Junior gear restrictions

[42x16ss]

Ok, maybe I'm being stupid here but, I'm pretty sure Chris Hoy rides 52X14 in the sprints, maybe a bit bigger in the Keirin.

If you're winning Olympic track golds on 52X14 then surely it's going to be enough for a kid in a race?

I know the cadence is difference in track racing but even so.

Lachlan Morton came top 10 at Utah a year or two ago when he was still on restricted gearing.

If you are a truly talented junior it's no handicap.

 

[Zorotheslacker]

Interesting that not one mainstream cassette manufacture offers 14T in their top components and some don't offer it at all. Why do you think that is?

 

[42x16ss]

Caleb Ewan scalped established pros such as Mark Renshaw and Allan Davis at the Bay Crits two years ago on restricted gearing.

If you're good enough, it's not an issue

 

[barn yard]

Interesting that not one mainstream cassette manufacture offers 14T in their top components and some don't offer it at all. Why do you think that is?

because junior racing is a small market

 

[DanielsDad]

Good thing Jens is not a Junior

Watching Jens ride - good thing he is not required to spin...

 

[winkybiker]

Kids are still growing and pushing big gears puts a lot of strain on the knees. It seems like a rule to try and reduce this so they don't have problems in later life.

However, I have no idea how they have come up with the allowable ratios and whether it is arbitrary or not.

Even with a restricted gear, kids can easily and often push a gear to big for the conditions. Up hill, into the wind etc. The key to kids developing a good spin and a style easy on the knees is good, firm coaching and advice, rather than arbitrary gear restrictions. Make sure they know that high cadences are the key to endurance, power and speed, as well as injury resistance. Get them to watch pro cyclists and the cadences they (mostly) use and see fast spinning (relative to "fondo guys").

 

[Zorotheslacker]

Even with a restricted gear, kids can easily and often push a gear to big for the conditions. Up hill, into the wind etc. The key to kids developing a good spin and a style easy on the knees is good, firm coaching and advice, rather than arbitrary gear restrictions. Make sure they know that high cadences are the key to endurance, power and speed, as well as injury resistance. Get them to watch pro cyclists and the cadences they (mostly) use and see fast spinning (relative to "fondo guys").

I agree with you.
You worded my point differently.

I am struggling to think of another good piece of coaching advice in sports that is turned into a rule and applied to one class of athlete only even when they compete in an open class (like Juniors in a Senior RR).

 

[DanielsDad]

Putting together a TT bike

My Junior is getting a TT bike. At his height we were thinking 175mm cranks were best. Lots of 175 53T/39T on the market. For all but Vitoria CS the 53 fails rollout.

Then the subject came up you get more "gear" with shorter cranks. So 170mm, 165 or 175 on a TT bike?

Going down a 1% grade on a TT bike and its easy to have to spin fast.

 

[King Boonen]

But the gear is the same with shorter cranks. The amount of force required to turn it goes up.

 

[DanielsDad]

But the gear is the same with shorter cranks. The amount of force required to turn it goes up.

For a given bike movement, in a gear the distance a rider needs to move their feet is less with shorter cranks and more with longer cranks. The leverage arm "gear" is longer with longer cranks, but requires more movement of the foot to go the same distance along the ground. This may feel like a lower gear as the feet are moving farther than they would in higher RPM in an actual lower gear.

So I am wondering since the gear and RPM required to move the bike forward have a fixed maximum due to gear restrictions, if the rider better to have a longer or shorter crank. I think if the TT speeds approach much over 110 RPM (just a SWAG), shorter cranks are better as the rider does not need to move their feet as far.

 

[winkybiker]

For a given bike movement, in a gear the distance a rider needs to move their feet is less with shorter cranks and more with longer cranks. The leverage arm "gear" is longer with longer cranks, but requires more movement of the foot to go the same distance along the ground. This may feel like a lower gear as the feet are moving farther than they would in higher RPM in an actual lower gear.

So I am wondering since the gear and RPM required to move the bike forward have a fixed maximum due to gear restrictions, if the rider better to have a longer or shorter crank. I think if the TT speeds approach much over 110 RPM (just a SWAG), shorter cranks are better as the rider does not need to move their feet as far.

What makes this complex is that the maximum damage potential is likely at the start of the downstroke where the force is applied through a bent knee. With shorter cranks, the force is more, (as noted above - at same speed and gears), but the knee is less bent (assuming an equivalent leg position at the bottom of the stroke). Whether that combination is better or worse for injury risk is unclear to me.

