The pedaling technique thread

Page 49 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
PhitBoy said:
backdoor said:
I could only get access to the abstract
Any library should be able to get the complete article for you through interlibrary loan.

I don't believe it would be worth the effort, Felix Zajac may be a learned professor but if cycling is not one of his hobbies (hiking, skiing, photography, reading and debating) I fail to see how he could be an expert in the most effective and efficient way to apply pedal power in cycling. No one technique is ideal for all the demands of competitive cycling because different types of pedalling effectiveness are required ( sprinting / TT 'ing )
 
Jun 1, 2014
385
0
0
backdoor said:
PhitBoy said:
backdoor said:
I could only get access to the abstract
Any library should be able to get the complete article for you through interlibrary loan.

I don't believe it would be worth the effort, Felix Zajac may be a learned professor but if cycling is not one of his hobbies (hiking, skiing, photography, reading and debating) I fail to see how he could be an expert in the most effective and efficient way to apply pedal power in cycling. No one technique is ideal for all the demands of competitive cycling because different types of pedalling effectiveness are required ( sprinting / TT 'ing )
You are basing your opinions on basic observation and misplaced assumptions that elite athletes are optimal in terms of technique. I believe PhitBoy is suggesting hat you learn the basic science behind how the legs work, as it might inform your opinions with a little fact.
 
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
JamesCun said:
backdoor said:
PhitBoy said:
backdoor said:
I could only get access to the abstract
Any library should be able to get the complete article for you through interlibrary loan.

I don't believe it would be worth the effort, Felix Zajac may be a learned professor but if cycling is not one of his hobbies (hiking, skiing, photography, reading and debating) I fail to see how he could be an expert in the most effective and efficient way to apply pedal power in cycling. No one technique is ideal for all the demands of competitive cycling because different types of pedalling effectiveness are required ( sprinting / TT 'ing )
You are basing your opinions on basic observation and misplaced assumptions that elite athletes are optimal in terms of technique. I believe PhitBoy is suggesting hat you learn the basic science behind how the legs work, as it might inform your opinions with a little fact.
How does a man with expert knowledge of how muscles work set about finding the perfect pedalling technique if he does not know what he is looking for? What is your idea of the perfect pedalling technique.
 
Jun 1, 2014
385
0
0
backdoor said:
JamesCun said:
backdoor said:
PhitBoy said:
backdoor said:
I could only get access to the abstract
Any library should be able to get the complete article for you through interlibrary loan.

I don't believe it would be worth the effort, Felix Zajac may be a learned professor but if cycling is not one of his hobbies (hiking, skiing, photography, reading and debating) I fail to see how he could be an expert in the most effective and efficient way to apply pedal power in cycling. No one technique is ideal for all the demands of competitive cycling because different types of pedalling effectiveness are required ( sprinting / TT 'ing )
You are basing your opinions on basic observation and misplaced assumptions that elite athletes are optimal in terms of technique. I believe PhitBoy is suggesting hat you learn the basic science behind how the legs work, as it might inform your opinions with a little fact.
How does a man with expert knowledge of how muscles work set about finding the perfect pedalling technique if he does not know what he is looking for? What is your idea of the perfect pedalling technique.
You have to know how the muscles work before you can start to investigate the perfect technique, if such a thing exists.

I subscribe to the idea that people should just pedal a bike. No evidence suggests that making changes impacts things in a positive direction.
 
Jun 1, 2014
385
0
0
backdoor said:
JamesCun said:
No evidence suggests that making changes impacts things in a positive direction.
Only because scientists do not know what to search for. If you have the correct objectives and can visualize what you are attempting to do, if it is possible your brain will find a way regardless of your knowledge as to how muscles work. **** Fosbury did just this and invented the latest high jump technique.
Please take the offers presented to you and go and study your 'natural pedalling technique'. It would be much more beneficial to everyone if we could discuss actual info vs thought experiments.
 
