For the "pedaling technique doesn't matter crowd"

[CoachFergie]

That is a fair response but in this case different forms of applying power around the pedal stroke have been tested (Rotor rings, IC's, with and without cleats, trying to purposely pull on upstroke) and none have had a significant effect on performance.

If the 2nd gen power meters ever come to market (how many years has metrigear/Garmin been pushed back) they will offer nothing more than what has already been well covered in the literature.

 

[coapman]

That is a fair response but in this case different forms of applying power around the pedal stroke have been tested (Rotor rings, IC's, with and without cleats, trying to purposely pull on upstroke) and none have had a significant effect on performance.

The same basic natural technique was still being used so how could any sensible person expect an improvement. After over 120 years of research the dead spot sector is still there, who is responsible for this failure. Ever since cleats became available it has been possible to apply max torque at 12. There should have been no need for all of these, Houdaille, biopace, rotorcranks, L shaped cranks and all the other different chain ring shapes.

 

[CoachFergie]

The same basic natural technique was still being used so how could any sensible person expect an improvement. After over 120 years of research the dead spot sector is still there, who is responsible for this failure. Ever since cleats became available it has been possible to apply max torque at 12. There should have been no need for all of these, Houdaille, biopace, rotorcranks, L shaped cranks and all the other different chain ring shapes.

And none of those different crank or chainring systems had any significant impact on performance.

Capmal etal (1997) found no different in performance between riders using toe clips or flat pedals.

Sorry Noel, your imagination is not evidence of anything.

 

[FrankDay]

What mathematical system are you using to arrive at this conclusion.

Ordinary math? I mean, it is how an engineer would calculate power given this data. The power you see on your power meter is the average of the instantaneous powers seen around the pedal circle.

 

[the big ring]

Ordinary math? I mean, it is how an engineer would calculate power given this data. The power you see on your power meter is the average of the instantaneous powers seen around the pedal circle.

Based on my understanding of discussions I have read, I disagree.

To wit:
Power is torque x time, right?
One "time measure" device / reed switch on the power meter (ok except for SRM track)
The strain guages measure torque.

 

[coapman]

Capmal etal (1997) found no different in performance between riders using toe clips or flat pedals.

Sorry Noel, your imagination is not evidence of anything.

Toe clips make no difference, it's the cleats that are all important in finding the solution to the dead spot sector. Of course if ( like all the researchers) you continue to use the natural technique, how can you be expected to solve anything.

 

[CoachFergie]

They did use straps as well.

Your imagination is very amusing

 

[coapman]

Based upon your description of your technique I can discern no improvement over "just pushing" and the only change you have made is to rotate the power circle counter clockwise such that the peak power occurs closer to TDC instead of just past 3 o'clock as seen by most people.

This sentence reveals you have not the slightest idea of what's involved in this semi circular technique. What it does is replace the 11-1 sector with the equivalent of 2-4 power application and raise reduced torque between 1-2 to maximal torque without interfering with the normal power of the remaining natural downstroke. All that's required is the simple knack or adjustment in the use of muscles at the top of the pedaling circle. My legs are applying continuous highly effective chain drive power to the chainwheel throughout its revolution and over half of the revolution it's maximal torque while your legs are effectively idling over one third of the revolution and applying seriously reduced torque in other areas where I can apply max torque. You are judging my power application on what you believe is possible.

 

[CoachFergie]

You are judging my power application on what you believe is possible.

Judging your rather vivid imagination is what I'm doing.

 

[coapman]

Ordinary math? I mean, it is how an engineer would calculate power given this data. The power you see on your power meter is the average of the instantaneous powers seen around the pedal circle.

Your problem is you are concentrating on each pedal around its circle, this means continuous split concentration is being used, resulting in a weaker stroke. I am only concerned with getting greatest possible chain drive power to the chainwheel in each revolution of the chainwheel and this can only be done by each leg's total concentration on its objective for only 180 deg. of its pedal circle. Any minimal negative torque that occurs is of no significance when compared to the amount of extra torque that can be generated with this semi circular style.

 

[JayKosta]

...
What it does is replace the 11-1 sector with the equivalent of 2-4 power application and raise reduced torque between 1-2 to maximal torque without interfering with the normal power of the remaining natural downstroke.
...
My legs are applying continuous highly effective chain drive power to the chainwheel throughout its revolution and over half of the revolution it's maximal torque ...
...

====================================
COAPMAN,
This technique might give a true performance increase, but without some factual measurements or performance comparisons, I cannot really judge it.

