For the "pedaling technique doesn't matter crowd"

[CoachFergie]

This is more of the same uci/obree type nonsense, even the level of the saddle is now resticted even though it can cause injury. When they see the perfect pedalling technique in action and the safety factor of Scott Rake bars, they will soon change again. A Coggan had a pair of Scott Rake bars. If I was in charge of the rules I would make it compulsory for all TT riders to sit on the rear of their saddles with sit bones where sit bones should be.

Actually couldn't be worse than the current mob in there.

But good to see they have banned the evil that is lycra shoe covers on indoor tracks. As a Commissaire that issue was causing me a lot of distress.

But anyhow, Rakes are illegal or at least they put you in an illegal position so back to the drawing board Noel. That and the fact you have no data to show either option (Rakes or Jacques Style) offers an improvement in power.

See if Axiscranks will sponsor you seeing you are going to revolutionise the bicycling world. Pity Graeme Obree will get all the credit.

 

[coapman]

Actually couldn't be worse than the current mob in there.

But good to see they have banned the evil that is lycra shoe covers on indoor tracks. As a Commissaire that issue was causing me a lot of distress.

But anyhow, Rakes are illegal or at least they put you in an illegal position so back to the drawing board Noel. That and the fact you have no data to show either option (Rakes or Jacques Style) offers an improvement in power.

See if Axiscranks will sponsor you seeing you are going to revolutionise the bicycling world. Pity Graeme Obree will get all the credit.

I am still waiting for your description of Obree's pedalling style ? which you say he described so well.

 

[CoachFergie]

I am still waiting for your description of Obree's pedalling style ? which you say he described so well.

Read it for yourself.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Obree-Way-cyclists-ebook/dp/B0094382WC

 

[coapman]

Read it for yourself.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Obree-Way-cyclists-ebook/dp/B0094382WC

As I said I hate computers, are you expected to pay for this, if so, I don't have a credit card.

 

[CoachFergie]

As I said I hate computers, are you expected to pay for this, if so, I don't have a credit card.

Don't tell us your problems. Ever heard of a book store?

 

[coapman]

Don't tell us your problems. Ever heard of a book store?

No, when I tried the free sample, it said not available in ireland.

 

[coapman]

Don't tell us your problems. Ever heard of a book store?

I understood that to mean online book store. No 'The obree way' there

 

[Tapeworm]

As I said I hate computers, are you expected to pay for this, if so, I don't have a credit card.

For one who hates computers you do an awful lot of typing here...

 

[coapman]

For one who hates computers you do an awful lot of typing here...

That's about all I can do on computers.

 

[FrankDay]

You don't seem to get that this technology to test this has been available for years.

http://axiscranks.com/market-applications/bicycle-cranks/

Go knock yourself out. They are not vapourware like Brim Brothers.

Not capable, you were offered the chance to travel to test your theory but declined. Stop hiding behind petty excuses.

The technology has been available for years???? Available to whom? From the link

is a proof of concept product that demonstrates the abilities of AXIS technology. This product is only sold to research institutes at this stage. although, if you have an application where the AXIS crank can add value to your product, let us know! All bicycle power measuring devices available in todays market measure net power.

Vaporware is a product announced but not available in the marketplace. Axis cranks seem like vaporware to me (unless one is a research institution, which leaves me out). Fergie, do you ever read what you link to? Or, if you read it, it is not clear you understand what you are reading.

 

[M Sport]

Scott Rake Handlebars. Were illegal within months. So a delusional pedalling technique, no idea of the magnitude and requires an illegal piece of equipment.

Thanks. It kind of puts things in perspective, discussing an imaginary pedalling technique that utilises equipment that is banned. What is the point, Coapman?

 

[CoachFergie]

The technology has been available for years???? Available to whom? From the link

Yup I have force vector studies dating back to the 70s. The link is for a product I first laid my hands on in 2011.

Vaporware is a product announced but not available in the marketplace. Axis cranks seem like vaporware to me (unless one is a research institution, which leaves me out). Fergie, do you ever read what you link to? Or, if you read it, it is not clear you understand what you are reading.

I could get a set sent down here in days. Not my problem if you or Noel are not prepared to put your money where your mouths are. Maybe if you marketed on facts and figures rather than delusion and hype you would sell more. Heh, maybe not because both your causes (Gimmickcranks and Short Cranks) have been sunk thanks to the well performed research available.

 

[kuoirad]

Pardon my mostly-off-topic question for CoachFergie - you mentioned being happy about the ban for lycra shoe covers on indoor tracks, that you'd been leery of them as a commissaire (sp?). Could you elaborate on that? Just curiosity on my part.

