Log in:  

Register

The pedaling technique thread

Moderator: Tonton

26 Nov 2017 07:01

Guess when you are bat***t crazy you can just ignore all the good work that was gone into researching pedalling technique and the many attempts to show that either by using different technology or different techniques have failed to improve performance over the way we currently pedal. Seeing we have no actual data on Anquetil your claims are merely speculation.
Last edited by CoachFergie on 27 Nov 2017 16:54, edited 1 time in total.
Hamish Ferguson
coachfergblog.blogspot.co.nz
User avatar CoachFergie
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,668
Joined: 21 Apr 2009 21:36
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand

Re: Re:

27 Nov 2017 16:40

backdoor wrote:
CoachFergie wrote:All current attempts to improve pedalling technique have been unsuccessful. Gimmickcranks, oval chainrings and special pedalling techniques.

Using your method lead to lower efficiency and less power. So does gimmickcranks. A para rider forced to pedal in circles for years instantly improves in efficiency when using a counter weight. Some of us have real data to show this.

Your have video and assumptions from nutters like yourself and journalists more concerned about telling a story than the science of cycling performance.


They are not attempts to improve technique, they are attempts to get better results from the same techniques by changing equipment, an impossible task. what special techniques were tested. As for that para rider, you don't need research to prove there is an improvement, all you need is commonsense. This can be easily explained, the inertia of the counterweight made it much easier to get his leg through the most difficult sector of the pedalling circle between 10 - 1 o'c. The problem with much of this research that proves what does not work to improve performance is, they never explain why it does not work.


Research is regularly used to prove commonsense right or wrong. This is important, since commonsense is surprisingly often wrong.

Research says: technique doesn't matter.

Surprise! :D
berend
New Member
 
Posts: 45
Joined: 13 Mar 2013 08:09

27 Nov 2017 20:10

I'm guessing the cadence of this thread is running at about 4 revs per year. Meaning the same (nonsense) argument is brought up and dispatched with about that frequency. But I've not put a meter on it. :D
User avatar Alex Simmons/RST
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,100
Joined: 10 Mar 2009 23:47
Location: Australia

Re: Re:

27 Nov 2017 22:05

berend wrote:...
Research says: technique doesn't matter.
...

---------------
I think it's more accurate to say that 'research' hasn't yet found a technique that is 'better' than that which the majority of top-ranked competitors currently use.

I'm sure that some struggling competitors are using a technique that is not best for them, and is preventing them from improving. I'm also sure that if a coach discovered a technique that WAS better, the coach would teach it, regardless of its being 'new or different'.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA
JayKosta
Member
 
Posts: 746
Joined: 25 Nov 2010 13:55

Re: Re:

27 Nov 2017 22:35

JayKosta wrote:
berend wrote:...
Research says: technique doesn't matter.
...

---------------
I think it's more accurate to say that 'research' hasn't yet found a technique that is 'better' than that which the majority of top-ranked competitors currently use.

I'm sure that some struggling competitors are using a technique that is not best for them, and is preventing them from improving. I'm also sure that if a coach discovered a technique that WAS better, the coach would teach it, regardless of its being 'new or different'.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA


A good idea can sometimes be worth more than a century of expensive research. How long would it have taken experienced high jump researchers to move the high jump technique beyond the STRADDLE to the FLOP ?
backdoor
Member
 
Posts: 323
Joined: 04 Jun 2015 12:55

27 Nov 2017 22:53

Again a poor comparison. That innovation was based on simple biomechanics. Same as the use of aerobars.

You have no data to suggest your approach produces more power or is more efficient.
Hamish Ferguson
coachfergblog.blogspot.co.nz
User avatar CoachFergie
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,668
Joined: 21 Apr 2009 21:36
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand

Re:

27 Nov 2017 23:11

CoachFergie wrote:Again a poor comparison. That innovation was based on simple biomechanics. Same as the use of aerobars.



It was based on commonsense and the professional cyclists' researchers had to be shown how to do it by those of another sport.
backdoor
Member
 
Posts: 323
Joined: 04 Jun 2015 12:55

Re: Re:

27 Nov 2017 23:57

backdoor wrote:
CoachFergie wrote:Again a poor comparison. That innovation was based on simple biomechanics. Same as the use of aerobars.



It was based on commonsense and the professional cyclists' researchers had to be shown how to do it by those of another sport.