Also, I don't think I can DO that pedal technique effectively.
I sometimes TRY to produce high torque in the 11-1 sector, but the torque in the 1-5 sector always seems much greater.
In the 11-1 sector, my torque is produced primarily by my foot moving forward, and with only a slight amount of up/down movement (and force) being applied to the pedal - and pushing forward forcefully with my foot is very tiring for the muscles that are involved.

Are you able to use the 11-5 techinque with high power output for a long duration - e.g. for a full 30 minutes, or longer?

Using a PM that measures and displays each leg separately, and at multiple points around the full pedal rotation would show the actual amount and location of the power production - that measurement would remove the uncertainty of how the stroke 'feels'.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

 

[FrankDay]

Based on my understanding of discussions I have read, I disagree.

To wit:
Power is torque x time, right?
One "time measure" device / reed switch on the power meter (ok except for SRM track)
The strain guages measure torque.

If a power meter is not measuring the average torque/power per revolution (be it a revolution of the cranks or the wheel) then they are not measuring power because the torque/power is constantly changing. The main purpose of the reed switch is to set the position of the crank to reliably time one revolution (so the average can be calculated).

 

[FrankDay]

Your problem is you are concentrating on each pedal around its circle, this means continuous split concentration is being used, resulting in a weaker stroke. I am only concerned with getting greatest possible chain drive power to the chainwheel in each revolution of the chainwheel and this can only be done by each leg's total concentration on its objective for only 180 deg. of its pedal circle. Any minimal negative torque that occurs is of no significance when compared to the amount of extra torque that can be generated with this semi circular style.

I don't have a concentration problem because I have developed and use tools to do the "concentrating" for me and then giving me feedback when it senses poor technique. If you had to concentrate on your feet in order to walk or run you would be about as effective as a toddler. But, with enough time toddlers learn what coordination works to allow walking and running without falling, which becomes ingrained into our nervous system. Real effectiveness comes from making these movements occur naturally without need for concentration. Uncoupling the cranks makes some of the changes you are trying to do through concentration. I have now developed a tool to further enhance the torque delivered over the top (or across the bottom, whichever I feel would be more important to work on) again without my needing to think about anything. I will try to post a video later today.

Anyhow, I graphed what you said you did and the math shows it to be no more effective than what most do in part because you ignore half of the stroke. You may think that part of the stroke is not significant but the math sez otherwise.

 

[coapman]

I don't have a concentration problem because I have developed and use tools to do the "concentrating" for me and then giving me feedback when it senses poor technique. If you had to concentrate on your feet in order to walk or run you would be about as effective as a toddler. But, with enough time toddlers learn what coordination works to allow walking and running without falling, which becomes ingrained into our nervous system. Real effectiveness comes from making these movements occur naturally without need for concentration. Uncoupling the cranks makes some of the changes you are trying to do through concentration. I have now developed a tool to further enhance the torque delivered over the top (or across the bottom, whichever I feel would be more important to work on) again without my needing to think about anything. I will try to post a video later today.

Anyhow, I graphed what you said you did and the math shows it to be no more effective than what most do in part because you ignore half of the stroke. You may think that part of the stroke is not significant but the math sez otherwise.

You are beyond redemption. How do you intend to broaden your power application where it can make a difference ? Why not graph actual torque which I have described for both feet on the same 360 deg length and see how it compares with the sinusoidal graph of natural pedaling.

 

[FrankDay]

Why not graph actual torque which I have described for both feet on the same 360 deg length and see how it compares with the sinusoidal graph of natural pedaling.

Because then all you have is a spinscan. The total power the bike sees is the total power of the two legs for one revolution added together. One learns nothing about what the individual legs are doing by analyzing them together. That is the weakness of the spinscan and the new SRM system, etc. To increase the total power the bike sees requires increasing the power delivered by each leg. Single leg analysis is required to best understand how to do this.

 

[coapman]

====================================

Also, I don't think I can DO that pedal technique effectively.


Are you able to use the 11-5 techinque with high power output for a long duration - e.g. for a full 30 minutes, or longer?

If you could, cyclists would have been using it years ago This technique is ideal for long duration high gear power output in non climbing time trials. That in my opinion explains why Anquetil's dominance in time trials was restricted to non climbing TT's.

 

[FrankDay]

Want to increase your force/torque/power across the top, bottom, or anywhere else in the stroke? It is simple, simply add resistance to that part of the stroke in training. With enough time overcoming that resistance will become natural and then be added to the stroke when the resistance is removed. Here is a simple way to add resistance to the top of the stroke (although it does require independent cranks on the bike).