 

[CoachFergie]

Pardon my mostly-off-topic question for CoachFergie - you mentioned being happy about the ban for lycra shoe covers on indoor tracks, that you'd been leery of them as a commissaire (sp?). Could you elaborate on that? Just curiosity on my part.

Sarcasm. With all that is going on in cycling that lycra booties should be banned seems ludicrous.

 

[Tapeworm]

^ wrong there Fergie. Armstrong used booties, and we all know what that led to. Soon the whole peloton are on them then it trickles down to the domestic ranks and then down to amateurs. Then every cyclist is going to their doctor looking for a booties prescription.

Rampant bootie usage is a blight on the noble sport of cycling.

Don't get me started on aero helmets or seat level-ness.

 

[CoachFergie]

Yes, I have heard rumours that riders on USPS and Discovery were coerced into using booties and if they refused were not given starts in major events. Apologies for making light of such a serious situation.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

.... although SRM offer a model that allows this for erg testing. Although quite impractical for field testing especially in competition.

The SRM variable length crank arms are quite usable on road, they are just super beefy/heavy (and would need to be fitted on a standard pro SRM model).

 

[FrankDay]

Yup I have force vector studies dating back to the 70s. The link is for a product I first laid my hands on in 2011.

That doesn't mean the technology has been available to the ordinary user. And, these were so "technical" they were frequently out of commission - at least that was what I was told when I talked to some people at the UC Davis (who have done some of those early studies) when I asked about coming up to be able to do some testing and gather some data. Further, apparently many of these places only have one, making the assumption that the right and left dynamic will be the same.

And, I have been aware of an exercise bike out of Europe (The Excalibur I believe it is called) that has had this capability for many years as I saw it about 10 years ago. However, the bike cost something like $35-50k with all the bells and whistles, as I remember, and I don't know a single person with one nor have I ever seen it being referenced as being used in a study that I can remember. And, of course, as I remember, this bike did not have the ability to change crank length no compare regular cranks to PowerCranks since the mechanism was in the cranks. And, of course, it is not possible for me to prove anything because anyone would rightfully see me as biased so I am forced to rely upon others. Here might be your chance to shine but, even though you state how easy it is to get this equipment to do the testing, you don't have the equipment. And, I think many might see you as also biased ruining your chance to do the world a favor and becoming a hero by scientifically proving me a fraud. LOL

You make light of how easy you think it should be to prove some of our musings. If that were the case it would be just as easy for you to disprove them. Where is that work? Instead you simply come here and make noise, lots of noise. With all the time you have wasted making your assertions wouldn't it have been better spend taking that time to have just proved your contention? Then you could be easily done with me. But, then, what would happen with your obsession?

 

[sciguy]

Frank,

You seem to keep forgetting that you're the one touting a product that you sell and are making what many of us think are rather outrageous claims as to the effectiveness of this product. In this case it would seem the burden of proof rests rather squarely on your shoulders.

That said, I'm pleased to see the development of this new power meter and feel that it will make it easier for the masses to study the influence of various pedaling techniques. Sadly for you, I expect that this will quickly show what many of us have long felt to be true

The software that the unit uses to inspect torque with each crank rotation looks a bit pricy for the common man. Perhaps I missed it but I didn't happen to see mentioned that the Icrank software sifts out non-tangential torque and quantifies it so that it can be compared to the tangential torque and used as a measure of effectiveness of pedaling. Seems as if we had a bet running on that which I'd already conceded but may now need to reevaluate.

 

[coapman]

Until then I will continue to believe the most powerful cycling torque will come from effective use of the anti-gravity muscles in the direction against gravity (in an upright bicycle).

You did some HPV work, how does peak torque of a HPV rider (across the top ?) compare to peak torque of an upright rider.

 

[CoachFergie]

The SRM variable length crank arms are quite usable on road, they are just super beefy/heavy (and would need to be fitted on a standard pro SRM model).

I had one fall apart on a rider in track racing but for testing purposes they would be fine.

 

[CoachFergie]

That doesn't mean the technology has been available to the ordinary user. And, these were so "technical" they were frequently out of commission - at least that was what I was told when I talked to some people at the UC Davis (who have done some of those early studies) when I asked about coming up to be able to do some testing and gather some data. Further, apparently many of these places only have one, making the assumption that the right and left dynamic will be the same.

You mean to say that you conned Cadel Evans or Poalo Bettini into using a Gimmickcrank but you can't talk a sport science student into doing a some basic testing? Weak!

And, I have been aware of an exercise bike out of Europe (The Excalibur I believe it is called) that has had this capability for many years as I saw it about 10 years ago. However, the bike cost something like $35-50k with all the bells and whistles, as I remember, and I don't know a single person with one nor have I ever seen it being referenced as being used in a study that I can remember.

Put your money where your mouth is!