And the simple biomechanics of Anquetil's glute/quad power generation that delivers max torque to TDC is being used daily by those in a strength sport, only difference being, theirs is to a fixed target Anquetil's to a moving target which makes it even easier.
backdoor
Member
 
Posts: 323
Joined: 04 Jun 2015 12:55

28 Nov 2017 00:06

Difference is you have yet to supply any data that this improves performance or increases efficiency. Seeing no one has presented any data on Anquetil your claims are mere speculation that he actually did anything more special than have a high VO2max, fractional utilisation of VO2max and had good efficiency relative to the opposition.
Hamish Ferguson
coachfergblog.blogspot.co.nz
User avatar CoachFergie
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,668
Joined: 21 Apr 2009 21:36
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand

Re:

28 Nov 2017 00:14

CoachFergie wrote:Difference is you have yet to supply any data that this improves performance or increases efficiency. Seeing no one has presented any data on Anquetil your claims are mere speculation that he actually did anything more special than have a high VO2max, fractional utilisation of VO2max and had good efficiency relative to the opposition.


That good efficiency came from the high torque return he was getting from the force he was applying compared to the moderate return Poulidor was getting from his mashing style.
backdoor
Member
 
Posts: 323
Joined: 04 Jun 2015 12:55

28 Nov 2017 05:40

Data Noel, without data, it's just speculation. You use these terms like torque and force but clearly have no idea that unless they are actually measured they are meaningless.

The evidence would suggest that pedalling had nothing to do with it. Jacques made a better choice of parents than Poulidor! We have no pedal data from either. Watching videos doesn't make you an expert on pedalling technique.

I measured your method with an infocrank and lower power and less efficiency. It doesn't work.
Hamish Ferguson
coachfergblog.blogspot.co.nz
User avatar CoachFergie
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,668
Joined: 21 Apr 2009 21:36
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand

Re:

03 Dec 2017 14:24

CoachFergie wrote:Guess when you are bat***t crazy you can just ignore all the good work that was gone into researching pedalling technique and the many attempts to show that either by using different technology or different techniques have failed to improve performance over the way we currently pedal. Seeing we have no actual data on Anquetil your claims are merely speculation.


As a coach did this study have any practical implications for you, as suggested by the researcher. Do you see anything wrong in the results of this research included in the published study.

http://www.tradewindsports.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Leong-14-UNPUBLISHED-PhD-Oval-vs-round-sub-max-and-max.pdf
backdoor
Member
 
Posts: 323
Joined: 04 Jun 2015 12:55

Re: Re:

03 Dec 2017 15:07

backdoor wrote:
backdoor wrote:
CoachFergie wrote:Again a poor comparison. That innovation was based on simple biomechanics. Same as the use of aerobars.



It was based on commonsense and the professional cyclists' researchers had to be shown how to do it by those of another sport.

And the simple biomechanics of Anquetil's glute/quad power generation that delivers max torque to TDC is being used daily by those in a strength sport, only difference being, theirs is to a fixed target Anquetil's to a moving target which makes it even easier.


Please draw the diagram with force vectors and associated muscle contribution to demonstrate this ‘simple biomechanics’ at TDC.
JamesCun
Junior Member
 
Posts: 262
Joined: 01 Jun 2014 12:42

Re: Re:

03 Dec 2017 21:06

backdoor wrote:
CoachFergie wrote:Guess when you are bat***t crazy you can just ignore all the good work that was gone into researching pedalling technique and the many attempts to show that either by using different technology or different techniques have failed to improve performance over the way we currently pedal. Seeing we have no actual data on Anquetil your claims are merely speculation.


As a coach did this study have any practical implications for you, as suggested by the researcher. Do you see anything wrong in the results of this research included in the published study.

http://www.tradewindsports.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Leong-14-UNPUBLISHED-PhD-Oval-vs-round-sub-max-and-max.pdf

It's a good study. But it has nothing to do with your assertions regarding pedalling and Anquetil.
User avatar Alex Simmons/RST
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,100
Joined: 10 Mar 2009 23:47
Location: Australia

Re: Re:

04 Dec 2017 22:39

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:
backdoor wrote:
CoachFergie wrote:Guess when you are bat***t crazy you can just ignore all the good work that was gone into researching pedalling technique and the many attempts to show that either by using different technology or different techniques have failed to improve performance over the way we currently pedal. Seeing we have no actual data on Anquetil your claims are merely speculation.


As a coach did this study have any practical implications for you, as suggested by the researcher. Do you see anything wrong in the results of this research included in the published study.

http://www.tradewindsports.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Leong-14-UNPUBLISHED-PhD-Oval-vs-round-sub-max-and-max.pdf

It's a good study. But it has nothing to do with your assertions regarding pedalling and Anquetil.


