Page 79 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

backdoor

Re: Re:

JayKosta said:
backdoor said:
...
if a t o'w man was asked the same question, I was wondering if he would attempt to use his t-o-w technique there.
------------
My guess is that the t-o-w person would NOT try to do a STRONG 'kick foot forward' at TDC.
Would wait till just beyond 1 o'clock and then do STRONG combination 'kick forward' and 'push down'.
From about 11:30 to 1:00, there might be better than usual 'unweighting' to keep the foot moving in the desired circular pattern and speed (keeping momentum).

In actual t-o-w contests, does the knee/lower leg get bent as much as in cycling?
I doubt that the angle between lower and upper leg is ever 90 degrees or less.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

If you cannot generate a tangential force at TDC equal or greater than that around 3 o'c, you would be better off forgetting about that sector and concentrating on the downstroke. When you use kicking forward with the downstroke, you are using two independent actions and the result will be a later start to a weaker downstroke. When you use the powerful INDOOR t o'w technique with the downstroke, it is one continuous extended power stroke.
The amount of knee bend would depend on the speed they are moving backwards.

CoachFergie

Re: Re:

backdoor said:
JayKosta said:
backdoor said:
...
if a t o'w man was asked the same question, I was wondering if he would attempt to use his t-o-w technique there.
------------
My guess is that the t-o-w person would NOT try to do a STRONG 'kick foot forward' at TDC.
Would wait till just beyond 1 o'clock and then do STRONG combination 'kick forward' and 'push down'.
From about 11:30 to 1:00, there might be better than usual 'unweighting' to keep the foot moving in the desired circular pattern and speed (keeping momentum).

In actual t-o-w contests, does the knee/lower leg get bent as much as in cycling?
I doubt that the angle between lower and upper leg is ever 90 degrees or less.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

If you cannot generate a tangential force at TDC equal or greater than that around 3 o'c, you would be better off forgetting about that sector and concentrating on the downstroke. When you use kicking forward with the downstroke, you are using two independent actions and the result will be a later start to a weaker downstroke. When you use the powerful INDOOR t o'w technique with the downstroke, it is one continuous extended power stroke.
The amount of knee bend would depend on the speed they are moving backwards.

Do you even ride Noel? We have tried this. It's not as powerful as you think.

backdoor

Re: Re:

CoachFergie said:
backdoor said:
JayKosta said:
backdoor said:
...
if a t o'w man was asked the same question, I was wondering if he would attempt to use his t-o-w technique there.
------------
My guess is that the t-o-w person would NOT try to do a STRONG 'kick foot forward' at TDC.
Would wait till just beyond 1 o'clock and then do STRONG combination 'kick forward' and 'push down'.
From about 11:30 to 1:00, there might be better than usual 'unweighting' to keep the foot moving in the desired circular pattern and speed (keeping momentum).

In actual t-o-w contests, does the knee/lower leg get bent as much as in cycling?
I doubt that the angle between lower and upper leg is ever 90 degrees or less.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

If you cannot generate a tangential force at TDC equal or greater than that around 3 o'c, you would be better off forgetting about that sector and concentrating on the downstroke. When you use kicking forward with the downstroke, you are using two independent actions and the result will be a later start to a weaker downstroke. When you use the powerful INDOOR t o'w technique with the downstroke, it is one continuous extended power stroke.
The amount of knee bend would depend on the speed they are moving backwards.

Do you even ride Noel? We have tried this. It's not as powerful as you think.

I don't know what ye were trying, but I can say with certainty it was not the power generating technique that took years to develop and perfect. If it was possible by means of the ROTOR CRANK idea to accelerate the idling leg's crank from 5 to 1 o'c as downstroke power was being applied from 1 to 5, so as to give a simultaneous switch over of power application from one leg to the other when cranks are in the 1 / 5 o'c position, would there be an advantage ?

