Log in:  

Register

The pedaling technique thread

Moderator: Tonton

Re: Re:

11 Jun 2018 23:23

PhitBoy wrote:
backdoor wrote:Nothing new in this abstract

Yeah, just add it to the list of all the other studies that have used work loop modeling to predict whole limb maximal potential. Oh wait... there aren't any others.


Like Jay , I only saw the abstract. How can this time consuming complicated work lead to the perfect pedalling technique, which I believe is simply about giving your brain the correct objectives and it will soon figure out not only the combination of your most powerful muscles needed for that purpose but also where to use them. Or is this more of a physiological rather than a pedalling study.
backdoor
Member
 
Posts: 366
Joined: 04 Jun 2015 12:55

12 Jun 2018 10:35

Simulation of muscle usage and its effect on power and endurance could result in tremendous changes in many sports. It could be a predictor of whether a change in technique has a high probability of giving better performance - and thereby lessen the reluctance of athletes to devote training time on a 'maybe'.

If there is any follow-on analysis of pedalling technique that does include high use of the muscles to move the ankle/foot before and thru TDC it might validate your ideas. A complication is whether the simulation tool can also include the torso and arm muscle usage that is involved with pedalling.

Jay
JayKosta
Member
 
Posts: 791
Joined: 25 Nov 2010 13:55

Re:

12 Jun 2018 14:46

Hi Jay:
We maximized the power that every muscle produced throughout the pedal cycle and came up with patterns that look almost identical to what cyclists do. That means there is nothing else the muscles can do to produce power in some other technique. Any other technique will be less powerful, not more. The differences we saw at the ankle occur during the middle of the recovery portion of the cycle where an active ankle extension would be counter productive. That is, even though soleus could produce more power during that portion of the cycle, doing so would produce negative power on the crank.
I hope this clarifies.
Cheers,
Jim

JayKosta wrote:Simulation of muscle usage and its effect on power and endurance could result in tremendous changes in many sports. It could be a predictor of whether a change in technique has a high probability of giving better performance - and thereby lessen the reluctance of athletes to devote training time on a 'maybe'.

If there is any follow-on analysis of pedalling technique that does include high use of the muscles to move the ankle/foot before and thru TDC it might validate your ideas. A complication is whether the simulation tool can also include the torso and arm muscle usage that is involved with pedalling.

Jay
PhitBoy
Junior Member
 
Posts: 88
Joined: 18 Jun 2015 18:58

Re: Re:

12 Jun 2018 22:18

PhitBoy wrote:Hi Jay:
We maximized the power that every muscle produced throughout the pedal cycle and came up with patterns that look almost identical to what cyclists do. That means there is nothing else the muscles can do to produce power in some other technique. Any other technique will be less powerful, not more. The differences we saw at the ankle occur during the middle of the recovery portion of the cycle where an active ankle extension would be counter productive. That is, even though soleus could produce more power during that portion of the cycle, doing so would produce negative power on the crank.
I hope this clarifies.
Cheers,
Jim

[



That study and your conclusions are even more ridiculous than what I had first imagined. As I said nothing new, just more of the same repetitive tinkering with existing pedalling styles and then searching for a different result in keeping with the definition of insanity. How can work loop modeling predict the maximal potential of the soleus muscle used in the pedalling power stroke when all existing pedalling styles leave it lying idle during this sector of the pedalling circle. The recovery stroke is for recovery, not for trying to generate torque. From the short explanation that I read, work loop modeling is for individual muscles, not for a combination of the three most powerful muscles (glutes quads and soleus) working as a unit that can generate maximal torque around TDC and beyond, as is the case with the perfect pedalling technique.
backdoor
Member
 
Posts: 366
Joined: 04 Jun 2015 12:55

Re: Re:

13 Jun 2018 00:08

backdoor wrote:That study and your conclusions are even more ridiculous than what I had first imagined.

