• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

The pedaling technique thread

Page 25 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Sep 23, 2010
3,596
1
0
Visit site
CoachFergie said:
If your method was effective you would be able communicate it to someone like Jim Martin and he could easily test it on a validated and calibrated erg.
Martin has no interest in actually doing a proper study about this stuff. He has known for a long time what needs to be done and has failed to do so.
 
Mar 18, 2009
2,442
0
0
Visit site
FrankDay said:
Martin has no interest in actually doing a proper study about this stuff. He has known for a long time what needs to be done and has failed to do so.

Again, it's your interest and the onus is on you to either conduct it or fund it. Complaining that someone else is not doing research on your interest is a copout.
 
Mar 10, 2009
965
0
0
Visit site
FrankDay said:
What is Brim Bros going to bring to the table that iCranks or Pioneer isn't bringing now (or soon)?


It has been said it can measure positive torque, negative torque and wasted force around the pedalling circle.
 
Mar 10, 2009
965
0
0
Visit site
CoachFergie said:
If the method produced more power any PM could show that.


You still don't get it, I am not interested in measuring power/torque but where exactly this torque is being applied especially where maximal torque can be applied while in the natural racing drops position.
 
Sep 23, 2010
3,596
1
0
Visit site
coapman said:
It has been said it can measure positive torque, negative torque and wasted force around the pedalling circle.
That will be an advance if it provides all of that data because it will be combining the data of iCranks and Pioneer. Of course, it really cannot give data about "wasted force" since forces coming from gravity are not wasted since they involve no muscle activity/energy use. Determining wasted force is a very difficult proposition.
 
coapman said:
You still don't get it, I am not interested in measuring power/torque but where exactly this torque is being applied especially where maximal torque can be applied while in the natural racing drops position.

No I get it very well, you want to maintain the delusion that your technique is something special despite numerous other coaches and riders like Obree having suggested something similar but all fail to supply any evidence. It doesn't matter where you can apply torque or not if it doesn't improve your ability to increase total power which can be measured with any power meter.

Brim Brothers, and lets face it, who would back that losing horse when so many other companies and getting the hardware to market even if the software is sadly lacking. Lets face it if you can't prove your theory with any power meter then you really have nothing of use!
 
Sep 23, 2010
3,596
1
0
Visit site
CoachFergie said:
who would back that losing horse when so many other companies and getting the hardware to market even if the software is sadly lacking.
Just thought I would make it such that this thought can't disappear.
 
Mar 10, 2009
965
0
0
Visit site
CoachFergie said:
No I get it very well, you want to maintain the delusion that your technique is something special despite numerous other coaches and riders like Obree having suggested something similar but all fail to supply any evidence. It doesn't matter where you can apply torque or not if it doesn't improve your ability to increase total power which can be measured with any power meter.

Brim Brothers, and lets face it, who would back that losing horse when so many other companies and getting the hardware to market even if the software is sadly lacking. Lets face it if you can't prove your theory with any power meter then you really have nothing of use!



Yes my technique is something special, Obree and other coaches are using or attempting to use minimal torque through 12 o'c ( nothing more than circular pedalling style). Their very limited extra torque is coming from the knee, my torque comes from the hip, in one continuous power stroke it applies maximal torque through 12, 1 and 2 o'c in addition to what is normally applied around 3 o'c. J Martin's idea of solving the 12 o'c dead spot sector was no different from that of those who attempted to compensate for it by changing equipment ( rotor cranks), an impossible task and of course all attempts ended in failure. I use nothing more than standard equipment and more effective use of muscles.
 
coapman said:
Yes my technique is something special, Obree and other coaches are using or attempting to use minimal torque through 12 o'c ( nothing more than circular pedalling style). Their very limited extra torque is coming from the knee, my torque comes from the hip, in one continuous power stroke it applies maximal torque through 12, 1 and 2 o'c in addition to what is normally applied around 3 o'c. J Martin's idea of solving the 12 o'c dead spot sector was no different from that of those who attempted to compensate for it by changing equipment ( rotor cranks), an impossible task and of course all attempts ended in failure. I use nothing more than standard equipment and more effective use of muscles.

