correct way to pedal

[CoachFergie]

If Scott Rakes or Drop Ins were of any benefit to performance they would still be in use today.

 

[coapman]

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.

What I mean is you can't have the brain trying to concentrate on two independent torque applications at the same time, such as pulling up while pushing down. It can do it but the result will be a weaker downstroke. Coyle has confirmed this. Unweighting is not independent torque application.

 

[coapman]

If Scott Rakes or Drop Ins were of any benefit to performance they would still be in use today.

Like the glutes and ankles, they dont know how to use Scott Rakes for best results. As for dropins, now that is a stupid idea. Would you be prepared to cover a bet. Torque at 1 o'c can be greater than torque at 3 o'c while in the natural racing drops position.

 

[CoachFergie]

Wah wah wah, heard it all before. Data please, not some wild arsed theory.

 

[coapman]

Wah wah wah, heard it all before. Data please, not some wild arsed theory.

If the inventor of this new top of the range powermeter is willing to be the judge.

 

[CoachFergie]

Any power meter will tell you if a new piece of equipment, training technique or technical modification has an actual effect.

 

[FrankDay]

What I mean is you can't have the brain trying to concentrate on two independent torque applications at the same time, such as pulling up while pushing down. It can do it but the result will be a weaker downstroke. Coyle has confirmed this. Unweighting is not independent torque application.

You are correct, it is not possible to concentrate on two different things at the same time. That is why if one wants to truly change how one pedals (where the two different legs are doing two different things at the same time) one must be able to change the unconscious coordination. And, even if one is concentrating on something as regards pedaling the science says that if they try to change something they usually can't do what they try, probably because of the delays involved between initiating a movement and when that movement is seen in the muscles.

This points out a problem you would seemingly have in developing your technique, where you have divided the pedaling circle into three zones. I would think this would make learning the technique even harder because not only are the two legs trying to do two different things at the same time, they change zones at different times, if the zones are 120º apart and the pedals are 180º apart.

Anyhow, we are all anxious to see the data that shows that you actually do what you say you do. Once you demonstrate that then I think people will be more interested in asking you how you accomplished your goal and looking to see if doing what you say actually does enhance power or efficiency.

 

[coapman]

This points out a problem you would seemingly have in developing your technique, where you have divided the pedaling circle into three zones. I would think this would make learning the technique even harder because not only are the two legs trying to do two different things at the same time, they change zones at different times, if the zones are 120º apart and the pedals are 180º apart.

This technique is already developed and perfected, there was no problem. The across the top (glutes/ankles) 11-2 sector merges with the (thighs/knees) 2-5 sector, it is one continuous smooth stroke from 11-5, which gets total concentration all the way until 5 where the simultaneous switch over takes place and the other leg gets total concentration from 11 to 5.

 

[CoachFergie]

Noel what you think happens in the pedal stroke and what you think it means to performance are meaningless without data to support it.

 

[FrankDay]

This technique is already developed and perfected, there was no problem. The across the top (glutes/ankles) 11-2 sector merges with the (thighs/knees) 2-5 sector, it is one continuous smooth stroke from 11-5, which gets total concentration all the way until 5 where the simultaneous switch over takes place and the other leg gets total concentration from 11 to 5.

That is all well and good. Just show us the data that shows that you actually pull it off and that it is the same when you are out on the street and thinking about where you are going and avoiding cars (and too numerous to mention other stuff) rather than what your leg muscles are doing.

 

[CoachFergie]

That is all well and good. Just show us the data that shows that you actually pull it off and that it is the same when you are out on the street and thinking about where you are going and avoiding cars (and too numerous to mention other stuff) rather than what your leg muscles are doing.

That's kinda funny seeing you have spent the last 11 years making some pretty bold claims with simply no evidence to support them.

 

[FrankDay]

That's kinda funny seeing you have spent the last 11 years making some pretty bold claims with simply no evidence to support them.

I have spent the last eleven years experiencing exactly how hard it is to change the unconscious coordination. Training muscles is relatively easy compared to retraining the nervous system after 20-40-60 years of pedaling one way to pedal another is hard.

 

[CoachFergie]

So you should have data coming out your backside! But nothing is forthcoming.

 

[function]

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.

I do agree with the above. The same objectivity has to be applied when discussing a prosthetic and it can't be blindly accepted as supporting evidence without data. After all, running lower prosthetics are superior to real lower legs, one has to look at the whole picture and analyse efficiency, oxygen consumption, muscle tension etc. So whether Alex attained the same level with a prosthetic could be a consequence of a number of factors and can't be blindly accepted as evidence for "mashing" being the best. My _opinion_ of course is that pedaling technique does not matter when you're at your _limit_.