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
JamesCun said:
backdoor said:
JamesCun said:
No evidence suggests that making changes impacts things in a positive direction.
Only because scientists do not know what to search for. If you have the correct objectives and can visualize what you are attempting to do, if it is possible your brain will find a way regardless of your knowledge as to how muscles work. **** Fosbury did just this and invented the latest high jump technique.
Please take the offers presented to you and go and study your 'natural pedalling technique'. It would be much more beneficial to everyone if we could discuss actual info vs thought experiments.
By actual info you mean natural pedalling. You should know by now that every discussion on pedalling ends in the same old arguments mashing v circular v pulling up, when in reality they are all the same basic technique. The perfect technique in the one in which each leg utilizes 180 deg. of the circle, gets 100% torque return from maximal force applied over 90 deg. of this 180 and eliminates the dead spot sector by making maximal use of it which gives extra pedalling time per hour, eliminates the root cause of cycling's lower back pain and reduces the risk of knee injury. It does exist. All of which means a simple idea while riding a bike can do more than over a century of research. What I find amazing are the almost opposite views on the importance of technique from PhitBoy and 5 times Tour de France winner / 5 times world time trial champion B. Hinault.
Now you can get back to Circular v Mashing.
 
Jun 1, 2014
385
0
0
backdoor said:
JamesCun said:
backdoor said:
JamesCun said:
No evidence suggests that making changes impacts things in a positive direction.
Only because scientists do not know what to search for. If you have the correct objectives and can visualize what you are attempting to do, if it is possible your brain will find a way regardless of your knowledge as to how muscles work. **** Fosbury did just this and invented the latest high jump technique.
Please take the offers presented to you and go and study your 'natural pedalling technique'. It would be much more beneficial to everyone if we could discuss actual info vs thought experiments.
By actual info you mean natural pedalling. You should know by now that every discussion on pedalling ends in the same old arguments mashing v circular v pulling up, when in reality they are all the same basic technique. The perfect technique in the one in which each leg utilizes 180 deg. of the circle, gets 100% torque return from maximal force applied over 90 deg. of this 180 and eliminates the dead spot sector by making maximal use of it which gives extra pedalling time per hour, eliminates the root cause of cycling's lower back pain and reduces the risk of knee injury. It does exist. All of which means a simple idea while riding a bike can do more than over a century of research. What I find amazing are the almost opposite views on the importance of technique from PhitBoy and 5 times Tour de France winner / 5 times world time trial champion B. Hinault.
Now you can get back to Circular v Mashing.
Please go into a lab and collect the data to show what you are claiming. Until then, we are just having a completely pointless 'discussion'.

I will take the opinions of Phitboy over a pro cyclists any day of the week, not even a debate about that one.
 
Apr 21, 2009
3,095
0
0
Only because scientists do not know what to search for. If you have the correct objectives and can visualize what you are attempting to do, if it is possible your brain will find a way regardless of your knowledge as to how muscles work. **** Fosbury did just this and invented the latest high jump technique.
What nonsense, if you had done any research you would appreciate that most of it is done to understand that what we don't know, to test a hypothesis of something we don't understand or estimate the effect of something different to the way things are done.

I am in the lab at present testing blood flow occlusion and using a Keirin event simulation to estimate the effects of the trials compared to a control group. Not because we know it works but because we don't know and are looking for data either way.

For every *** Fosbury there are 9999 nutters who thought they had the method, product, technique etc that would revolutionise sport, and didn't!
 
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
CoachFergie said:
What nonsense, if you had done any research you would appreciate that most of it is done to understand that what we don't know, to test a hypothesis of something we don't understand or estimate the effect of something different to the way things are done.
Yes what nonsense, can you state one pedalling technique improvement that resulted from 125 years of this type of research which you refer to above. I made only one research attempt, which was to find a way of biomechanically combining arm cranking forces with leg power forces and it only took a week to get my answer. It can be done.
I am in the lab at present testing blood flow occlusion and using a Keirin event simulation to estimate the effects of the trials compared to a control group. Not because we know it works but because we don't know and are looking for data either way.
It is this tampering with the internal working of the body that has ruined many sports because the question arises, where does it end.

For every **** Fosbury there are 9999 nutters who thought they had the method, product, technique etc that would revolutionise sport, and didn't!
Fosbury was called a nutter even after winning his Olympic gold medal, by the straddle coaches who could see themselves becoming redundant if this new technique was permitted.
 