I see it as a complete waste of time (and funding if any) because if the riders involved were not prepared to pedal in the way the inventor intended them to pedal, how could there be an improvement. Having said that I don't believe they can improve performance except maybe when climbing out of the saddle. For as long as scientists continue to use other riders for their experiments they will never improve the biomechanics of pedalling because you can't control the muscles of another rider. And it looks like there's more to follow as he searches for the holy grail of non round chainrings,
"It is important to note that the eccentricities of the commercially available chainrings
utilized in these series of studies may not be sufficient to elicit measureable
improvements in maximal and submaximal cycling performance. A future direction
would be to combine the methodological approaches used in these series of studies with
the utilization of chainring eccentricities beyond those commercially available "
backdoor
Member
 
Posts: 323
Joined: 04 Jun 2015 12:55

Re: Re:

04 Dec 2017 23:54

JamesCun wrote:
backdoor wrote:
backdoor wrote:
CoachFergie wrote:
Please draw the diagram with force vectors and associated muscle contribution to demonstrate this ‘simple biomechanics’ at TDC.


As CoachFergie says, you will learn nothing from looking at diagrams, photos or videos. If you go to a training session of your nearest indoor tug o'war team with a pair of non slip soles, you will not only discover all the muscles that are involved but also how exactly they work to deliver this maximal TDC torque.
backdoor
Member
 
Posts: 323
Joined: 04 Jun 2015 12:55

Re: Re:

05 Dec 2017 00:16

backdoor wrote:
JamesCun wrote:
backdoor wrote:
backdoor wrote:
CoachFergie wrote:
Please draw the diagram with force vectors and associated muscle contribution to demonstrate this ‘simple biomechanics’ at TDC.


As CoachFergie says, you will learn nothing from looking at diagrams, photos or videos. If you go to a training session of your nearest indoor tug o'war team with a pair of non slip soles, you will not only discover all the muscles that are involved but also how exactly they work to deliver this maximal TDC torque.


I’m sure he isn’t saying what you want to pretend he’s saying. You can draw the muscle attachments and force vectors on Anquetil if that makes you happy. I’ll save you the time though, a cyclist looks nothing like a tug of war. Sitting above the crank is not a good position to kick the leg forward. It is however, a good position to push down. If you could be horizontal in a tug of war, that would be the most powerful position (since you would be pushing straight down through your feet). You can’t just make up stuff that is impossible and not back anything up.
JamesCun
Junior Member
 
Posts: 262
Joined: 01 Jun 2014 12:42

05 Dec 2017 03:32

In related bat shiz craziness Frank Day is using one of his disciples to post to Slowtwitch. More circular arguments. When one delusion gets shot down he moves on to the next.

I see we are back to the pointless tug of war argument. Have you actually ridden a bike Noel?

You were very right Alex.
Hamish Ferguson
coachfergblog.blogspot.co.nz
User avatar CoachFergie
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,668
Joined: 21 Apr 2009 21:36
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand

Re:

05 Dec 2017 11:51

[quote="CoachFergie

I see we are back to the pointless tug of war argument. Have you actually ridden a bike Noel?

You were very right Alex.[/quote]

" INDOOR" . Turn back the clock a few years when down hill skiers were travelling down with their hands as close together as possible while cycling tt'ers on their expensive low profile bikes were travelling with their hands even further apart than road racers and coaches did not see anything wrong ? Same today with that dead spot sector.
backdoor
Member
 
Posts: 323
Joined: 04 Jun 2015 12:55

Re: Re:

05 Dec 2017 14:08

JamesCun wrote:
I’m sure he isn’t saying what you want to pretend he’s saying. You can draw the muscle attachments and force vectors on Anquetil if that makes you happy. I’ll save you the time though, a cyclist looks nothing like a tug of war. Sitting above the crank is not a good position to kick the leg forward. It is however, a good position to push down. If you could be horizontal in a tug of war, that would be the most powerful position (since you would be pushing straight down through your feet). You can’t just make up stuff that is impossible and not back anything up.


He is referring to how muscles are used in a pedalling technique. That would be impossible, it's a combination of muscles that are used simultaneously to drive a maximal force forward from the hip to the ball of foot. You are not independently kicking forward from the knee as in the circular style, it's one continuous power stroke from 11 to 5 o'c. These t o'w muscles, used in exactly the same way, are capable of generating more than enough force for maximal torque at TDC when in a leaning forward position and bending it round to 1 and 2 o'c. You need only a small fraction of the maximal force these muscles are capable of producing when in the leaning back i t o'w position. It's a matter of adapting the leaning forward position for use on a bicycle, made easier by the fact that it is self bike fitting because you have two important lines to work from.
backdoor
Member
 
Posts: 323
Joined: 04 Jun 2015 12:55

PreviousNext

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

Back to top