Tom Petty said it best: You believe what you want to believe. Keep on peddling your pedaling Noel.
Cheers,
Jim
PhitBoy
Junior Member
 
Posts: 88
Joined: 18 Jun 2015 18:58

Re: Re:

13 Jun 2018 07:08

backdoor wrote:
PhitBoy wrote:Hi Jay:
We maximized the power that every muscle produced throughout the pedal cycle and came up with patterns that look almost identical to what cyclists do. That means there is nothing else the muscles can do to produce power in some other technique. Any other technique will be less powerful, not more. The differences we saw at the ankle occur during the middle of the recovery portion of the cycle where an active ankle extension would be counter productive. That is, even though soleus could produce more power during that portion of the cycle, doing so would produce negative power on the crank.
I hope this clarifies.
Cheers,
Jim

[



That study and your conclusions are even more ridiculous than what I had first imagined. As I said nothing new, just more of the same repetitive tinkering with existing pedalling styles and then searching for a different result in keeping with the definition of insanity. How can work loop modeling predict the maximal potential of the soleus muscle used in the pedalling power stroke when all existing pedalling styles leave it lying idle during this sector of the pedalling circle. The recovery stroke is for recovery, not for trying to generate torque. From the short explanation that I read, work loop modeling is for individual muscles, not for a combination of the three most powerful muscles (glutes quads and soleus) working as a unit that can generate maximal torque around TDC and beyond, as is the case with the perfect pedalling technique.

Noel, please stop. You really haven't a clue what you are crapping on about.
User avatar Alex Simmons/RST
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,179
Joined: 10 Mar 2009 23:47
Location: Australia

Re: Re:

13 Jun 2018 09:26

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:
backdoor wrote:
PhitBoy wrote:Hi Jay:
We maximized the power that every muscle produced throughout the pedal cycle and came up with patterns that look almost identical to what cyclists do. That means there is nothing else the muscles can do to produce power in some other technique. Any other technique will be less powerful, not more. The differences we saw at the ankle occur during the middle of the recovery portion of the cycle where an active ankle extension would be counter productive. That is, even though soleus could produce more power during that portion of the cycle, doing so would produce negative power on the crank.
I hope this clarifies.
Cheers,
Jim

[



That study and your conclusions are even more ridiculous than what I had first imagined. As I said nothing new, just more of the same repetitive tinkering with existing pedalling styles and then searching for a different result in keeping with the definition of insanity. How can work loop modeling predict the maximal potential of the soleus muscle used in the pedalling power stroke when all existing pedalling styles leave it lying idle during this sector of the pedalling circle. The recovery stroke is for recovery, not for trying to generate torque. From the short explanation that I read, work loop modeling is for individual muscles, not for a combination of the three most powerful muscles (glutes quads and soleus) working as a unit that can generate maximal torque around TDC and beyond, as is the case with the perfect pedalling technique.

Noel, please stop. You really haven't a clue what you are crapping on about.


I would if someone would tell me where I am wrong in my explanation of the perfect technique, which in brief simply involves joining the maximal forward power producing technique from another powerful sport for the first half of your power stroke (11-2)with the maximal downward power producing technique of mashing for the second half (2-5), together they give 180 deg of highly effective torque from each pedal stroke with no dead spot sector. I hate seeing the misinformation being spread by these studies which (except for Anquetil) has kept pedalling unchanged since the invention of the bicycle.
backdoor
Member
 
Posts: 366
Joined: 04 Jun 2015 12:55

Re: Re:

13 Jun 2018 22:54

backdoor wrote:
Alex Simmons/RST wrote:
backdoor wrote:
PhitBoy wrote:Hi Jay:
We maximized the power that every muscle produced throughout the pedal cycle and came up with patterns that look almost identical to what cyclists do. That means there is nothing else the muscles can do to produce power in some other technique. Any other technique will be less powerful, not more. The differences we saw at the ankle occur during the middle of the recovery portion of the cycle where an active ankle extension would be counter productive. That is, even though soleus could produce more power during that portion of the cycle, doing so would produce negative power on the crank.
I hope this clarifies.
Cheers,
Jim