 

[DanielsDad]

What makes this complex is that the maximum damage potential is likely at the start of the downstroke where the force is applied through a bent knee. With shorter cranks, the force is more, (as noted above - at same speed and gears), but the knee is less bent (assuming an equivalent leg position at the bottom of the stroke). Whether that combination is better or worse for injury risk is unclear to me.

I think you didn't answer other than saying its hard.

It is complicated. It almost comes down to changing cranks by course.

Take the Bend course used in USA youth Nationals in the past. 5+ miles climbing at a 2%ish grade and then descending. We made the mistake of using 175s for the up and he couldn't keep up on the 30+ return - that was at 11 years old. Now older we have to decide and test maybe longer cranks for the uphill and then tuck and coast for the downhill - if there is a longer downhill.

The Wisconsin TT course is flatter so the goal would be to pedal. Arizona Valley of the Sun is close to flat, but the kids finishing are all going about 30mph.

Again boils down to testing and changing on each course.

 

[Zorotheslacker]

Simple solution would be to get a bigger gear.

 

[avanti]

.................

Again boils down to testing and changing on each course.

In my opinion one should stick with the same length cranks on a road bike since that is what your leg muscles are used to.

Also for a given frame shorter cranks give greater clearance when cornering.

 

[hiero2]

When my best mate and I were racing as juniors I used restricted gears and he didn't, as a result he spent a year off the bike with damaged growth plates in his knees. It's the same as kids not doing massive weights at the gym until they are fully developed and I have another mate who was racing with A grade as an U15, on restricted gears. I also won a number of bunch sprints at open races with the 52X14 gear combo in U19s.

The theory is to protect the kids joints as they grow so they don't damage themselves long term. It is also to keep it as a more even playing field so that , in theory, the biggest, most developed kid doesn't just mash massive gears and ride away like that.

Yup. When juniors have the bigger gearing, they often use it, and without the experience of an older rider - knowing when to back off. Also, the youthful body will often perform well enough to cause damage even when the young athlete doesn't sense it.

I think somebody else mentioned working on spinning being part of the training. I would add that doing the old traditional spring month in a fixed gear to get your spinning rates up would probably be a good thing. I worked with quite a few juniors when I was racing - I don't think any of them ever used a fixed gear - not enough patience. Doesn't mean it wouldn't have been a good idea. If he can do 170, work on 190. Spinning helps strengthen the connective tissues.

 

[Zorotheslacker]

...often perform well enough to cause damage even when the young athlete doesn't sense it.

Are there any medical cases you can point to in support of your claim?
Sure - crashes, getting hit in football etc., but anything that "spinning" at 60 RPM would hurt any kid.

The views that weightlifting would be bad for a kid, - or TDF riders don't live as long as the general population are around - but also don't look to me as if they are true. I just have not seen any set of data showing riding in a gear (near what a racer might) harms anyone.

 

[cyclopeon]

Weighing in late here, but some thoughts.

1.

I just have not seen any set of data showing riding in a gear (near what a racer might) harms anyone.

What, you want someone to do a controlled experiment on a couple of groups of kids for several years and then track the results into their old age? Never going to happen in a responsible country or environment. If it did, the naysayers would have a field day pointing out all the environmental changes (eg diet) between "then" and "now" which would supposedly invalidate the study. No, too many other variables affecting day to day living of kids, they ain't lab rats.

2. But, it's not just about the legs! I think, and I can only base it on my own case and feelings, that the cardiovascular development benefits of using lower gears while the body is still developing sets a person up with a better engine for life than they will manage if they start later.

3. As to why there is a coaching guideline in the rules for juniors, the thing is that a lot of juniors don't have coaches (or at least for the sake of sport I hope that's the case... it sure was in my day). So the UCI chose to control just about the only factor they can control, it seems to me.

4. What's the big deal if a junior racing in the midst of older riders doesn't win due to gears? They should be in it for fun; the seriousness can come later.

5. Give juniors the okay to use power gears and you are nudging them into the steroid crowd in the highschools (what??!! never!!?? Of course this would never apply to your kid, or yours, or those of any forumites, model children all... but think about it a bit!)

6. How can you know for sure that his body responds better to lower cadences/ higher gears, as opposed to he is just too complacent with his status quo to work hard at developing a higher cadence?