The amount of resistance is easily adjusted by either adding more bungie cords or adjusting the stretch of the bungie cords. My guess is the set-up you see is adding about 5 lbs force across the top. It is pretty easy to pedal (although I suspect it wouldn't be so easy to do for an hour or two). I hope to have a similar system on my bike that I can ride on the road soon. The key to making this change will, as always, be time in the saddle with it. Anyhow, with a system such as this broadening the power curve should be pretty easy for the person dedicated to do so.

I will try to get a video of it in action and a picture of the bike system soon.

 

[CoachFergie]

With enough time overcoming that resistance will become natural and then be added to the stroke when the resistance is removed.

Meanwhile in the real world Fernandez-Pena et al (2009) found that independent crank use changed the muscle firing patterns in the legs and after reverting to normal cranks these changes were not maintained.

 

[the big ring]

Ordinary math? I mean, it is how an engineer would calculate power given this data. The power you see on your power meter is the average of the instantaneous powers seen around the pedal circle.

If a power meter is not measuring the average torque/power per revolution (be it a revolution of the cranks or the wheel) then they are not measuring power because the torque/power is constantly changing. The main purpose of the reed switch is to set the position of the crank to reliably time one revolution (so the average can be calculated).

So first you say it's constantly measuring instantaneous power around the pedal circle (technique) and averaging it (result), then you say it's measuring average torque / power per revolution (result).

Torque is not power. You seem to be equating the two.

A power meter may be able to sample numerous torque values and average them between timing signals (once per revolution), but it certainly does not generate a stream of instantaneous power values and then average them for every revolution.

 

[coapman]

Want to increase your force/torque/power across the top, bottom, or anywhere else in the stroke? It is simple, simply add resistance to that part of the stroke in training. With enough time overcoming that resistance will become natural and then be added to the stroke when the resistance is removed. Here is a simple way to add resistance to the top of the stroke (although it does require independent cranks on the bike).

The amount of resistance is easily adjusted by either adding more bungie cords or adjusting the stretch of the bungie cords. My guess is the set-up you see is adding about 5 lbs force across the top. It is pretty easy to pedal (although I suspect it wouldn't be so easy to do for an hour or two). I hope to have a similar system on my bike that I can ride on the road soon. The key to making this change will, as always, be time in the saddle with it. Anyhow, with a system such as this broadening the power curve should be pretty easy for the person dedicated to do so.

I will try to get a video of it in action and a picture of the bike system soon.

That exercise should carry a warning: "This workout can cause knee injury" The correct combination of muscles are capable of generating more than enough tangential force to deliver maximal torque across the top without undergoing additional exercise. It does not matter how long you spend in the saddle, if the brain is not given clear objectives to follow, no signals will be sent to the muscles and they will return to their natural way of pedaling. That's why total concentration is necessary when any changes are made to technique. It also explains why PC'ers return to their natural style soon after returning to standard cranks. It's all about concentration.

 

[FrankDay]

So first you say it's constantly measuring instantaneous power around the pedal circle (technique) and averaging it (result), then you say it's measuring average torque / power per revolution (result).

Torque is not power. You seem to be equating the two.

A power meter may be able to sample numerous torque values and average them between timing signals (once per revolution), but it certainly does not generate a stream of instantaneous power values and then average them for every revolution.

A PM measures torque values at whatever rate it samples at. Once it knows what constitutes a full revolution it can then average all the samples it has for an average torque. At the same time it also knows the rotation rate because it knows how long it took to get a full revolution and power is nothing more than average torque times omega (the rotation rate). PM's are pretty simple devices conceptually.

 

[FrankDay]

That exercise should carry a warning: "This workout can cause knee injury"

You of the "maximize torque at TDC" fame are saying this tool should carry a warning for the knees? LOL

 

[coapman]

You of the "maximize torque at TDC" fame are saying this tool should carry a warning for the knees? LOL

Like weightlifting and rowing, it depends on how you do it.

 

[FrankDay]

So, I have now proven that my modification I did on the exercise bike, to improve training for improved pedal forces over the top is doable on a bike you can ride outdoors. I am not sure I will get more than 10 miles out of this first try but I have ridden it and it is fine. As you can see I simply screwed some plastic pipe onto a cargo carrier and then made extensions to properly position my bungie cords. When I showed this to my wife she said "Loonie, I don't want to be seen with you!" LOL.

 

[CoachFergie]

Well done Frank, you have done the same as baseball players using heavy bats, or runners pulling sleds and changed the biomechanics of how people actually perform in competition. Like changing the way one pedals none of these training methods have led to an improvement in performance.

The real challenge of coaching is to train more specifically to meet the event demands.