Jun 18, 2015
171
2
3,835
backdoor said:
Fosbury was called a nutter even after winning his Olympic gold medal, by the straddle coaches who could see themselves becoming redundant if this new technique was permitted.
This is a perfect example. Fosbury had real data showing that his technique was better. Also, everyone else who tried his technique went higher than they previously had done. There is a very similar backstory on clap skates. People laughed and wouldn't try them. Only the juniors for NL would try them initially. Then they beat all the seniors. No more debate. You could make a similar argument for tt bars until Lemond used them.
The problem with using that example for pedaling technique is that almost all studies show that variations on technique hurt rather than help efficiency.
I'm sure as soon as you can show a technique improves performance everyone will beat a path to your door.
Good luck with that,
Jim
 
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
PhitBoy said:
backdoor said:
Fosbury was called a nutter even after winning his Olympic gold medal, by the straddle coaches who could see themselves becoming redundant if this new technique was permitted.
This is a perfect example. Fosbury had real data showing that his technique was better. Also, everyone else who tried his technique went higher than they previously had done. There is a very similar backstory on clap skates. People laughed and wouldn't try them. Only the juniors for NL would try them initially. Then they beat all the seniors. No more debate. You could make a similar argument for tt bars until Lemond used them.
The problem with using that example for pedaling technique is that almost all studies show that variations on technique hurt rather than help efficiency.
I'm sure as soon as you can show a technique improves performance everyone will beat a path to your door.
Good luck with that,
Jim
Fosbury and Anquetil made important changes to technique which resulted in improvements. Changes made by Fosbury were obvious for all to see and try to copy but Anquetil's important change was invisible, it took place between sole of shoe and pedal. Fosbury changed the center of gravity position as the body moved over the bar, Anquetil changed (by about 45 deg.) the direction of tangential line at spot where his peak torque was being applied to the crank. All variations from the instinctive mashing technique that have been studied have one thing in common with the instinctive technique, this tangential line points almost vertically downward, and here instinct knows best and that explains why they hinder rather than help performance.
 
Jun 18, 2015
171
2
3,835
For the umpteenth time Noel, please contact Tom Korff at Brunel in London or Paul Barratt at British Cycling in Manchester. They can evaluate your biomechanics and your efficiency. You could change the cycling world! Or, as an Englishman, you could singlehandedly elevate British Cycling to the top of the world in all cycling events. If you are right no one would be able to compete with them once they learned this technique of yours. Wouldn't that be better than posts on an obscure cycling forum? I think at one point you said they too far away from you and that you couldn't be bothered to make the trip. But I have traveled in England and its a small country. I can't imagine that you are more than 3hrs away from one of those locations by train. Heck, I bet that some of us here would take up a collection to reimburse you for the train ticket.
Until you demonstrate your fantastic(al) technique and the efficiency that comes with it, all evidence points to a simple synergistic leg extension/flexion strategy as the most efficient.
Cheers,
Jim (Happy to do the evaluation in my lab if you ever come to Salt Lake City)

backdoor said:
Anquetil changed (by about 45 deg.) the direction of tangential line at spot where his peak torque was being applied to the crank. All variations from the instinctive mashing technique that have been studied have one thing in common with the instinctive technique, this tangential line points almost vertically downward, and here instinct knows best and that explains why they hinder rather than help performance.
 
PhitBoy said:
Heck, I bet that some of us here would take up a collection to reimburse you for the train ticket.
I'd set $20 in a heartbeat to fund the trip! You could once for all reveal to the world the secret that's be hidden all these years.

Noel,

Let me know your address details so we can get this effort going.

Hugh
 
Jun 18, 2015
171
2
3,835
Note the sound of crickets chirping... One might be inclined to believe his lack of response would indicate that Noel knows, in heart of hearts, that his claims are unfounded.
If he ever does go in for an evaluation, which seems unlikely, the data will most likely show one of two things:
1. He has typical pedaling and ordinary efficiency or 2) He shows non standard pedaling technique (anyone *can* manipulate their pedaling when power is submaximal) and less than ordinary efficiency.
Then again, he could turn the whole cycling biomechanics world on its head with novel technique and super high efficiency.
Cheers,
Jim

sciguy said:
Let me know your address details so we can get this effort going.
Hugh
 