JayKosta

Re: Re:

backdoor said:
...
I don't know what ye were trying, but I can say with certainty it was not the power generating technique that took years to develop and perfect. If it was possible by means of the ROTOR CRANK idea to accelerate the idling leg's crank from 5 to 1 o'c as downstroke power was being applied from 1 to 5, so as to give a simultaneous switch over of power application from one leg to the other when cranks are in the 1 / 5 o'c position, would there be an advantage ?
------------------------------
A question - with the ROTOR CRANK does one pedal move from 5 to 1 while the other pedal moves from 1 to 5? If that is what happens, then either the cyclist is using muscles in an 'upward' motion from 5-to-1, or the muscles that push the pedal down from 1-to-5 are also being used to push the other pedal from 5-to-1 (or most likely some combination of muscles).

Whether there would be a 'cycling advantage' depends on whether the muscle usage to accomplish that motion is developed to have strength and endurance that is better than muscle usage with conventional pedalling technique and equipment. And the only way to really know if that has happened is by actual testing and measurement.

Regardless of what pedalling technique is used, muscle effort is needed for 2 basic things -
1) applying tangental force on the crank arm to propel the bike forward.
2) reposition the foot so it can again do #1.

Whether one pedalling technique has an advantage over another depends on how effectively and efficiently the rider can do the required muscle movements.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

backdoor

Re: Re:

JayKosta said:
backdoor said:
...
I don't know what ye were trying, but I can say with certainty it was not the power generating technique that took years to develop and perfect. If it was possible by means of the ROTOR CRANK idea to accelerate the idling leg's crank from 5 to 1 o'c as downstroke power was being applied from 1 to 5, so as to give a simultaneous switch over of power application from one leg to the other when cranks are in the 1 / 5 o'c position, would there be an advantage ?
------------------------------
A question - with the ROTOR CRANK does one pedal move from 5 to 1 while the other pedal moves from 1 to 5? If that is what happens, then either the cyclist is using muscles in an 'upward' motion from 5-to-1, or the muscles that push the pedal down from 1-to-5 are also being used to push the other pedal from 5-to-1 (or most likely some combination of muscles).

Whether there would be a 'cycling advantage' depends on whether the muscle usage to accomplish that motion is developed to have strength and endurance that is better than muscle usage with conventional pedalling technique and equipment. And the only way to really know if that has happened is by actual testing and measurement.

Regardless of what pedalling technique is used, muscle effort is needed for 2 basic things -
1) applying tangental force on the crank arm to propel the bike forward.
2) reposition the foot so it can again do #1.

Whether one pedalling technique has an advantage over another depends on how effectively and efficiently the rider can do the required muscle movements.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

With the ROTOR CRANK already in use, the idling leg is supposed to unweight and move upward from BDC slightly ahead of the faster moving upward crank. There is only a slight change as one crank is only about 10 deg past TDC when the other crank is at BDC position. It would be almost impossible to change it to what I was suggesting, which would be to mechanically compensate for the inability to apply effective torque throughout the entire 60 deg TDC sector. Apart from the extra weight and increased friction in the extra moving parts gearing would be too high around 3 o'c. Instead of trying to mechanically compensate for this dead sector, Anquetil changed his muscle use to directly replace that sector with max torque. This also meant having the muscle action in the idling leg mentally travelling well ahead of the crank from 5 to 11 o'c so as to be ready for simultaneous switch over of max power application at 11 o'c.

JayKosta

Re: Re:

backdoor said:
... Anquetil changed his muscle use to directly replace that sector with max torque. This also meant having the muscle action in the idling leg mentally travelling well ahead of the crank from 5 to 11 o'c so as to be ready for simultaneous switch over of max power application at 11 o'c.
-----------------------------
Your description of Anqutil's muscle usage is now getting very similar to the 'mainline' explanation of Anq's success - Anq had exceptional (and rare) physiology (muscle type, VO2 capacity, etc.) - and he used it to TRAIN his muscles to perform in what was for him, a highly effective and efficient pedalling technique.

