• 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 26 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
coapman said:
You use footballers weak muscles around 12 o'c, I use indoor tug o'war mens' powerful muscles.


Like this?

tugofwarjpg.jpg


So do you need a banana seat out of the 60s to lay back on?
 
Mar 10, 2009
965
0
0
Visit site
coapman said:
It certainly does.

To expand on the difference. In outdoor t o'w leg muscles are used in the same way as mashers use them in their downstroke, lower leg muscles are not used. With the indoor t o'w two powerful forces have to be generated, downward to produce sufficient shoe/mat friction resistance and forward to drive the body backwards. Maximal use is made of lower leg musles. Because the cyclist's cleat replaces the need for shoe/mat friction, a cyclist can separate and merge these two powerful forces (forward and downward) for an extended powerful pedalling stroke from 11 to 5 o'c.
https://ojs.ub.uni-konstanz.de/cpa/article/view/3743
 
coapman said:
With the indoor t o'w two powerful forces have to be generated, downward to produce sufficient shoe/mat friction resistance and forward to drive the body backwards.
[/url]

Noel,

If I'm not extremely mistaken, the downward force would be called gravity and your muscles are needed to generate it. The article you linked to concerned static friction which is a characteristic of the material being slid or hopefully for the athletes competing in the Tug of war not sliding.

Hugh
 
Sep 23, 2010
3,596
1
0
Visit site
coapman said:
To expand on the difference. In outdoor t o'w leg muscles are used in the same way as mashers use them in their downstroke, lower leg muscles are not used. With the indoor t o'w two powerful forces have to be generated, downward to produce sufficient shoe/mat friction resistance and forward to drive the body backwards. Maximal use is made of lower leg musles. Because the cyclist's cleat replaces the need for shoe/mat friction, a cyclist can separate and merge these two powerful forces (forward and downward) for an extended powerful pedalling stroke from 11 to 5 o'c.
https://ojs.ub.uni-konstanz.de/cpa/article/view/3743
You seem to have missed a few things that makes your example not quite what you think it is. While it is true that the tug of rope people are applying a large force horizontal to the ground you seem to have missed that to do that their body is almost horizontal to the ground.
DSCF5095.jpg
So, the direction of the force in relation to their body is actually down and their knee is extended (as his the hip). So, what they are doing has nothing to do with applying a force across the top of the pedaling stroke.

Next, while the force they are applying is quite large it turns out the muscle constraction is an isometric conraction. Isometric contractions are the strongest we can apply but there is no muscle or joint movement and no work being done (at least until the other side fails and movement starts to occur). Unfortunately, cycling involves constant joint movement and the constant need to do work (work/time is power) to make the bicycle move.

So, when you are able to demonstrate you are actually doing what you think you are doing I think your illustration is not helping your case.
 
Mar 10, 2009
965
0
0
Visit site
sciguy said:
Noel,

If I'm not extremely mistaken, the downward force would be called gravity and your muscles are needed to generate it. The article you linked to concerned static friction which is a characteristic of the material being slid or hopefully for the athletes competing in the Tug of war not sliding.

Hugh

Resistance for that downward force is supplied by gravity as the men are leaning backward but that force still has to be applied, same as the cyclist applying down force at 3 o'c. It works.
 
Sep 23, 2010
3,596
1
0
Visit site
coapman said:
Resistance for that downward force is supplied by gravity as the men are leaning backward but that force still has to be applied, same as the cyclist applying down force at 3 o'c. It works.
What are you talking about? If you rotate those athletes such that their legs are in the same position as they would be on a bicycle their feet would be near BDC and the forces would be down and forward. BDC is not across the top and forward at BDC is not what cyclists do. Your analogy simply doesn't work.
 
Mar 10, 2009
965
0
0
Visit site
FrankDay said:
You seem to have missed a few things that makes your example not quite what you think it is. While it is true that the tug of rope people are applying a large force horizontal to the ground you seem to have missed that to do that their body is almost horizontal to the ground.
DSCF5095.jpg
So, the direction of the force in relation to their body is actually down and their knee is extended (as his the hip). So, what they are doing has nothing to do with applying a force across the top of the pedaling stroke.

Next, while the force they are applying is quite large it turns out the muscle constraction is an isometric conraction. Isometric contractions are the strongest we can apply but there is no muscle or joint movement and no work being done (at least until the other side fails and movement starts to occur). Unfortunately, cycling involves constant joint movement and the constant need to do work (work/time is power) to make the bicycle move.

So, when you are able to demonstrate you are actually doing what you think you are doing I think your illustration is not helping your case.


How many years of exclusive PC training would it take to get the muscles you are trying to train to generate the same power that these muscles can produce. At 3 o'c pedaling force is only a small fraction of this forward T o'W force, so even with knees bent at 90 deg. or more there is nothing to prevent a rider from using these same muscles to apply greater power across the top than what is applied at 3 while in the seated natural racing drops position from a cadence of about 50 upwards. I have been doing it for the past 15 years.
 
