For the "pedaling technique doesn't matter crowd"

[CoachFergie]

Actually, quite a few of them, at least in the off season. Don't you ever wonder why pros continue to contact us about getting on the product? Why, after all these years of experience (by those winning) with the product, would that continue to happen if it were so worthless.

Is the off season 9 months and exclusive use?

Marco Pinotti blogged that he did 45min a week, occasionally twice a week.

But more Pro's don't train with a Gimmickcrank and improve in the sport.

But according to Lance all Pro's takes drugs so perhaps we shouldn't look to them for guidance. Better to look at the well performed research which shows that changes to pedalling technique have no significant effect on performance.

 

[FrankDay]

Is the off season 9 months and exclusive use?

No. the 9 months of exclusive use thing is simply what we say is necessary for our average new user to see, on average, about a 40% increase in power. Nothing says that people cannot see improvement with lesser use and many (including most pros I suspect) use them differently than "exclusively" as other issues may prevent them from following that direction.

Marco Pinotti blogged that he did 45min a week, occasionally twice a week.

Your point? I suspect that Pinotti is using them in a manner that he feels is best for him in his situation. Did he also blog why he continues to use them despite your protestations that the device is useless?

But more Pro's don't train with a Gimmickcrank and improve in the sport.

?????? Your point? Compare those who do not use them to the number of world and national champions who have and continue to do so, even if they don't use them as I feel is best for optimal benefit. Your point that some don't use them is useless to make an argument. Some pros don't use coaches but are, rather, self coached. Does that mean coaches are worthless? I don't know of a single study that proves that coaches do anything positive for the cyclist yet many, but not all, continue to use them. Why?

But according to Lance all Pro's takes drugs so perhaps we shouldn't look to them for guidance. Better to look at the well performed research which shows that changes to pedalling technique have no significant effect on performance.

"well performed" LOL. Show me one negative PowerCranks study that actually documented that the PC group actually had enough time with the product to change pedaling technique. We have been through this before. I will stop now.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

I will stop now.

Thinking of running a book to see how long you last.

 

[coapman]

Better to look at the well performed research which shows that changes to pedalling technique have no significant effect on performance.

Yes they do, changing from mashing to circular results in less power output. But that is the wrong way to look at it. There is an ideal time or place for using a different style, even Fernandez-Pena agrees with that. Switching to circular pedalling in road races can rest the quads for more important work later on in the race. But Fernandez-Pina like the rest is not aware of that all important completely different TT semi-circular style.

 

[CoachFergie]

No. the 9 months of exclusive use thing is simply what we say is necessary for our average new user to see, on average, about a 40% increase in power.

But you have no data to show this is the case.

I suspect that Pinotti is using them in a manner that he feels is best for him in his situation. Did he also blog why he continues to use them despite your protestations that the device is useless???????

A lot of people think they need to adopt a circular pedalling method despite the ever growing volume of research that you don't.

Show me one negative PowerCranks study that actually documented that the PC group actually had enough time with the product to change pedaling technique. We have been through this before. I will stop now.

Bohm and Fernandez-Pena studies both showed that occurred within the six week period study was carried out over.

 

[CoachFergie]

Yes they do, changing from mashing to circular results in less power output. But that is the wrong way to look at it. There is an ideal time or place for using a different style, even Fernandez-Pena agrees with that. Switching to circular pedalling in road races can rest the quads for more important work later on in the race. But Fernandez-Pina like the rest is not aware of that all important completely different TT semi-circular style.

Outstanding.

Or you could just not pedal as hard to save the quads for later in the race like most people do by using effective drafting, pacing or downhill sections.

 

[coapman]

No. the 9 months of exclusive use thing is simply what we say is necessary for our average new user to see, on average, about a 40% increase in power.

Result of research done by Fernandez-Pena is in agreement with the findings of Phil Holman, which is that PC pedalling reduces power in the downstroke. I would estimate this loss to be about 10%. This means for a PC'er to gain that 40% increase in power output, he would have to apply 50% of downstroke power as pedal moves across the bottom, up and over the top. Is that possible even with the use of bungee cord resistance training.

 

[CoachFergie]

Result of research done by Fernandez-Pena is in agreement with the findings of Phil Holman, which is that PC pedalling reduces power in the downstroke. I would estimate this loss to be about 10%. This means for a PC'er to gain that 40% increase in power output, he would have to apply 50% of downstroke power as pedal moves across the bottom, up and over the top. Is that possible even with the use of bungee cord resistance training.