No technique is so special that you don't need to supply evidence. Any power meter will do! Saying otherwise is just a dodge!!!
 
coapman said:
You still don't get it, I am not interested in measuring power/torque but where exactly this torque is being applied especially where maximal torque can be applied while in the natural racing drops position.

Where in a pedal stroke one produces torque isn't relevant if the total power output isn't improved.

Unless an alternative technique enables a rider to produce more power over durations of relevance and/or in circumstances that matter, then it is of no value.

The ability to demonstrate that such techniques do or do not enable a rider to produce more power have been available for over a century with power measurement ergometers, and for nearly 30 years with on bike power meters.

The fact that you persistently refuse to put your notion to the performance test when the means to do so have been available for generations, suggests that it is, well, nonsense.

Suggesting that you need to measure the torque around the pedal stroke is a big fat overweight red herring. No more power is no more power, no improvement in performance, no increase in speed.
 
Mar 10, 2009
965
0
0
Visit site
Alex Simmons/RST said:
Where in a pedal stroke one produces torque isn't relevant if the total power output isn't improved.

Unless an alternative technique enables a rider to produce more power over durations of relevance and/or in circumstances that matter, then it is of no value.

The ability to demonstrate that such techniques do or do not enable a rider to produce more power have been available for over a century with power measurement ergometers, and for nearly 30 years with on bike power meters.

The fact that you persistently refuse to put your notion to the performance test when the means to do so have been available for generations, suggests that it is, well, nonsense.

Suggesting that you need to measure the torque around the pedal stroke is a big fat overweight red herring. No more power is no more power, no improvement in performance, no increase in speed.


Soccer players can bend the flight of a ball, golfers can control the flight of a ball or stop the ball and tennis players have many ways of controlling the ball including the drop shot. What cyclists are not aware of is that it's possible for them to bend maximal force around 180 de. of the pedalling circle, resulting in 120 deg of maximal torque instead of your pedaling's 30 deg. The fact that ye do not realize that this will result in greater power from each pedal stroke demonstrates how little ye know about pedalling.
 
coapman said:
The fact that ye do not realize that this will result in greater power from each pedal stroke demonstrates how little ye know about pedalling.

Imparting spin on a ball to introduce aerodynamic effects that cause a ball to deviate from a straight line flight path has absolutely nothing to do with the technique involved pedalling a bicycle. I can move chess pieces with precision too, and that's about as (ir)relevant.

If such a training intervention results in more power output, then show us. It's really very simple. A power meter, some testing of performance before and after intervention and voila - you've some evidence to support what you say. Add in some controls and even better.

However you have consistently refused to provide any data to support your assertions of an improvement in power output.
 
Mar 10, 2009
965
0
0
Visit site
Alex Simmons/RST said:
Imparting spin on a ball to introduce aerodynamic effects that cause a ball to deviate from a straight line flight path has absolutely nothing to do with the technique involved pedalling a bicycle. I can move chess pieces with precision too, and that's about as (ir)relevant.

If such a training intervention results in more power output, then show us. It's really very simple. A power meter, some testing of performance before and after intervention and voila - you've some evidence to support what you say. Add in some controls and even better.

However you have consistently refused to provide any data to support your assertions of an improvement in power output.

I used these examples to show that competitive sports need more techniques than the one each child instinctively begins with. Cycling does not have to be different. By changing the way force is applied to the pedal you can get maximal sprinter power or maximal sustainable power. By applying maximal torque over 120 deg. instead of 30 deg., you can increase power output from each pedal stroke while reducing peak force applied to pedal, resulting in less knee stress and injury and the removal of all stress from the lower back (core) to the hips.
 
coapman said:
I used these examples to show that competitive sports need more techniques than the one each child instinctively begins with. Cycling does not have to be different. By changing the way force is applied to the pedal you can get maximal sprinter power or maximal sustainable power. By applying maximal torque over 120 deg. instead of 30 deg., you can increase power output from each pedal stroke while reducing peak force applied to pedal, resulting in less knee stress and injury and the removal of all stress from the lower back (core) to the hips.

So you keep claiming. If such a technique is beneficial to cycling performance you will see more power using any power meter. Continually dodging this very obvious point would suggest the technique is not really effective.
 