I think that every cyclist attempts to pedal in a manner that they think is most effective and efficient. The phyical (and mental) differences between people makes their specific individual technique different from each other. Without similar physical and mental ability, it is unlikely someone can simply be taught to pedal the same as Anq - they might try, but probably with less success than when using their own preferred method.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

CoachFergie

Merckx dropped his heels. He was way better than Jacques. Nuff said.

Alex Simmons/RST

Anquetil, Merckx and Hinault had significantly different pedalling styles. All managed to do OK. Amazing. or not

backdoor

Re:

Alex Simmons/RST said:
Anquetil, Merckx and Hinault had significantly different pedalling styles. All managed to do OK. Amazing. or not

The pedalling of Merckx and Hinault may have looked different but in reality they were both using the same basic technique in which greatest torque could only be applied around 3 o'c and both riders' legs were effectively idling around TDC.

Alex Simmons/RST

Re: Re:

backdoor said:
Alex Simmons/RST said:
Anquetil, Merckx and Hinault had significantly different pedalling styles. All managed to do OK. Amazing. or not

The pedalling of Merckx and Hinault may have looked different but in reality they were both using the same basic technique in which greatest torque could only be applied around 3 o'c and both riders' legs were effectively idling around TDC.
Hinault perfected a special backward pedalling technique that enabled him to capture and use the torque his opponents were wasting with their mashing styles.

No one in the history of the sport before or since has been able to replicate Hinault's phenomenal backward torque suck even though high jumpers and shot putters the world over have been routinely deploying these methods since the 1970s.

There are however rumours of some Zwift turbo torque sucking being trialled by a few riders in Kazakstan in prep for the anticipated Zwift world champs in 2019, to be held on a virtual replica of the Zolder course so favoured by Mario Cipollini.

CoachFergie

Re: Re:

backdoor said:
Alex Simmons/RST said:
Anquetil, Merckx and Hinault had significantly different pedalling styles. All managed to do OK. Amazing. or not

The pedalling of Merckx and Hinault may have looked different but in reality they were both using the same basic technique in which greatest torque could only be applied around 3 o'c and both riders' legs were effectively idling around TDC.

Yet Merckx is the greatest rider of all time and Hinault is the greatest time trialist ever. Just goes to show how inconsequential your observations are.

backdoor

Re: Re:

CoachFergie said:
backdoor said:
Alex Simmons/RST said:
Anquetil, Merckx and Hinault had significantly different pedalling styles. All managed to do OK. Amazing. or not

The pedalling of Merckx and Hinault may have looked different but in reality they were both using the same basic technique in which greatest torque could only be applied around 3 o'c and both riders' legs were effectively idling around TDC.

Yet Merckx is the greatest rider of all time and Hinault is the greatest time trialist ever. Just goes to show how inconsequential your observations are.

That's understandable, Merckx raced for the glory of winning, to Anquetil cycling was a business from which he hoped to amass a fortune for least amount of effort. Anquetil won all 9 G P d N he competed in, Hinault won 3. High gears did not do Hinault's knees any favours, his greatest torque application in each pedal stroke had to come down from his knees, Anquetil's high gear power came from his rear end and was smoothly distributed over twice the range Hinault was restricted to.

CoachFergie

Noel, data, or not interested. You can not support any of your claims with evidence.

backdoor

Re:

CoachFergie said:
Noel, data, or not interested. You can not support any of your claims with evidence.

How does the pedalling style you used as a child compare with your pedalling style today ?

CoachFergie

I didn't measure the way I pedalled when I was a child, so that would be speculation.

backdoor

Re:

CoachFergie said:
I didn't measure the way I pedalled when I was a child, so that would be speculation.

You are obsessed with the measurement of everything, what I meant was, does your method of applying chain drive power to the pedal today differ from the way you applied it then.

CoachFergie

Yes, I am obsessed, data is handy to back up my assertions. You should try it some time.

Again, I didn't measure my pedalling when I was a child. Infocrank didn't make a trike based model back then!