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
PhitBoy said:
Note the sound of crickets chirping... One might be inclined to believe his lack of response would indicate that Noel knows, in heart of hearts, that his claims are unfounded.
If he ever does go in for an evaluation, which seems unlikely, the data will most likely show one of two things:
1. He has typical pedaling and ordinary efficiency or 2) He shows non standard pedaling technique (anyone *can* manipulate their pedaling when power is submaximal) and less than ordinary efficiency.
There is more than one way to produce large force during leg extension,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWosQfk15_Q
and that was how Anquetil was able to apply additional more easily generated max forward torque at TDC and 1 o'c where Poulidor's legs were effectively idling in time trials.
Clue in this quote from Cyclingnews "We asked Donor if the comparison of Lance with Anquetil was appropriate. Well, not really, said Donor, Anquetil was an elegant rider who was really a time trial specialist in his day. His riding style was so smooth he looked as if he was just sailing along. Anquetil was very powerful in his rear end and he used this to drive his pedalling."
By blindly following triathletes with their "rest on" aerobars, TT riders made another mistake. By doing so they ended any possibility of discovering how to solve pedalling's dead spot. The ideal aero bars for Anquetil's technique are those (no longer available)" Scott Rake" bars, as I believe used at one time by A. Coggan.
 
Jun 18, 2015
171
2
3,835
Sigh... completely immune to being called out. But then again this is the internet: anyone can say anything, no data required. Different than my academic world where all claims must be supported with solid data.

backdoor said:
There is more than one way to produce large force during leg extension
 
Aug 4, 2011
3,647
0
0
Sometimes when I am feeling really strong /good days, I pedal more on my tip toes [ if you get me] I can turn the pedals really smooth and push my 53 x11 quite easy. Some times I drop my heel down a wee bit and this works really well also. I never try and fight my bike. if it does not feel easy then I back off .
 
Re:

ray j willings said:
Sometimes when I am feeling really strong /good days, I pedal more on my tip toes [ if you get me] I can turn the pedals really smooth and push my 53 x11 quite easy. Some times I drop my heel down a wee bit and this works really well also. I never try and fight my bike. if it does not feel easy then I back off .
-------------------------------------
I think what you have described is strongly related to your individual physiology and individual athletic abilities.

And that might also be true of Anquetil's style/technique. Perhaps the Anquetil technique would be an improvement for some segment of cyclists, or perhaps Anquetil was 'uniquely suitable' for it. Have there been others since him?

But regardless of Anquetil, I think the main topic of this thread is if the 'standard pedaling technique' that is used by the majority of cyclist (with small individual differences) could be improved for everyone by a change in how and where power is applied during the full rotation of the cranks.
A popular view seems to be that the 'standard technique' is quite good as-is, and that any improvements due to changes in pedaling technique would be minimal at best, and that an individual's performance improvement goals can be better achieved by training such factors as: aerodynamics, nutrition, strategy, etc.

... and still waiting for power meter manufactures to "test and document" the pedal technique of top ranked world-class cyclists, and to suggest how their power meter products can be used for individual performance improvement.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA
 
Apr 21, 2009
3,095
0
0
Re: Re:

Good grief Jay, are you really that stupid?

Despite the countless studies to the contrary do you believe that there is a more effective way of pedalling?

Coyle 1991 demonstrates perfectly that experienced cat 1 cyclists pedal less effectively than cat 2 cyclists but generate more power in a 40km TT. That their great efficiency is due to more training and development of type 1 fibers. Can't wait to hear your alternative theory. At least Noel has one even if he is unwilling to provide any evidence or have his theory tested.

And why are you going down the pointless route of demanding evidence that power meters improve performance? They don't, they are what we measure to show that performance has improved!



JayKosta said:
ray j willings said:
Sometimes when I am feeling really strong /good days, I pedal more on my tip toes [ if you get me] I can turn the pedals really smooth and push my 53 x11 quite easy. Some times I drop my heel down a wee bit and this works really well also. I never try and fight my bike. if it does not feel easy then I back off .
-------------------------------------
I think what you have described is strongly related to your individual physiology and individual athletic abilities.