Sep 23, 2010
3,596
1
0
Visit site
CoachFergie said:
So you keep claiming. If such a technique is beneficial to cycling performance you will see more power using any power meter. Continually dodging this very obvious point would suggest the technique is not really effective.
Fergie, you ought to know that it really is impossible for Coapman to do what you claim is so easy since he cannot go back to where he was before and show the power improvement. He has already made the "change" so how is he to demonstrate improvement now? All, he can do is to demonstrate that he actually pedals in the fashion he claims he does. My guess is he will fail in this effort if he ever gets around to it as what he describes is essentially impossible also because of the effects of gravity on pedal forces and torque.
 
FrankDay said:
Fergie, you ought to know that it really is impossible for Coapman to do what you claim is so easy since he cannot go back to where he was before and show the power improvement. He has already made the "change" so how is he to demonstrate improvement now? All, he can do is to demonstrate that he actually pedals in the fashion he claims he does. My guess is he will fail in this effort if he ever gets around to it as what he describes is essentially impossible also because of the effects of gravity on pedal forces and torque.

Who says that he has to show his own data? He just needs to show the data of riders for whom such a training intervention was implemented, and compare with others for whom it wasn't but undertook the same training plan.
 
Mar 10, 2009
965
0
0
Visit site
FrankDay said:
Fergie, you ought to know that it really is impossible for Coapman to do what you claim is so easy since he cannot go back to where he was before and show the power improvement. He has already made the "change" so how is he to demonstrate improvement now? All, he can do is to demonstrate that he actually pedals in the fashion he claims he does. My guess is he will fail in this effort if he ever gets around to it as what he describes is essentially impossible also because of the effects of gravity on pedal forces and torque.

There is nothing to prevent me from going back to where I was because I did not change technique, I discovered and perfected another technique to add to the perfected circular and mashing techniques which I still continue to use. The technique I discovered generates maximal sustainable long duration power for use in TT's , mashing produces maximal short duration power for use in sprinting. A PM cannot distinguish between sustainable and unsustainable power. How does gravity make what I claim impossible?
 
Sep 23, 2010
3,596
1
0
Visit site
coapman said:
How does gravity make what I claim impossible?
Because the weight of the leg is quite large and so contributes substantial force in the down direction regardless of crank position. Therefore, the gravity component to torque is maximum and large at 3 o'clock and zero at 6 and 12 o'clock (in addition to being large and negative at 9 o'clock) and somewhere in between everywhere else. Because of this it is essentially impossible to see "maximum" sustained torque (as you claim) over a wide range of pedal positions even if the muscles are providing equal and maximal torque through this range. You have talked yourself into believing you are doing something even though it is essentially impossible to do what you say. Until you see the pedal forces you will continue to believe this. Accelerations and decelerations of the thigh also contribute to this "passive torque" problem. I look forward to hearing about what you do once you see what you actually do.
 
Mar 10, 2009
965
0
0
Visit site
FrankDay said:
Because the weight of the leg is quite large and so contributes substantial force in the down direction regardless of crank position. Therefore, the gravity component to torque is maximum and large at 3 o'clock and zero at 6 and 12 o'clock (in addition to being large and negative at 9 o'clock) and somewhere in between everywhere else. Because of this it is essentially impossible to see "maximum" sustained torque (as you claim) over a wide range of pedal positions even if the muscles are providing equal and maximal torque through this range. You have talked yourself into believing you are doing something even though it is essentially impossible to do what you say. Until you see the pedal forces you will continue to believe this. Accelerations and decelerations of the thigh also contribute to this "passive torque" problem. I look forward to hearing about what you do once you see what you actually do.

Sorry to disappoint you, unlike the weak footballing muscles you use across the top (12 o'c), the combination of muscles I use there are capable of generating greater torque than what the down stroke muscles can produce at 3 o'c.
 
Sep 23, 2010
3,596
1
0
Visit site
coapman said:
Sorry to disappoint you, unlike the weak footballing muscles you use across the top (12 o'c), the combination of muscles I use there are capable of generating greater torque than what the down stroke muscles can produce at 3 o'c.
Prove it.

10 letters