 

[CoachFergie]

I do agree with the above. The same objectivity has to be applied when discussing a prosthetic and it can't be blindly accepted as supporting evidence without data.

This is true, Alex has posted his numbers.

After all, running lower prosthetics are superior to real lower legs, one has to look at the whole picture and analyse efficiency, oxygen consumption, muscle tension etc.

Judging by times from Competition the same scenario does not exist in cycling.

As said Alex has posted his data. I expect having gone through a dramatic life event Alex has now focused on cycling and his coaching. He is also just be selected for the Aussie team creating the ideal conditions for improved performance.

So whether Alex attained the same level with a prosthetic could be a consequence of a number of factors and can't be blindly accepted as evidence for "mashing" being the best. My _opinion_ of course is that pedaling technique does not matter when you're at your _limit_.

It wasn't submitted to say mashing is best. It was submitted to illustrate performance can be improved from getting better at mashing because with a prosthesis there is no alternative available. Just the same as my N=1 study comparing MAP tests between cycling shoes and sandshoes where there was no difference between either. Of course in sand shoes one can not pull up and is limited in the ability to push over the top or pull through the bottom. Not that I try to attempt that anyway.

 

[coapman]

I have spent the last eleven years experiencing exactly how hard it is to change the unconscious coordination. Training muscles is relatively easy compared to retraining the nervous system after 20-40-60 years of pedaling one way to pedal another is hard.

When your brain has the objectives I find there is no problem. I have perfected all three styles and can switch instantly to any one of them. What type of data do you require. A pedalling graph from an accurate powermeter which clearly demonstrates that peak torque can be applied at 1 o'c instead of around 3. should be sufficient to settle any bet or confirm that I do as I claim to do. In your PC graph, there should be no difference from that of a perfected circular stroke. As for the safety of aero or narrow bars. I would prefer to use my own narrow bars, it's what you are accustomed to using. I believe there is nothing more dangerous in an emergency stop than a rider perched on the tip of his saddle with head well over the front wheel. I noticed recently that cycle couriers were changing to narrower and narrower bars and the explanation they give is that they are safer in traffic. Well done Alex, I admire your dedication. Coachfergie do you have the percentage contribution of each of the muscles involved in the mashing downstroke.

 

[oldborn]

I have perfected all three styles and can switch instantly to any one of them.

Found that statement funny as Coach Fergie supporting anegdotal evidence of Alex performance. How could you do that at 100 rpm, please plain English.

Alex rescpect to your fitness and do not get me wrong, just returned from swimming practice it is amazing to watch one guy without leg, he was swimming 100 around 1min30sec just for fun, i would kill for that. So that does mean nothing at all, just you are in great shape and have a will

As for thread went on, more and more power meter info commercial is getting bigger, without any support or evidence that PM gonna improve our fitness.

I like that Snake Oil word i allways thinking about sweat is word.

Dismiss

 

[FrankDay]

When your brain has the objectives I find there is no problem. I have perfected all three styles and can switch instantly to any one of them. What type of data do you require. A pedalling graph from an accurate powermeter which clearly demonstrates that peak torque can be applied at 1 o'c instead of around 3. should be sufficient to settle any bet or confirm that I do as I claim to do.

First, you need to be able to demonstrate you can do what you claim. A simple graph showing "peak torque" coming at 1 o'clock does not demonstrate that you can instantly switch to other styles nor does it even show that your peak torque is coming at 1 o'clock because all the current PM's combine both legs into one output so your 1 o'clock peak torque could be coming from 7 o'clock on the other leg. What you really need to show to prove what you do is individual pedal forces around the entire circle.

Anyhow, such a graph would be interesting but you have never shown a single graph of what you do.

 

[CoachFergie]

Can definitely see that this one is going to require subjects with probes in their brain to determine just when what muscles are being sent the message to fire to satisfy Frank or Noel. A pedal based power meter (of which there is plenty of lab based data) or EMG studies (again plenty) simply will not suffice.

When you kids work out the division of the sandpit be sure to let us know how we can improve our performance.

 

[FrankDay]

Can definitely see that this one is going to require subjects with probes in their brain to determine just when what muscles are being sent the message to fire to satisfy Frank or Noel. A pedal based power meter (of which there is plenty of lab based data) or EMG studies (again plenty) simply will not suffice.