 

[Zorotheslacker]

What, you want someone to do a controlled experiment on a couple of groups of kids for several years and then track the results into their old age? Never going to happen in a responsible country or environment. If it did, the naysayers would have a field day pointing out all the environmental changes (eg diet) between "then" and "now" which would supposedly invalidate the study. No, too many other variables affecting day to day living of kids, they ain't lab rats.

I think other studies on weight lifting and the general acknowledgement that kids do tough things to their body in the play ground would be enough evidence that pushing a gear 20% higher would not hurt. If there is such data - they should ban hills for Juniors (something adults that race them would be happy with).

Do we know pushing big gears is not bad for 50 year olds? They seem to break more than kids from what I have seen. Yet there is no limitation on adults.

2. But, it's not just about the legs! I think, and I can only base it on my own case and feelings, that the cardiovascular development benefits of using lower gears while the body is still developing sets a person up with a better engine for life than they will manage if they start later.

I agree. Its coaching.

3. As to why there is a coaching guideline in the rules for juniors, the thing is that a lot of juniors don't have coaches (or at least for the sake of sport I hope that's the case... it sure was in my day). So the UCI chose to control just about the only factor they can control, it seems to me.

That ship has long sailed. There are live in camps for Juniors. Lookup Slipstream and Williams academy. I would think most competitive Juniors have coaches.

4. What's the big deal if a junior racing in the midst of older riders doesn't win due to gears? They should be in it for fun; the seriousness can come later.

Response of both my kids would be winning is fun. If not winning the drive to win.

Same deal as limiting an master would be. In the case of kids - very few will move to being a pro. In the case of masters - none - but they get the big gears? When they are in the same race - have the same rules. Many Junior races have single digit number of competitors. This changes how races are ridden. They do adult races to learn how to race like adults. The sprints and down hills are part of that.

5. Give juniors the okay to use power gears and you are nudging them into the steroid crowd in the highschools (what??!! never!!?? Of course this would never apply to your kid, or yours, or those of any forumites, model children all... but think about it a bit!)

And make them spin and they need better cardio so push them into EPO? What about the steroids wouldn't help winning a few hill climbs with their Junior gears?

6. How can you know for sure that his body responds better to lower cadences/ higher gears, as opposed to he is just too complacent with his status quo to work hard at developing a higher cadence?

I don't. I don't think it does. But my gut is look at the pros. I have not seen road riders put they max power out in the 140RPM range - its time to shift up before that don't you think?
Yet - that is the handicap put on juniors. And the best power is a matter of many things - all coaching.

Repeating my point about gears:
It is using the rules to coach over being fair. I would prefer they were fair first, then tell EVERYONE what they think the best way to ride is.

 

[cyclopeon]

I agree to disagree. Though we can agree that closed minds are fun.

I think your kids should have a fantastic career on Wall Street or your national equivalent...

 

[Zorotheslacker]

I agree to disagree. Though we can agree that closed minds are fun.

I think your kids should have a fantastic career on Wall Street or your national equivalent...

I think the only thing to disagree on is that coaching via the rules is OK AND its also OK to have juniors race at a disadvantage.

As far as danger or damage - I'm looking for data on it. If there was some I'd be on the same side as you.

 

[DanielsDad]

Do non-round rings lower cadence?

I was wondering if juniors using QRings or the like was in sense a way to get a bigger gear. So an actual 52T might act like a 54T in a sprint?

Is the cadence lowered at all, or any difference on the gear a rider would use from round to non-round rings?

 

[Zorotheslacker]

I was wondering if juniors using QRings or the like was in sense a way to get a bigger gear. So an actual 52T might act like a 54T in a sprint?

Is the cadence lowered at all, or any difference on the gear a rider would use from round to non-round rings?

Would it matter if there were not restrictions?
A friend told me when he raced Jrs they only had restrictions in the Jr races, not when they raced adults.

Anyone know the limits in Europe for junior gears?

 

[DanielsDad]

My Junior is getting a TT bike. At his height we were thinking 175mm cranks were best. Lots of 175 53T/39T on the market. For all but Vitoria CS the 53 fails rollout.

Then the subject came up you get more "gear" with shorter cranks. So 170mm, 165 or 175 on a TT bike?

Going down a 1% grade on a TT bike and its easy to have to spin fast.

So he was able to average just under 32mph just fine and hit 42mph on a downhill section and said that was too fast to do for long.
172.5mm, 52X14
He has a flat real TT this Sunday, that should be fine. I would agree that for anything with a significant downhill a bigger gear would yield a better time.