And, of course, as I remember, this bike did not have the ability to change crank length no compare regular cranks to PowerCranks since the mechanism was in the cranks. And, of course, it is not possible for me to prove anything because anyone would rightfully see me as biased so I am forced to rely upon others.

Nice dodge. Many companies fund or carry out their own research, much of it is published as long as it is properly acknowledged.

Here might be your chance to shine but, even though you state how easy it is to get this equipment to do the testing, you don't have the equipment. And, I think many might see you as also biased ruining your chance to do the world a favor and becoming a hero by scientifically proving me a fraud.

I am very content with the research that has been performed. My area of research is tracking performance over a period with a power meter. I am clearly biased towards science and against Snake Oil salesmen.

You make light of how easy you think it should be to prove some of our musings. If that were the case it would be just as easy for you to disprove them. Where is that work? Instead you simply come here and make noise, lots of noise. With all the time you have wasted making your assertions wouldn't it have been better spend taking that time to have just proved your contention? Then you could be easily done with me. But, then, what would happen with your obsession?

They are disproved every day and measured with a first generation power meter. No change in power from changing crank length and no significant change in power from trying to change pedal technique. It amuses me watching you continue to fight your lost cause.

 

[CoachFergie]

Anyone with a Power Meter can test different applications of force around the pedal stroke. Very easy to do. But why would you when the research has been performed and shown the magnitude of performance gains are non-existent.

Even the basis for this thread is non-existent.

The authors you quote at the start of another Frank Day train wreck wrote this in EJAP soon after they published the first study...

Contrary to Leirdal and Ettema (2010), we do not find a significant relationship between DC and GE.

 

[FrankDay]

Anyone with a Power Meter can test different applications of force around the pedal stroke. Very easy to do. But why would you when the research has been performed and shown the magnitude of performance gains are non-existent.

Even the basis for this thread is non-existent.

The authors you quote at the start of another Frank Day train wreck wrote this in EJAP soon after they published the first study...

Contrary to Leirdal and Ettema (2010), we do not find a significant relationship between DC and GE.

Earlier in the paper they write:

A reason for the contradicting results of this study and Leirdal and Ettema (2010) may be the type of bicycle–ergometer system that was used.

They then go on to discuss why this might be an issue.

Fergie, if you want to discuss a paper and what it might mean it would seem best to post a link to it and let everyone have a chance to interpret what it might mean to an overall argument rather than just declaring that proof of what you say exists. Thanks for the heads up though. Interesting paper.

 

[FrankDay]

Frank,

You seem to keep forgetting that you're the one touting a product that you sell and are making what many of us think are rather outrageous claims as to the effectiveness of this product. In this case it would seem the burden of proof rests rather squarely on your shoulders.

That said, I'm pleased to see the development of this new power meter and feel that it will make it easier for the masses to study the influence of various pedaling techniques. Sadly for you, I expect that this will quickly show what many of us have long felt to be true

The software that the unit uses to inspect torque with each crank rotation looks a bit pricy for the common man. Perhaps I missed it but I didn't happen to see mentioned that the Icrank software sifts out non-tangential torque and quantifies it so that it can be compared to the tangential torque and used as a measure of effectiveness of pedaling. Seems as if we had a bet running on that which I'd already conceded but may now need to reevaluate.

I am not forgetting anything. From a scientific perspective it is really impossible for me to prove my points because I am seen as biased. Hence, there would be a big waste of my time to try. What I do try to do from a scientific perspective is to support those independent people who wish to look at the issue. It is the best I can do.

And, if this new PM turns out to be "sad for me" then so be it. I and many others though will be completely surprised if that is the case. That is why I am so excited that this data will soon be readily available. Stand by. Many more long threads are sure to be on the horizon if I am correct. If I am wrong we will be a thing of the past. Mark my words, the cycling community is soon to learn that "pedaling technique matters" and it matters big time. Of course, it isn't possible to know what your technique really is unless you can measure it.

BTW, that software price is a mistake. I was blown away when I saw that so I contacted them. The TA analysis software is included with the iCranks. In fact, you can download it from that site without purchasing the cranks now and see it work as it comes with an example file. To use the software users are going to need to get an ANT+ USB stick to put in their computer so they can communicate (or do the same with an iPhone and then transfer the data) but that costs about $40. I still don't have all I need to make my pre-production unit work with the TA software, all I can do is use the Garmin right now. They told me that store error would be corrected soon on the web site.

I don't believe the software separates out tangential and radial forces (TA stands for torque analysis). I suspect they could do that if they wanted to (that may be in the $2,000 version of the software) but that is way to much information for the average consumer IMHO. Look how confusing the radial component of that AXIS cranks is. IMHO it is simply enough for most to look at the top, front, bottom, and back tangential component and compare right and left to see where major weaknesses lie. The iCranks software will give that and more.