When you kids work out the division of the sandpit be sure to let us know how we can improve our performance.

No probes in brain necessary if we are talking unconscious coordination, since most pedaling is a spinal reflex action, the CNS only seems to be involved in moderating effort, so little actual thinking required. And, don't worry, we will keep part of the sandbox open for you since you seem to demand to be there also.

 

[coapman]

First, you need to be able to demonstrate you can do what you claim. A simple graph showing "peak torque" coming at 1 o'clock does not demonstrate that you can instantly switch to other styles nor does it even show that your peak torque is coming at 1 o'clock because all the current PM's combine both legs into one output so your 1 o'clock peak torque could be coming from 7 o'clock on the other leg. What you really need to show to prove what you do is individual pedal forces around the entire circle.

Anyhow, such a graph would be interesting but you have never shown a single graph of what you do.

Coming from 7 o'c, "you cannot be serious", not even a PC rider could apply significant torque there. This new PM is supposed to be able to give individual pedal forces. Another advantage with this technique is when the pedal gets to 5 o'c, that leg instantly draws back, transferring the momentum from that downward leg to the other leg as it starts its power stroke at 11. When the masher gets to 5 o'c, his leg is still following through with the downward force, most of which goes to ground, wasting more energy. I have not shown any graph because I don't have a PM nor do I intend buying one and nobody around here is interested in the scientific side of pedalling, like most cyclists they believe pedalling style is of no importance. As I am writing this, somewhere in the world an engineer is probably working on the next equipment that is supposed to eliminate the dead spot. My technique can put an end to that nonsense.

 

[CoachFergie]

Some of us are interested in performance and through our days as coaches and riders we get fed a steady diet of methods, techniques and equipment that will affect our cycling to some degree.

So what sounds good in yours or Franks head needs to be assessed under a performance model. Will a pedaling technique or training using an independent crank system make a difference in performance is the question. We would like some data to support your claims or all this is pure speculation.

 

[coapman]

Some of us are interested in performance and through our days as coaches and riders we get fed a steady diet of methods, techniques and equipment that will affect our cycling to some degree.

So what sounds good in yours or Franks head needs to be assessed under a performance model. Will a pedaling technique or training using an independent crank system make a difference in performance is the question. We would like some data to support your claims or all this is pure speculation.

Who is supplying this diet. All I see in magazines is ever increasing ridiculously priced new equipment for the equipment addict which it is claimed will save a few seconds in TT's. Should TT's be about the performance of a rider or a £25,000+ bike. Will a pedaling technique improve performance? Of course it will, Coyle has already confirmed this and for TT's you have to look no further than Anquetil to get that question answered and what some may not know, he only used sufficient pedal power to guarantee a victory, the technique was capable of generating even more if required. Will an independent crank system improve performance, how could it, when all it does is train a combination of muscles that are not capable of generating effective crank torque and interfere with torque production in the main power stroke.

 

[CoachFergie]

All I see in magazines is ever increasing ridiculously priced new equipment for the equipment addict which it is claimed will save a few seconds in TT's. Should TT's be about the performance of a rider or a £25,000+ bike.

Good to see the UCI step in and limit the bikes at World Track Champs. All parts must be available for anyone to purchase.

Will a pedaling technique improve performance? Of course it will, Coyle has already confirmed this and for TT's you have to look no further than Anquetil to get that question answered and what some may not know, he only used sufficient pedal power to guarantee a victory, the technique was capable of generating even more if required.

But you have no real evidence of this. I can just as equally claim that his pedalling technique cost him winning the Tour eight times and denying Armstrong the record.

Will an independent crank system improve performance, how could it, when all it does is train a combination of muscles that are not capable of generating effective crank torque and interfere with torque production in the main power stroke.

Again just words and needs to be tested. Fortunately several well conducted studies published in peer review journals with sound methodology show there are no performance benefits.

 

[coapman]

But you have no real evidence of this. I can just as equally claim that his pedalling technique cost him winning the Tour eight times and denying Armstrong the record.
.

Oh yes there is evidience. Anquetil's pedalling technique did in fact cost him winning that eight tour or rather his lack of opportunity to use his pedalling. Knowing that Anquetil's secret weapon lay in his TT pedalling technique, the organizers reduced TT's in the Tour. In other stages Anquetil technique does not give a significant advantages, it needs high gear pedalling if it is to gain most benefit from the increased power it makes available, so that rules out mountainy stages. On the flat stages there is not much sense in using max power output if you have a group of twenty riders sitting on your wheel and it is not suitable for sprinting.