[



That study and your conclusions are even more ridiculous than what I had first imagined. As I said nothing new, just more of the same repetitive tinkering with existing pedalling styles and then searching for a different result in keeping with the definition of insanity. How can work loop modeling predict the maximal potential of the soleus muscle used in the pedalling power stroke when all existing pedalling styles leave it lying idle during this sector of the pedalling circle. The recovery stroke is for recovery, not for trying to generate torque. From the short explanation that I read, work loop modeling is for individual muscles, not for a combination of the three most powerful muscles (glutes quads and soleus) working as a unit that can generate maximal torque around TDC and beyond, as is the case with the perfect pedalling technique.

Noel, please stop. You really haven't a clue what you are crapping on about.


I would if someone would tell me where I am wrong in my explanation of the perfect technique, which in brief simply involves joining the maximal forward power producing technique from another powerful sport for the first half of your power stroke (11-2)with the maximal downward power producing technique of mashing for the second half (2-5), together they give 180 deg of highly effective torque from each pedal stroke with no dead spot sector. I hate seeing the misinformation being spread by these studies which (except for Anquetil) has kept pedalling unchanged since the invention of the bicycle.

It's not possible to turn around the beliefs of the self deluded.

The onus is on you to demonstrate your assertions have a basis is reality by providing some actual data. You have failed to do so for as long as I can recall, nearly a couple of decades.

You have been provided the opportunity to do so at biomechanical research facility, and many have explained how this can be done without a lot of effort or cost (via a basic intervention protocol and power measurement). Yet you persist with your delusion and refuse to test it with the simplest of measures currently available to the cycling public.

That you dismiss those with actual data so casually is simply hand waving on your part.
User avatar Alex Simmons/RST
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,179
Joined: 10 Mar 2009 23:47
Location: Australia

Re: Re:

14 Jun 2018 18:46

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:

I would if someone would tell me where I am wrong in my explanation of the perfect technique, which in brief simply involves joining the maximal forward power producing technique from another powerful sport for the first half of your power stroke (11-2)with the maximal downward power producing technique of mashing for the second half (2-5), together they give 180 deg of highly effective torque from each pedal stroke with no dead spot sector. I hate seeing the misinformation being spread by these studies which (except for Anquetil) has kept pedalling unchanged since the invention of the bicycle.


It's not possible to turn around the beliefs of the self deluded.

The onus is on you to demonstrate your assertions have a basis is reality by providing some actual data. You have failed to do so for as long as I can recall, nearly a couple of decades.

You have been provided the opportunity to do so at biomechanical research facility, and many have explained how this can be done without a lot of effort or cost (via a basic intervention protocol and power measurement). Yet you persist with your delusion and refuse to test it with the simplest of measures currently available to the cycling public.

That you dismiss those with actual data so casually is simply hand waving on your part.


There is no self delusion about the elimination of cycling's worst lower back pain when you yourself are a victim. Lower back pain is the most common medical problem in cycling and medical experts after over a century of research have failed to find a solution or even relieve this pain. The explanation for their failure lies in the fact that natural pedalling is the root cause of this torture that has forced many out of the sport. Change peak torque application from 3 o'c to the 1.30 position and the problem is solved because greatest pedalling resistance is now being supplied by the powerful hips instead of a defective lower back and all upper body weight is supported by the working arms without any stressing of the arms.
What effect would the application of additional maximal torque at 12 and 1 o'c have on the power from your pedalling stroke, according to PhitBoy's results from his latest study it would reduce it. His conclusion from that study should have read, 'when using natural pedalling any attempt to change muscle usage will result in less power than that of the mashing technique'. How would you answer that question ?
backdoor
Member
 
Posts: 366
Joined: 04 Jun 2015 12:55

Re: Re:

15 Jun 2018 23:40

Where's the data Noel?
User avatar Alex Simmons/RST
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,179
Joined: 10 Mar 2009 23:47
Location: Australia

Previous

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

Back to top