Alex Simmons/RST

It's all about negative torque suck transference. If you perfect the art of trash talking, you can turn talk into torque. Hinault was a master of the technique.

backdoor

Re:

CoachFergie said:
Yes, I am obsessed, data is handy to back up my assertions. You should try it some time.

Again, I didn't measure my pedalling when I was a child. Infocrank didn't make a trike based model back then!

For your information you are using the same technique (mashing) that you first learnt as a child because like walking and running it was ingrained in your brain not long after you started to pedal. A child would select the most obvious or easiest way to get the cranks moving. Even if they wanted to, It would be impossible for them to use the most effective way because of their equipment set-up (bars above saddle etc) and no cleats. Years later as coaches, scientists and engineers this technique was so ingrained in their brains that they were incapable of even considering the idea that a more effective technique could exist, and so in an attempt to rectify the major fault in this childhood technique, they started the never ending merry-go-round of odd shaped chainrings and cranks.

CoachFergie

So you keep saying Noel, but without data you can't actually prove anything you claim. You are deluded. You cling to this illusion of the perfection of one rider who lets face it, admitted he took drugs and clearly was the best rider of his time. Jacques lucked in and was born with the best VO2max, fractional utilisation of VO2 and efficiency of the day.

Jim Martin has provided a wealth of data that any form of equipment that claims to alter pedalling technique and special methods claimed to improve technique are mostly bogus and any potential gains are so small that even David Brailsford would not be impressed.

Personally, I have tried your method as described by you within the constraints of UCI rules for road cycling and time trial cycling and it is less powerful and far less efficient.

backdoor

Re:

CoachFergie said:
So you keep saying Noel, but without data you can't actually prove anything you claim. You are deluded. You cling to this illusion of the perfection of one rider who lets face it, admitted he took drugs and clearly was the best rider of his time. Jacques lucked in and was born with the best VO2max, fractional utilisation of VO2 and efficiency of the day.

Jim Martin has provided a wealth of data that any form of equipment that claims to alter pedalling technique and special methods claimed to improve technique are mostly bogus and any potential gains are so small that even David Brailsford would not be impressed.

Personally, I have tried your method as described by you within the constraints of UCI rules for road cycling and time trial cycling and it is less powerful and far less efficient.

What UCI TT rules ?

CoachFergie

Re: Re:

backdoor said:
CoachFergie said:
So you keep saying Noel, but without data you can't actually prove anything you claim. You are deluded. You cling to this illusion of the perfection of one rider who lets face it, admitted he took drugs and clearly was the best rider of his time. Jacques lucked in and was born with the best VO2max, fractional utilisation of VO2 and efficiency of the day.

Jim Martin has provided a wealth of data that any form of equipment that claims to alter pedalling technique and special methods claimed to improve technique are mostly bogus and any potential gains are so small that even David Brailsford would not be impressed.

Personally, I have tried your method as described by you within the constraints of UCI rules for road cycling and time trial cycling and it is less powerful and far less efficient.

What UCI TT rules ?

Well there you go.

MarkvW

Present a plausible statement. Draw all the possible logical conclusions that you can from it. Retreat back to the plausible statement when challenged. Lather, rinse, repeat. Year after year.

A priori "science" is the funniest science.

backdoor

Re:

CoachFergie said:
So you keep saying Noel, but without data you can't actually prove anything you claim. You are deluded. You cling to this illusion of the perfection of one rider who lets face it, admitted he took drugs and clearly was the best rider of his time. Jacques lucked in and was born with the best VO2max, fractional utilisation of VO2 and efficiency of the day.

Jim Martin has provided a wealth of data that any form of equipment that claims to alter pedalling technique and special methods claimed to improve technique are mostly bogus and any potential gains are so small that even David Brailsford would not be impressed.

Personally, I have tried your method as described by you within the constraints of UCI rules for road cycling and time trial cycling and it is less powerful and far less efficient.

When applying crank torque, at any instant how many teeth of a 52t chainring are involved in pulling the chain or how many degrees of any chainring are involved ?