And that might also be true of Anquetil's style/technique. Perhaps the Anquetil technique would be an improvement for some segment of cyclists, or perhaps Anquetil was 'uniquely suitable' for it. Have there been others since him?

But regardless of Anquetil, I think the main topic of this thread is if the 'standard pedaling technique' that is used by the majority of cyclist (with small individual differences) could be improved for everyone by a change in how and where power is applied during the full rotation of the cranks.
A popular view seems to be that the 'standard technique' is quite good as-is, and that any improvements due to changes in pedaling technique would be minimal at best, and that an individual's performance improvement goals can be better achieved by training such factors as: aerodynamics, nutrition, strategy, etc.

... and still waiting for power meter manufactures to "test and document" the pedal technique of top ranked world-class cyclists, and to suggest how their power meter products can be used for individual performance improvement.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA
 
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
backdoor said:
PhitBoy said:
Note the sound of crickets chirping... One might be inclined to believe his lack of response would indicate that Noel knows, in heart of hearts, that his claims are unfounded.
If he ever does go in for an evaluation, which seems unlikely, the data will most likely show one of two things:
1. He has typical pedaling and ordinary efficiency or 2) He shows non standard pedaling technique (anyone *can* manipulate their pedaling when power is submaximal) and less than ordinary efficiency.
There is more than one way to produce large force during leg extension,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWosQfk15_Q
and that was how Anquetil was able to apply additional more easily generated max forward torque at TDC and 1 o'c where Poulidor's legs were effectively idling in time trials.
" The highlight of outdoor tug of war is the clash of sheer power between the two teams. Athletes seek an optimal foothold in the ground by digging in their heels and, using that as their pivot, pull the rope with all the strength they're capable of mustering.

Obviously, this technique doesn't work for the indoor events: leaning too far back would cause the athletes to slip, even on the specially designed rubber mats. Hence they try to steadily move back - step by step - to avoid loss of pulling power. Indoor matches require more complex techniques and tactics than those in the outdoor tug of war."


Muscles used in outdoor tug o'war are similar to those used in the mashing technique (Merckx style), but in pedalling their most effective force is restricted to about 60 deg. of the pedalling power stroke. Muscles used in the more complex indoor t o'w technique are similar to those used by Anquetil and their most effective force extends over 120 deg. of the power stroke.
 
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
Re: Re:

CoachFergie said:
Good grief Jay, are you really that stupid?

Despite the countless studies to the contrary do you believe that there is a more effective way of pedalling?

Coyle 1991 demonstrates perfectly that experienced cat 1 cyclists pedal less effectively than cat 2 cyclists but generate more power in a 40km TT. That their great efficiency is due to more training and development of type 1 fibers.
what prevents those cat 2 cyclists from doing more training and development of type 1 fibres ?
And why are you going down the pointless route of demanding evidence that power meters improve performance? They don't, they are what we measure to show that performance has improved!
The right power meter can indirectly improve performance by showing riders where exactly in the pedalling circle torque can increased.



JayKosta said:
ray j willings said:
Sometimes when I am feeling really strong /good days, I pedal more on my tip toes [ if you get me] I can turn the pedals really smooth and push my 53 x11 quite easy. Some times I drop my heel down a wee bit and this works really well also. I never try and fight my bike. if it does not feel easy then I back off .
-------------------------------------
I think what you have described is strongly related to your individual physiology and individual athletic abilities.

And that might also be true of Anquetil's style/technique. Perhaps the Anquetil technique would be an improvement for some segment of cyclists, or perhaps Anquetil was 'uniquely suitable' for it. Have there been others since him?

But regardless of Anquetil, I think the main topic of this thread is if the 'standard pedaling technique' that is used by the majority of cyclist (with small individual differences) could be improved for everyone by a change in how and where power is applied during the full rotation of the cranks.
A popular view seems to be that the 'standard technique' is quite good as-is, and that any improvements due to changes in pedaling technique would be minimal at best, and that an individual's performance improvement goals can be better achieved by training such factors as: aerodynamics, nutrition, strategy, etc.

... and still waiting for power meter manufactures to "test and document" the pedal technique of top ranked world-class cyclists, and to suggest how their power meter products can be used for individual performance improvement.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA
[/quote]
 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
Re: Re:

CoachFergie said:
Good grief Jay, are you really that stupid?

