The pedaling technique thread

Page 82 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
Re: Re:

Alex Simmons/RST said:
backdoor said:
That's why I was asking for his VO2 MAX value. It has been said he had a larger heart than other riders. His method of training for TT's could be copied but not his pedalling technique.
You remind me of Jeremy Clarkson when introducing the Stig, except it's Noel introducing Anquteil.

Some say...
No, the semi circular pedalling technique which can apply continuous effective chain drive force to the chainring for the smoothest possible style of pedalling.
 
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
Apr 21, 2009
3,095
0
0
But of course Merckx won more races, won more time trials and went further in the Hour Record. So using batsh*t crazy logic his way of pedalling is more powerful.
 
Noel, you often mention the leg position and strength of indoor tug-of-war athletes - how do the various 'joint angles' of t-o-w athletes compares to those of a cyclist in the area around TDC of pedalling (which I think is the primary focus of your pedalling technique).
E.G the smallest and largest angles of:
1) upper leg and torso,
2) upper leg and lower leg, and
3) ankle - foot and lower leg.

If those angles are significantly different for t-o-w compared to cycling, then why do you think that similar use of those muscles would be beneficial for cycling? Do t-o-w athletes employ as much range-of-motion for the those joints as cyclists?

Jay
 
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
Re:

JayKosta said:
Noel, you often mention the leg position and strength of indoor tug-of-war athletes - how do the various 'joint angles' of t-o-w athletes compares to those of a cyclist in the area around TDC of pedalling (which I think is the primary focus of your pedalling technique).
E.G the smallest and largest angles of:
1) upper leg and torso,
2) upper leg and lower leg, and
3) ankle - foot and lower leg.

If those angles are significantly different for t-o-w compared to cycling, then why do you think that similar use of those muscles would be beneficial for cycling? Do t-o-w athletes employ as much range-of-motion for the those joints as cyclists?

Jay
The angles are very different because they are in the extreme position as they pull against an equal force taking only mini steps if any, but their power generating technique is still identical to what can be used on the bike. Their lying back in addition to adding to their force acts as a type of anchor. They are applying a force many times greater than what would be needed for maximal crank torque. When perfecting this pedalling technique by attempting to start your power stroke earlier and earlier you are concentrating on trying to generate the same maximal force as angles decrease when you move back before TDC. I discovered this technique when I succeeded in biomechanically combining hand cranking power with leg pedalling power. Without my Scott Rake type bars this would have been impossible because they removed the unwanted leverage of shoulder width bars. Without these narrow aero bars Anquetil had to use two handed resistance which is more difficult and not as effective as alternate hand resistance. Arm resistance is necessary to counter act the maximal forward force at TDC and 1 o'c. One other important requirement is a correct bike set up because your arm resistance line has to be parallel to your power application line at peak torque position. It was said that Anquetil's bars were set higher than what was customary for that period.
 
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
Re: Re:

backdoor said:
JayKosta said:
Noel, you often mention the leg position and strength of indoor tug-of-war athletes - how do the various 'joint angles' of t-o-w athletes compares to those of a cyclist in the area around TDC of pedalling (which I think is the primary focus of your pedalling technique).
E.G the smallest and largest angles of:
1) upper leg and torso,
2) upper leg and lower leg, and
3) ankle - foot and lower leg.

If those angles are significantly different for t-o-w compared to cycling, then why do you think that similar use of those muscles would be beneficial for cycling? Do t-o-w athletes employ as much range-of-motion for the those joints as cyclists?

Jay
The angles are very different because they are in the extreme position as they pull against an equal force taking only mini steps if any, but their power generating technique is still identical to what can be used on the bike. Their lying back in addition to adding to their force acts as a type of anchor. They are applying a force many times greater than what would be needed for maximal crank torque. When perfecting this pedalling technique by attempting to start your power stroke earlier and earlier you are concentrating on trying to generate the same maximal force as angles decrease when you move back before TDC. I discovered this technique when I succeeded in biomechanically combining hand cranking power with leg pedalling power. Without my Scott Rake type bars this would have been impossible because they removed the unwanted leverage of shoulder width bars. Without these narrow aero bars Anquetil had to use two handed resistance which is more difficult and not as effective as alternate hand resistance. Arm resistance is necessary to counteract the maximal forward force at TDC and 1 o'c. One other important requirement is a correct bike set up because your arm resistance line has to be parallel to your power application line at peak torque position. It was said that Anquetil's bars were set higher than what was customary for that period.
 
Re:

MarkvW said:
Wow. He is still at it, trying to sell those stupid P****c***k things.
---------------------------
PCs have not been discussed here for quite a while.