Findings of Phil Holman??? BWAH HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA. You mean self-observations of a rider. I suppose that is better than some crackpot theory based on an video observation of a rider from the Fifties

That is almost as dumb as Frank claiming Phil's 2mph increase in speed over a season as evidence of the efficacy of Gimmickcranks. We see far greater improvements in Pursuit speed over a season than that anyway. Usually down to training progression, improvement in weather, bringing out better equipment and mostly because riders peak and bring their A game for the Championship events at the end of the season.

 

[coapman]

Usually down to bringing out better equipment

It's still true, there is one born every minute. Using commonsense and a serious look at technique can guarantee a 50-70% increase in the power of each pedal stroke without increasing peak torque. That's what you call smooth pedalling. Maybe you, being the physiological and chemistry expert can tell us what percentage power gain does a tt rider get from the ideal dose of EPO.

 

[CoachFergie]

It's still true, there is one born every minute. Using commonsense and a serious look at technique can guarantee a 50-70% increase in the power of each pedal stroke without increasing peak torque. That's what you call smooth pedalling.

Ha ha, "guarantee a 50-70% increase". Starting to sound like Frank, just toss out made up numbers and a few casual anecdotes.

Both pathetic.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Ha ha, "guarantee a 50-70% increase". Starting to sound like Frank, just toss out made up numbers and a few casual anecdotes.

Both pathetic.

But Fergie, if only - I could be the first paracycling masters age (totally clean) winner of the TdF!!

 

[coapman]

But Fergie, if only - I could be the first paracycling masters age (totally clean) winner of the TdF!!

You may be a paracyclist but as things stand, there is no difference in the pedalling ability of you and CoachFergie in time trials, you are missing the muscles of a lower leg and ankle, but while CoachFergie is fully equipped, his serious problem is, like all other cyclists he does not know how to use his lower leg muscles and ankles.

 

[CoachFergie]

Think I will stick to the theories that have some actual data to support them than Gimmickcrank Marketing or some nut-bar that no one believes.

Look what happened to the last guy who asked us to believe in his extra-ordinary performances

 

[FrankDay]

Findings of Phil Holman??? BWAH HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA. You mean self-observations of a rider. I suppose that is better than some crackpot theory based on an video observation of a rider from the Fifties

That is almost as dumb as Frank claiming Phil's 2mph increase in speed over a season as evidence of the efficacy of Gimmickcranks. We see far greater improvements in Pursuit speed over a season than that anyway. Usually down to training progression, improvement in weather, bringing out better equipment and mostly because riders peak and bring their A game for the Championship events at the end of the season.

For those new to this debate let me bring them up to speed on who Phil Holman is and what he did. Back in 2000 we were having a similar debate on the old RST and RBR groups as to the efficacy of the PowerCranks and Phil Holman was just as adamant as Coach Fergie that they simply couldn't work as I claimed. I challenged him to use them as I recommend for 6 months and report to the group what happened. He took me up on the challenge. (My friends thought I was crazy) Here is his last report:

"This will be my final report for 2000 having trained fairly consistently
with the Power Cranks for the last 7 months.
For those not familiar with my training and reports, I was a skeptic of the
claims made by their inventor Frank Day and volunteered to train with
them and report on my findings. The cranks work by going out of phase
if you do not pull up on them (each crank has its own freewheel so to speak)
The constant feedback forces the rider to modify their pedal stroke and
always provide positive torque to the cranks with both legs.

My final conclusion is that they worked for me.
I've been a life time sports and fitness enthusiast and have been cycling
competitively for the last 10 years. I'm 50 years old so for me to see the
improvement in my performance over the last several months has been
totally awesome.
Winning a Bronze Medal at World Masters Track has been a real kick. Its been
almost 3 weeks and I'm still grinning.
The following is a list of observations/hints that I discovered when using
the cranks and may be useful to some in obtaining maximum benefit.

1/ Pulling up on the cranks is best achieved at a lower cadence (80 rpm). At
this speed the hamstrings and hip flexors get a good workout but expect it
to take a couple of weeks for these muscles to be strong enough for you
to pedal continuously for a couple of miles at a time.

2/ Modification of ones pedal stroke with increased pull-up tends to
diminish the magnitude of the downstroke. Someone actually reported
that they deteriorated overall after using the Cranks.
This is noticeable when climbing out of the saddle or trying to
accelerate quickly with a pedal stomp. What I did to counteract this was to
do a few 10 minute sessions of climbing a week using my quads only to
maintain their power and strength.

3/ The Power Cranks require good discipline to use as they are more awkward
to get in and out of the pedals and are less user friendly when freewheeling
and riding in traffic. I choose a 10 mile loop with light traffic and a
cycle lane to do most of my training.
It had several good climbs in it and was ideal.
It may be difficult to ride them on a group ride especially if you are out
with a bunch of hammer heads.
Make sure you maintain this kind of ride in your workout program if it is
already there.