Despite the countless studies to the contrary do you believe that there is a more effective way of pedalling?

Coyle 1991 demonstrates perfectly that experienced cat 1 cyclists pedal less effectively than cat 2 cyclists but generate more power in a 40km TT. That their great efficiency is due to more training and development of type 1 fibers. Can't wait to hear your alternative theory. At least Noel has one even if he is unwilling to provide any evidence or have his theory tested.

And why are you going down the pointless route of demanding evidence that power meters improve performance? They don't, they are what we measure to show that performance has improved!



JayKosta said:
ray j willings said:
Sometimes when I am feeling really strong /good days, I pedal more on my tip toes [ if you get me] I can turn the pedals really smooth and push my 53 x11 quite easy. Some times I drop my heel down a wee bit and this works really well also. I never try and fight my bike. if it does not feel easy then I back off .
-------------------------------------
I think what you have described is strongly related to your individual physiology and individual athletic abilities.

And that might also be true of Anquetil's style/technique. Perhaps the Anquetil technique would be an improvement for some segment of cyclists, or perhaps Anquetil was 'uniquely suitable' for it. Have there been others since him?

But regardless of Anquetil, I think the main topic of this thread is if the 'standard pedaling technique' that is used by the majority of cyclist (with small individual differences) could be improved for everyone by a change in how and where power is applied during the full rotation of the cranks.
A popular view seems to be that the 'standard technique' is quite good as-is, and that any improvements due to changes in pedaling technique would be minimal at best, and that an individual's performance improvement goals can be better achieved by training such factors as: aerodynamics, nutrition, strategy, etc.

... and still waiting for power meter manufactures to "test and document" the pedal technique of top ranked world-class cyclists, and to suggest how their power meter products can be used for individual performance improvement.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA
....isn't it just so wonderful that we have such a sweet man, as CoachFergie, to hold our hands and patiently guide us down the right path....could you imagine how awful it would be if we were instead afflicted by some loud-mouth obnoxious arse who is constantly beating us down from his self appointed seat of supreme and ultimate knowledge ( you know the kind of guy who wears asbestos shorts to keep from burning the seats he sits on )....

...we are so blessed....thank you lawd, thank you jaysus...

Cheers
 
Re: Re:

CoachFergie said:
Good grief Jay, are you really that stupid?

Despite the countless studies to the contrary do you believe that there is a more effective way of pedalling?

Coyle 1991 demonstrates perfectly that experienced cat 1 cyclists pedal less effectively than cat 2 cyclists but generate more power in a 40km TT. That their great efficiency is due to more training and development of type 1 fibers. Can't wait to hear your alternative theory. At least Noel has one even if he is unwilling to provide any evidence or have his theory tested.

And why are you going down the pointless route of demanding evidence that power meters improve performance? They don't, they are what we measure to show that performance has improved!
...
----------------------------------------
Hamish,

I think you miss-read my post. I did not say that I believe there is a 'generally more efficient' way to pedal than the standard technique.

I don't understand your interpretation of the Coyle 1991 results.
I think that both the Cat 1 and Cat 2 groups both use the 'standard pedaling technique' -yes there are differences but the curves are very similar.
Table 4 is interesting because it shows the Cat 1s producing more watts (average work rate) and with better 'efficiency' (cycling economy), and at a lower Average Blood Lactate level. Perhaps their better economy is due to their additional strength and muscle fiber type, and not pushing themselves to the lactate level of the Cat 2 group.
An interesting question is 'why did the Cat 1 ant Cat 2 curves (Figs 4 and 5) differ at all', and do the differences mean anything useful?

Regarding power meters ...
I don't 'demand' that PM mfgs DO anything, and I certainly agree that PMs are a measuring tool.
My point is that if PM mfgs build and advertise them with features that claim to show 'power application technique' such as L/R balance and 'sector analysis', then I would expect the mfgs (for their own self interest, and sales) to provide info for consumers about how their product is better and can be more useful than other PMs.
Or perhaps just having those 'bells and whistles' is adequate to drive sales, and they can't, or don't want to bother to, provide info about how to use those features.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS