correct way to pedal

[JayKosta]

........

===================================
coapman,

thanks for the info.
And it will be interesting learning your results of PM testing & usage.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

 

[CoachFergie]

In this muscle combination the power is generated mainly in the GM muscles

I assume this means glute maximus. I learned all about these doing my first 25mile time trial. Cyclists have been engaging this muscle group for many years. Nothing new there.

and the torque is applied from the ankles

Paging Alex Simmons, you may want to comment on that! Congrats on the selection BTW.

 

[coapman]

I assume this means glute maximus. I learned all about these doing my first 25mile time trial. Cyclists have been engaging this muscle group for many years. Nothing new there.



Paging Alex Simmons, you may want to comment on that! Congrats on the selection BTW.

True, there is nothing new in using the GM muscles but the vital difference lies in how you use them. Quoting from Cyclingnews " We asked Donor if the comparison of Lance and Armstrong is appropriate. Well not really said Donor, Anquetil was an elegant rider who was really a time trial specialist in his day. His riding style was so smooth that he looked like he was just sailing along. Anquetil was very powerful in his rear end and he used this to drive his pedalling while not moving his upper body. " Alex has supplied the proof that mashers could have both legs amputated from below the knee and it would not affect their torque production. Not only do cyclists not know how to use their GM's in TT's, the same applies to their lower legs and ankles.

 

[CoachFergie]

What are you rambling on about?

None of that made the slightest sense. At least you are consistent!

 

[coapman]

True, there is nothing new in using the GM muscles but the vital difference lies in how you use them. Quoting from Cyclingnews " We asked Donor if the comparison of Lance and Armstrong is appropriate. Well not really said Donor, Anquetil was an elegant rider who was really a time trial specialist in his day. His riding style was so smooth that he looked like he was just sailing along. Anquetil was very powerful in his rear end and he used this to drive his pedalling while not moving his upper body. " Alex has supplied the proof that mashers could have both legs amputated from below the knee and it would not affect their torque production. Not only do cyclists not know how to use their GM's in TT's, the same applies to their lower legs and ankles.[/QUOTE



That should read ' comparison of Lance and Anquetil '

 

[coapman]

What are you rambling on about?

None of that made the slightest sense. At least you are consistent!

Despite having lost his lower leg, Alex is capable of producing the same or even greater torque now than before his accident. True or false ?

 

[CoachFergie]

Despite having lost his lower leg, Alex is capable of producing the same or even greater torque now than before his accident. True or false ?

He is producing more (5min I think) power than before his crash.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Despite having lost his lower leg, Alex is capable of producing the same or even greater torque now than before his accident. True or false ?

My sustainable aerobic power is same as before. Some bests, some same.
Since cadence has not changed much, then AEPF (torque) would not be all that different.

Pedaling with a prosthetic leg it's simply is not possible to do anything other than push down. Fortunately since that's what matters in most cycling, then you don't lose too much. Sprinting is different though.

I have made gains in W/kg terms though, e.g 5-min. Absolute power not quite as high (like ~20W lower) but W/kg is better.


Sprint power is significantly lower (200-250W). My peak is now ~1200W, typically I was more in the 1400-1450W range, have hit 1500W.

 

[coapman]

My sustainable aerobic power is same as before. Some bests, some same.
Since cadence has not changed much, then AEPF (torque) would not be all that different.

Pedaling with a prosthetic leg it's simply is not possible to do anything other than push down. Fortunately since that's what matters in most cycling, then you don't lose too much. Sprinting is different though.

I have made gains in W/kg terms though, e.g 5-min. Absolute power not quite as high (like ~20W lower) but W/kg is better.


Sprint power is significantly lower (200-250W). My peak is now ~1200W, typically I was more in the 1400-1450W range, have hit 1500W.

Your sustainable aerobic power is the same and that's what you would be using in TT's. This can only mean one thing, you never used your lower legs and ankles to significantly increase crank torque in TT's and that's what I was trying to get across to coachfergie.

 

[FrankDay]

Pedaling with a prosthetic leg it's simply is not possible to do anything other than push down.

Phooey. If all one could do with a prosthetic leg was to "push down", then no one would be able to walk or run with a prosthesis. One may not be able to do as much as one could do with a "real" leg but certainly it is possible to do some other things with the leg beyond "just pushing". It may be that you don't do much more than just push, but if that is all you did before, then is it any wonder you test the same now. That is not evidence, however, that you couldn't do something different nor is it evidence that what you do is superior to other techniques.

 

[M Sport]

This can only mean one thing, you never used your lower legs and ankles to significantly increase crank torque in TT's and that's what I was trying to get across to coachfergie.

You didn't actually specifically state what the secret Anquetil technique was, Noel. All you said was it gave maximum torque and power from 11 o'clock through 12 or 1 o'clock, you didn't specifically state how that was done and what muscle groups were used, for all I know he could have been using his arms. I know glutes were mentioned in one or two posts but obviously glutes aren't in your ankles or lower legs.

I guess now is your opportunity to spell out the technique for us doubters rather than just say it was a secret un-measured technique.

 

[coapman]

Phooey. If all one could do with a prosthetic leg was to "push down", then no one would be able to walk or run with a prosthesis. One may not be able to do as much as one could do with a "real" leg but certainly it is possible to do some other things with the leg beyond "just pushing". It may be that you don't do much more than just push, but if that is all you did before, then is it any wonder you test the same now. That is not evidence, however, that you couldn't do something different nor is it evidence that what you do is superior to other techniques.

You are hinting at the old Coyle argument. But there are some important facts to remember before using the legs to do other things in cycling. If these other things are not capable of producing maximal torque they are best forgotten. Only one set of torque producing muscles should be in use at any one time (sprinting etc. excluded). If not, mashing will always be superior.

 

[coapman]

My sustainable aerobic power is same as before. Some bests, some same.
Since cadence has not changed much, then AEPF (torque) would not be all that different.

Pedaling with a prosthetic leg it's simply is not possible to do anything other than push down. Fortunately since that's what matters in most cycling, then you don't lose too much. Sprinting is different though.

I have made gains in W/kg terms though, e.g 5-min. Absolute power not quite as high (like ~20W lower) but W/kg is better.


Sprint power is significantly lower (200-250W). My peak is now ~1200W, typically I was more in the 1400-1450W range, have hit 1500W.

Did you ever get to compare the output from each leg ? Have you tried a fixed wheel ?

 

[coapman]

You didn't actually specifically state what the secret Anquetil technique was, Noel. All you said was it gave maximum torque and power from 11 o'clock through 12 or 1 o'clock, you didn't specifically state how that was done and what muscle groups were used, for all I know he could have been using his arms. I know glutes were mentioned in one or two posts but obviously glutes aren't in your ankles or lower legs.

I guess now is your opportunity to spell out the technique for us doubters rather than just say it was a secret un-measured technique.

You are not paying much attention to what I am writing because you have two errors there. Its 11-2 o'c and the arms play a vital role in this technique. Frank could tell you, I have explained it many times but nobody is capable of grasping the concept. You have got to know exactly what your objectives are and then it's a matter of perfecting and perfecting until you eventually get a simultaneous switch over of power application with no dead spot when cranks are in the 11/5 o'c position. Quoting from Hinault's book " You have to realize that Anquetil perfected his style in training, with a concentration that often made him resent the presence of other riders around him. " As I have already said, the powerful glutes and ankles are used across the top and the thigh muscles and knees for the downstroke. In the following example of what Anquetil was attempting to do in training, torque generation in the real pedal stroke is almost identical. He was attempting to combine the generated power of an indoor tug o'war competitor with that in the downstroke of a natural pedaller. The cranks need to be travelling at a moderate cadence before the brain seriously plugs in to this technique. Proper bike setup and equipment is also a necessity. Bars used could be either G Obree's latest type or a pair of Scott Rake aero clip-ons. I was using the aerodynamic Obree type bars and still use them today even before the triathlete's bars were invented. Anquetil was forced to use the shoulder width bars and this made the perfection he was seeking impossible to reach.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Did you ever get to compare the output from each leg ?

Without laboratory based force measurement pedals, this is not possible to do.

Have you tried a fixed wheel ?

I'm a track endurance rider. My 5-min W/kg best was set during a 4km individual pursuit. I also, along with my team, set a state record in team pursuit earlier this year. Something I also did a bit over 4 years ago when I had both legs.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Phooey. If all one could do with a prosthetic leg was to "push down", then no one would be able to walk or run with a prosthesis.

Your ignorance of the matter is bordering on insulting.

Prosthetics for walking and running and cycling have significant design differences, as do prosthetics for any particular activity one might choose to do.

 

[CoachFergie]

I don't think it's ignorance. Muddy waters are the natural environment of the Snake Oil Salesman trying to market a product which no real evidence to support it.

But would love to see anyone use a cycling prosthesis to run and have yet to see a prosthesis for cycling with anything but a fixed ankle joint.

Looking at EMG studies there is nothing new nor special about using the glutes from 11 to 2 in the pedal stroke. Some do some don't. Kind of pointless if you need to use illegal bars to achieve it. Bit like training on independent cranks when you can't use them in road races.

 

[FrankDay]

Your ignorance of the matter is bordering on insulting.

Prosthetics for walking and running and cycling have significant design differences, as do prosthetics for any particular activity one might choose to do.

What is insulting is your insistence that because you have a prosthetic you can do nothing more than push in the direction of the bone, anything else and the prosthetic either breaks or falls off (or something else unspecified). I guess that argument could be made for an AKA (depending upon the design) but not a BKA, which is your situation I believe. So, no one with any knowledge in this area would believe that for one instance. I presume you walk to and from your bicycle after putting on your cycling prosthetic, so I presume that prosthetic can do more than "just push." Even if someone who has no knowledge of prosthetics thought about this in the least bit would say such a statement to be wrong. What happens to your prosthetic when you are clipped into your bicycle and you make a mistake and "pull up" on the pedal an ounce or so? I would guess nothing?

While prosthetics for different specialized tasks might have different design criteria they all have certain basics requirements they must meet. Being able to apply some lateral force and not falling off if a small distracting force is applied are two of these that all prosthetics, at least those that have any utility, must meet. You are simply using your prosthetic as "evidence" for statements that have no basis. Since few have any experience in this area they might actually accept your statement. I do and I challenge your statement.

 

[FrankDay]

You are hinting at the old Coyle argument. But there are some important facts to remember before using the legs to do other things in cycling. If these other things are not capable of producing maximal torque they are best forgotten. Only one set of torque producing muscles should be in use at any one time (sprinting etc. excluded). If not, mashing will always be superior.

What a crazy statement coming from someone who is trying to argue that the best technique is to provide tangential force application all the time. First, because we are applying force to the pedals across three joints (the hip, knee, ankle) it will always be necessary to use muscles that are not being used to provide maximal torque but are necessary to provide any torque. And, second, the angle of maximum torque is constantly changing. In order to constantly change the angle of applied force to match the angle of maximum torque requires constantly changing the balance of these muscles, such that it may be that at 4-5 o]clock it may be necessary to be both pushing with the glutes and quads while transitioning to pulling back with the hamstrings and glutes. The direction and amount of any force comes from the use and balancing of many different muscles. It is so complicated and the changes occur so rapidly that it is difficult, if not impossible, to change by thinking about it.