4/ I did notice increased leg strength after using the cranks not only when
riding but also when walking around. I seemed to have more spring in my step

5/ My training sessions got faster especially intervals on the track.
My pursuit pace for training improved from last years 30 mph to 32 mph this
summer.

6/ My top speed improved from around 35mph to 38mph.

7/ Although I didn't ride any TTs this year (missed Nats with broken arm) my
30min power workouts on the trainer improved to equal my best ever without
having to do my killer TT intervals.

8/ My AT heart rate improved from my usual (low 150s) to 160.
160 was normally my max yet I was able to sustain it for 30 mins......wow.

9/ Most good weeks I put in around 100 miles with the cranks. After several
weeks I noticed that I was automatically pedaling with the same action on my
race, rain and track bikes with regular cranks.

10/ The sound of my trainer has gone from whir....whir....whir....whir to
....whirrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

I look forward to continue training with the cranks in the off season and
hope to do a PR in the 40k TT next season. Masters Nats in is in my
home state (WA) for 2001.
Regards
Phil Holman "

I look forward very much to seeing your report/data that you regularly see far greater improvements than 2 mph over ones previous maximum pursuit speed in one season in riders where such an improvement would be enough to take them to a bronze medal at Worlds.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

I will stop now.

Thinking of running a book to see how long you last.

For those new to this debate ...

18 minutes short of 3 days.

My money was on a week, but you couldn't even last three days

 

[Tapeworm]

So sad that a person can spend years training and not improve. But then they find their "miracle" training method. And must be the *only* thing which made them better. Not an alteration in training load, structure or recovery. Nope, all in the cranks.

As for the comment about improving leg strength - trolllolololol.

 

[Tapeworm]

Over on ST Jim Martin just posted this little study abstract:-
Int J Sports Med.*2008 Oct;29(10):817-22. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1038374. Epub 2008 Apr 17.*Effects of pedal type and pull-up action during cycling.*Mornieux G,*Stapelfeldt B,*Gollhofer A,*Belli A.*Source*Institut für Sport und Sportwissenschaft, Universität Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. guillaume.mornieux@sport.uni-freiburg.de*Abstract*The aim of this study was to determine the influence of different shoe-pedal interfaces and of an active pulling-up action during the upstroke phase on the pedalling technique. Eight elite cyclists (C) and seven non-cyclists (NC) performed three different bouts at 90 rev . min (-1) and 60 % of their maximal aerobic power. They pedalled with single pedals (PED), with clipless pedals (CLIP) and with a pedal force feedback (CLIPFBACK) where subjects were asked to pull up on the pedal during the upstroke. There was no significant difference for pedalling effectiveness, net mechanical efficiency (NE) and muscular activity between PED and CLIP. When compared to CLIP, CLIPFBACK resulted in a significant increase in pedalling effectiveness during upstroke (86 % for C and 57 % NC, respectively), as well as higher biceps femoris and tibialis anterior muscle activity (p < 0.001). However, NE was significantly reduced (p < 0.008) with 9 % and 3.3 % reduction for C and NC, respectively. Consequently, shoe-pedal interface (PED vs. CLIP) did not significantly influence cycling technique during submaximal exercise. However, an active pulling-up action on the pedal during upstroke increased the pedalling effectiveness, while reducing net mechanical efficiency.*

 

[Tapeworm]

And that post in ST:-
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/gforum....view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread

 

[FrankDay]

Over on ST Jim Martin just posted this little study abstract:-
Int J Sports Med.*2008 Oct;29(10):817-22. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1038374. Epub 2008 Apr 17.*Effects of pedal type and pull-up action during cycling.*Mornieux G,*Stapelfeldt B,*Gollhofer A,*Belli A.*Source*Institut für Sport und Sportwissenschaft, Universität Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. guillaume.mornieux@sport.uni-freiburg.de*Abstract*The aim of this study was to determine the influence of different shoe-pedal interfaces and of an active pulling-up action during the upstroke phase on the pedalling technique. Eight elite cyclists (C) and seven non-cyclists (NC) performed three different bouts at 90 rev . min (-1) and 60 % of their maximal aerobic power. They pedalled with single pedals (PED), with clipless pedals (CLIP) and with a pedal force feedback (CLIPFBACK) where subjects were asked to pull up on the pedal during the upstroke. There was no significant difference for pedalling effectiveness, net mechanical efficiency (NE) and muscular activity between PED and CLIP. When compared to CLIP, CLIPFBACK resulted in a significant increase in pedalling effectiveness during upstroke (86 % for C and 57 % NC, respectively), as well as higher biceps femoris and tibialis anterior muscle activity (p < 0.001). However, NE was significantly reduced (p < 0.008) with 9 % and 3.3 % reduction for C and NC, respectively. Consequently, shoe-pedal interface (PED vs. CLIP) did not significantly influence cycling technique during submaximal exercise. However, an active pulling-up action on the pedal during upstroke increased the pedalling effectiveness, while reducing net mechanical efficiency.*

Cool. Proves to me that "asking" someone to change technique without training them (and the necessary muscles) to use that technique naturally is most likely to result in a reduced efficiency. Go up and read Phil Holman's report again. Notice he says

for me to see the
improvement in my performance over the last several months has been
totally awesome

He did not report seeing this improvement as soon as he started to think about pulling up. In fact, most see the exact opposite because the necessary muscles are totally under trained for this effort. Most people when they transition to PowerCranks see a huge drop off in ability. It is not until they have many miles under their belt using the new technique that they return to their former ability and then start to see improvement. That is what Phil Holman reported. That is what essentially every user reports. So such studies as posted by Martin are worthless when it comes to assessing different pedaling techniques. I would expect every rider to test best using their natural technique over a strange technique they are asked (and totally untrained for) to do. You would think Martin was experienced enough in as a sports scientist to understand this. I guess not.

Edit: The authors report that effectiveness improves but efficiency drops when riders are asked to make this change. But, the real question is what happens to "pedaling effectiveness" and "efficiency" (and power) as riders train themselves to ride in this different fashion for long periods. Until that question is answered (for this and other pedaling techniques) the question as to which technique is best or better than another remains unresolved by science.

 

[FrankDay]

And that post in ST:-
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/gforum....view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread

Ugh, why doesn't he come here and post it? He knows we are here having this discussion. He knows it shows nothing of importance and is misleading but he goes to a site where he will receive nothing but encouragement for such drivel.

 

[Tapeworm]

What's that saying about arguing with a fool?

 

[FrankDay]

What's that saying about arguing with a fool?

Foolish is as foolish does. Posting that study as (definitive) evidence of anything is pure foolishness. Your defending it is pure foolishness.

 

[CoachFergie]

I look forward very much to seeing your report/data that you regularly see far greater improvements than 2 mph over ones previous maximum pursuit speed in one season in riders where such an improvement would be enough to take them to a bronze medal at Worlds.

We see it every year in Canterbury over a 4 month season where we run Monthly Omnium's.

Where did Phil place the year before at Master's Worlds. Perhaps if he had trained specifically he would have won Gold. Just as untestable as your hypothesis.

 

[CoachFergie]

18 minutes short of 3 days.

My money was on a week, but you couldn't even last three days

I had him at 2 days.

 

[CoachFergie]

Cool. Proves to me that "asking" someone to change technique without training them (and the necessary muscles) to use that technique naturally is most likely to result in a reduced efficiency. Go up and read Phil Holman's report again.

BWAH HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!

Yeah some Muppet over a study published in a well respected journal.

Notice he says
He did not report seeing this improvement as soon as he started to think about pulling up. In fact, most see the exact opposite because the necessary muscles are totally under trained for this effort. Most people when they transition to PowerCranks see a huge drop off in ability. It is not until they have many miles under their belt using the new technique that they return to their former ability and then start to see improvement. That is what Phil Holman reported. That is what essentially every user reports.

Come now Frank, plenty of people have spoken out that the Gimmickcranks are a waste of time and they did not improve. Are you booked in with Oprah for next Friday?

So such studies as posted by Martin are worthless when it comes to assessing different pedaling techniques. I would expect every rider to test best using their natural technique over a strange technique they are asked (and totally untrained for) to do. You would think Martin was experienced enough in as a sports scientist to understand this. I guess not.

Ha ha, see my signature. Learn the ways of the Snake Oil Salesman. Ad hominem. Jim Martin is a very well respected researcher, just don't get him too would up over applied sport science or he will unfriend you from Facebook

Edit: The authors report that effectiveness improves but efficiency drops when riders are asked to make this change. But, the real question is what happens to "pedaling effectiveness" and "efficiency" (and power) as riders train themselves to ride in this different fashion for long periods. Until that question is answered (for this and other pedaling techniques) the question as to which technique is best or better than another remains unresolved by science.

Well we see the results from all the well performed and published in well regarded journals, Gimmickcrank studies that show no advantage after a period of training that leads to a change in pedalling technique (Bohm, 2008 and Fernandez-Pena, 2009).