Sep 23, 2010
3,596
1
0
Visit site
coapman said:
How many years of exclusive PC training would it take to get the muscles you are trying to train to generate the same power that these muscles can produce. At 3 o'c pedaling force is only a small fraction of this forward T o'W force, so even with knees bent at 90 deg. or more there is nothing to prevent a rider from using these same muscles to apply greater power across the top than what is applied at 3 while in the seated natural racing drops position from a cadence of about 50 upwards. I have been doing it for the past 15 years.
Those muscles, while producing a lot of force, are producing zero power. Power involves a force acting through a distance. Those muscles are contracting but not moving so there is no power being generated here. So, whatever force PC'ers (and almost everyone else) is applying at TDC is generating more power than these people because their muscles are actually shortening.

Edit: Correction, work is force through a distance. Power is the rate of doing work. If there is no distance there is no work. If there is no work there is no power regardless of how hard the muscles are contracting or how high the force is.
 
Mar 10, 2009
965
0
0
Visit site
FrankDay said:
Those muscles, while producing a lot of force, are producing zero power. Power involves a force acting through a distance. Those muscles are contracting but not moving so there is no power being generated here.

Forget about what these people are doing with these powerful muscles, it's what I do with them that matters and unlike the PC'er, from the day you acquire this special technique these muscles are capable of generating that maximal power across the top. This pedaling technique did not originate from the T o'W technique, it was from the objective of trying to combine arm and leg power to increase power output. After a year of exclusive PC use how many times more powerful are the muscles you have trained across TDC and BDC.
 
Sep 23, 2010
3,596
1
0
Visit site
coapman said:
Forget about what these people are doing with these powerful muscles, it's what I do with them that matters and unlike the PC'er, from the day you acquire this special technique these muscles are capable of generating that maximal power across the top. This pedaling technique did not originate from the T o'W technique, it was from the objective of trying to combine arm and leg power to increase power output.
Forget about them??? You were the one posting the picture to illustrate your technique.
After a year of exclusive PC use how many times more powerful are the muscles you have trained across TDC and BDC.
I have no idea, although I can make some assumptions and then calculate the difference. If we assume that a PowerCranks improve the spinscan number from 70 to 90 and the peak force remains unchanged this would result in an approximate doubling of the forces/power generated across the top and the bottom compared to "normal".

edit: such a change results in an overall power increase of 28%
 
Sep 23, 2010
3,596
1
0
Visit site
FrankDay said:
such a change results in an overall power increase of 28%
I might add that my calculations assumed zero negative forces on the backstroke for both pre and post PC training. However, in most cases, pre PC, people will have some negative force on a portion of the upstroke lowering the peak force seen by the SpinScan. Of course, if PowerCranks eliminates the negative forces on the upstroke then this would actually increase the peak force and the overall power increase seen by such a change would be greater than the 28% I calculated (how much would depend upon the size of the negative forces now). And people are claiming that technique doesn't matter and a 40% improvement is impossible. But, there it is, a greater than 30% increase without the rider needing to push any harder than they do now and without pulling up an ounce on the backstroke. A "simple" change in technique, doing a little bit more around the majority of the circle, results in big power increases overall. Isn't math wonderful?
 
Mar 10, 2009
965
0
0
Visit site
FrankDay said:
Forget about them??? You were the one posting the picture to illustrate your technique.


I said forget about them because you are concentrating on what they are using this generated power for and the fact that no movement is taking place. The real issue is, I am using exactly the same powerful muscles in exactly the same way as they do to generate a force, they are using the force from shoe to mat to try and pull their opponents forward, I am using the force from shoe to cleat to drive the pedal forward.
Another important fact is when generating pedal power in this way, all lower back stress is completely removed and absorbed by the hips even when in the aero racing drops position
 
Mar 10, 2009
965
0
0
Visit site
FrankDay said:
I might add that my calculations assumed zero negative forces on the backstroke for both pre and post PC training. However, in most cases, pre PC, people will have some negative force on a portion of the upstroke lowering the peak force seen by the SpinScan. Of course, if PowerCranks eliminates the negative forces on the upstroke then this would actually increase the peak force and the overall power increase seen by such a change would be greater than the 28% I calculated (how much would depend upon the size of the negative forces now). And people are claiming that technique doesn't matter and a 40% improvement is impossible. But, there it is, a greater than 30% increase without the rider needing to push any harder than they do now and without pulling up an ounce on the backstroke. A "simple" change in technique, doing a little bit more around the majority of the circle, results in big power increases overall. Isn't math wonderful?


What you are forgetting is your loss of concentration on your down stroke with your delayed start and earlier finish because different muscles have to be used in all three sectors, resulting in as (Coyle et al) confirmed an overall loss in power compared to that of the masher. You don't have time to make three force application changes in each pedalling stroke. I apply max torque across the top and down in one extended force application. When you can apply max torque across the top, you can ignore BDC in the same way as you do at 9 o'c.
 
Sep 23, 2010
3,596
1
0
Visit site
coapman said:
What you are forgetting is your loss of concentration on your down stroke with your delayed start and earlier finish because different muscles have to be used in all three sectors, resulting in as (Coyle et al) confirmed an overall loss in power compared to that of the masher. You don't have time to make three force application changes in each pedalling stroke. I apply max torque across the top and down in one extended force application. When you can apply max torque across the top, you can ignore BDC in the same way as you do at 9 o'c.
I don't have a loss of concentration because I, like almost everyone else, simply never think about pedaling just like runners don't think about running and walkers don't think about walking. I don't think about changing directions. It is all done unconsciously. The only thing I think about as regards pedaling is how hard am I going and do I need to shift gears.
 
Mar 10, 2009
965
0
0
Visit site
FrankDay said:
I don't have a loss of concentration because I, like almost everyone else, simply never think about pedaling just like runners don't think about running and walkers don't think about walking. I don't think about changing directions. It is all done unconsciously. The only thing I think about as regards pedaling is how hard am I going and do I need to shift gears.

And there's your problem. If you did try and concentrate on applying more effective force at BDC and BDC as you claim you do with three different combinations of muscles in each pedalling stroke, you would soon find it was an impossible task without losing power in your down stroke and that is how you are getting that high Spinscan number.
 
Sep 23, 2010
3,596
1
0
Visit site
coapman said:
And there's your problem. If you did try and concentrate on applying more effective force at BDC and BDC as you claim you do with three different combinations of muscles in each pedalling stroke, you would soon find it was an impossible task without losing power in your down stroke and that is how you are getting that high Spinscan number.
??? I don't concentrate on anything except where I am going most of the time. I don't lose any pushing power. To improve one's spinscan number (as I said, I can ride at a spinscan of 95) one must make the forces over the top and bottom almost the equal of those on the front and back. Therefore, I have gained power over both the top and the bottom. And, I have no negatives on the upstroke. All without thinking about anything. My training tool did the "thinking" for me to force me to change my technique to something more powerful and efficient.
 
Mar 10, 2009
965
0
0
Visit site
FrankDay said:
??? I don't concentrate on anything except where I am going most of the time. I don't lose any pushing power. To improve one's spinscan number (as I said, I can ride at a spinscan of 95) one must make the forces over the top and bottom almost the equal of those on the front and back. Therefore, I have gained power over both the top and the bottom. And, I have no negatives on the upstroke. All without thinking about anything. My training tool did the "thinking" for me to force me to change my technique to something more powerful and efficient.


What you are doing is what mountain bikers do and they do it to prevent spinning of the back wheel by increasing power at TDC and BDC which automatically reduces torque in their down stroke.
 
Sep 23, 2010
3,596
1
0
Visit site
coapman said:
What you are doing is what mountain bikers do and they do it to prevent spinning of the back wheel by increasing power at TDC and BDC which automatically reduces torque in their down stroke.
It doesn't matter how one pedals, or how hard one pushes, the power that one puts out is equal to the average power put out around the entire pedaling circle. We can all agree, I think, that the goal of most cyclists is to increase their power output. If one can put out more power by applying less force at the maximum but, at the same time, more force during the rest of the circle then that would be a worthwhile pursuit. Concentrating on only part of the circle doesn't seem like the smartest approach because any reduction in force seen in the parts of the circle not being concentrated on will reduce the average for the circle and, hence, reduce power overall.

for example, if I am averaging 100 watts and increase my pushing force 10% during 36º of the downstroke I will have increased my total wattage 1 watt. Or, I can increase my forces 1% over 324º of the pedal circle and see almost the same 1 watt increase. The whole pedaling circle counts when it comes to generating power. Whatever happens at the pedal wherever it is around the arc either adds to or subtracts from the average power making it to the wheel. That is a fact that cannot be disputed!
 
Mar 10, 2009
965
0
0
Visit site
FrankDay said:
It doesn't matter how one pedals, or how hard one pushes, the power that one puts out is equal to the average power put out around the entire pedaling circle. We can all agree, I think, that the goal of most cyclists is to increase their power output. If one can put out more power by applying less force at the maximum but, at the same time, more force during the rest of the circle then that would be a worthwhile pursuit. Concentrating on only part of the circle doesn't seem like the smartest approach because any reduction in force seen in the parts of the circle not being concentrated on will reduce the average for the circle and, hence, reduce power overall.

for example, if I am averaging 100 watts and increase my pushing force 10% during 36º of the downstroke I will have increased my total wattage 1 watt. Or, I can increase my forces 1% over 324º of the pedal circle and see almost the same 1 watt increase. The whole pedaling circle counts when it comes to generating power. Whatever happens at the pedal wherever it is around the arc either adds to or subtracts from the average power making it to the wheel. That is a fact that cannot be disputed!


If you pedalled with a sufficiently high cadence while using your idea of pedalling technique, it would result in having dead spot sectors at 9 and 3 o'c instead of at 12 and 6 o'c.
 
Sep 23, 2010
3,596
1
0
Visit site
coapman said:
If you pedalled with a sufficiently high cadence while using your idea of pedalling technique, it would result in having dead spot sectors at 9 and 3 o'c instead of at 12 and 6 o'c.
You are crazy.
 

TRENDING THREADS