 

[CoachFergie]

What is insulting is your insistence that because you have a prosthetic you can do nothing more than push in the direction of the bone, anything else and the prosthetic either breaks or falls off (or something else unspecified). I guess that argument could be made for an AKA (depending upon the design) but not a BKA, which is your situation I believe. So, no one with any knowledge in this area would believe that for one instance. I presume you walk to and from your bicycle after putting on your cycling prosthetic, so I presume that prosthetic can do more than "just push." Even if someone who has no knowledge of prosthetics thought about this in the least bit would say such a statement to be wrong. What happens to your prosthetic when you are clipped into your bicycle and you make a mistake and "pull up" on the pedal an ounce or so? I would guess nothing?

While prosthetics for different specialized tasks might have different design criteria they all have certain basics requirements they must meet. Being able to apply some lateral force and not falling off if a small distracting force is applied are two of these that all prosthetics, at least those that have any utility, must meet. You are simply using your prosthetic as "evidence" for statements that have no basis. Since few have any experience in this area they might actually accept your statement. I do and I challenge your statement.

Muddy waters are the natural environment of the Snake Oil Salesman.

All the AWD cyclists I know have two different prosthesis's for walking and cycling just as I would imagine track athletes would have a different prosthesis for walking and running.

 

[CoachFergie]

What a crazy statement coming from someone who is trying to argue that the best technique is to provide tangential force application all the time. First, because we are applying force to the pedals across three joints (the hip, knee, ankle) it will always be necessary to use muscles that are not being used to provide maximal torque but are necessary to provide any torque. And, second, the angle of maximum torque is constantly changing. In order to constantly change the angle of applied force to match the angle of maximum torque requires constantly changing the balance of these muscles, such that it may be that at 4-5 o]clock it may be necessary to be both pushing with the glutes and quads while transitioning to pulling back with the hamstrings and glutes. The direction and amount of any force comes from the use and balancing of many different muscles. It is so complicated and the changes occur so rapidly that it is difficult, if not impossible, to change by thinking about it.

You two crack me up. And they say children have the most vivid imaginations.

Real evidence please!

 

[BroDeal]

What a crazy statement coming from someone who is trying to argue that the best technique is to provide tangential force application all the time. First, because we are applying force to the pedals across three joints (the hip, knee, ankle) it will always be necessary to use muscles that are not being used to provide maximal torque but are necessary to provide any torque. And, second, the angle of maximum torque is constantly changing. In order to constantly change the angle of applied force to match the angle of maximum torque requires constantly changing the balance of these muscles, such that it may be that at 4-5 o]clock it may be necessary to be both pushing with the glutes and quads while transitioning to pulling back with the hamstrings and glutes. The direction and amount of any force comes from the use and balancing of many different muscles. It is so complicated and the changes occur so rapidly that it is difficult, if not impossible, to change by thinking about it.

 

[FrankDay]

Muddy waters are the natural environment of the Snake Oil Salesman.

All the AWD cyclists I know have two different prosthesis's for walking and cycling just as I would imagine track athletes would have a different prosthesis for walking and running.

The question is not whether an amputee would have different prostheses for different activities but whether any of those prostheses only allow force to be applied to the ground or anything else through pushing. I mean, really, if Alex is on his bike and tries to apply a small force in the direction to "scrape the mud off" his prosthesis does it fall off his leg?

 

[CoachFergie]

The question is not whether an amputee would have different prostheses for different activities but whether any of those prostheses only allow force to be applied to the ground or anything else through pushing. I mean, really, if Alex is on his bike and tries to apply a small force in the direction to "scrape the mud off" his prosthesis does it fall off his leg?

I can't speak for Alex but for the AWD athletes I have coached yes it does. We have to pay particular attention to their standing starts and many choose to start in the seat.

 

[coapman]

Looking at EMG studies there is nothing new nor special about using the glutes from 11 to 2 in the pedal stroke. Some do some don't. Kind of pointless if you need to use illegal bars to achieve it. Bit like training on independent cranks when you can't use them in road races.

You are so busy looking for negatives that you forget the basic facts. This is a TT technique, you need to get your manual details changed if it states it is illegal to use aero clip-ons in TT's. ( Scott Rake ) For road races as my original post stated mashing or circular is best.