The subject that BACKDOOR/Noel is advocating is a pedalling technique using regular cranks. My understanding is that the techique emphasizes a very strong lowerleg application of force to the pedal from before TDC and continues for approximately 180 degrees - in conjunction with strong counter-pull using the arms to maintain saddle position. The technique is said to require high mental concentration, and to be most applicable in a situation such as a flat TT where there would not be distractions from other riders, and a steady pace could be maintained.

No reliable test data is available about the effectiveness or efficiency of the technique. And any physiological muscle advantage with the technique is questionable.

Jay
 
Re: Re:

JayKosta said:
MarkvW said:
Wow. He is still at it, trying to sell those stupid P****c***k things.
---------------------------
PCs have not been discussed here for quite a while.

The subject that BACKDOOR/Noel is advocating is a pedalling technique using regular cranks. My understanding is that the techique emphasizes a very strong lowerleg application of force to the pedal from before TDC and continues for approximately 180 degrees - in conjunction with strong counter-pull using the arms to maintain saddle position. The technique is said to require high mental concentration, and to be most applicable in a situation such as a flat TT where there would not be distractions from other riders, and a steady pace could be maintained.

No reliable test data is available about the effectiveness or efficiency of the technique. And any physiological muscle advantage with the technique is questionable.

Jay
Thanks! Noted.
 
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
Re: Re:

JayKosta said:
MarkvW said:
Wow. He is still at it, trying to sell those stupid P****c***k things.
---------------------------
PCs have not been discussed here for quite a while.

My understanding is that the techique emphasizes a very strong lowerleg application of force to the pedal from before TDC and continues for approximately 180 degrees

Jay
No, it continues with maximal torque until 2 o'c where it merges with the natural downward force until 5 o'c, at which position a simultaneous switchover of max leg force application takes place. Downward force takes over from about 2.30. There is no dead spot sector between 11 and 1, that's why concentration is required.
 
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
Re:

CoachFergie said:
But of course Merckx won more races, won more time trials and went further in the Hour Record. So using batsh*t crazy logic his way of pedalling is more powerful.
That would be in keeping with the objectives of each rider. As for the hour record, you only have to go far enough to beat the previous record, Anquetil did not believe in wasting energy. How many world TT's (GP de N) did Merckx win ?
 
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
Re:

CoachFergie said:
More repetition of nonsense. If it was better it would be easily measureable. Jim Martin has just had a paper accepted that may shed more light on this matter.
Simulated work-loops predict maximal human cycling power
James C. Martin, Jennifer A. Nichols
Journal of Experimental Biology 2018 : jeb.180109 doi: 10.1242/jeb.180109 Published 17 May 2018
ArticleInfo & metrics PDF
Abstract
Fish, birds, and lizards sometimes perform locomotor activities with maximized muscle power. Whether humans maximize muscular power is unknown because current experimental techniques cannot be applied non-invasively. This study uses simulated muscle work loops to examine whether voluntary maximal cycling is characterized by maximized muscle power. The simulated work loops leverage experimentally measured joint angles, anatomically realistic muscle parameters (muscle-tendon lengths, velocities, and moment arms), and a published muscle model to calculate powers and forces for thirty-eight muscles. For each muscle, stimulation onset and offset were optimized to maximize muscle work and power for the complete shortening/lengthening cycle. Simulated joint powers and total leg power (i.e., summed muscle powers) were compared to previously reported experimental joint and leg powers. Experimental power values were closely approximated by simulated maximal power for the leg (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)=0.91), the hip (ICC=0.92), and knee (ICC=0.95), but less closely for the ankle (ICC=0.74). Thus, during maximal cycling, humans maximize muscle power at the hip and knee, but the ankle acts to transfer (instead of maximize) power. Given that only the timing of muscle stimulation onsets and offsets were altered, these results suggest that human motor control strategies may optimize muscle activations to maximize power. The simulations also provide insights into biarticular muscles by demonstrating that the powers at each joint spanned by a biarticular muscle can be substantially greater than the net power produced by the muscle. Our work loop simulation technique may be useful for examining clinical deficits in muscle power production.

Received February 28, 2018.
Accepted May 8, 2018.

This is probably the paper to which you are referring. Nothing new in this abstract, will it make you consider changing your method of applying torque to the cranks or is it to be added to the other 500+ pedalling studies.

"Thus during maximal cycling, humans maximize muscle power at the hip and knee, but the ankle acts to transfer (instead of maximize) power."
As I have already mentioned, not only the ankle but the foot and entire lower leg which contains the most powerful and most fatigue resistant muscle in the lower body act to transfer (instead of maximize) power because cyclists don't know how to use these muscles for best effect. Alex Simmons with his before and after accident pedalling power values has confirmed this. Pedalling biomechanics can never be improved by analysing existing pedalling techniques, if it could, it would have been done many years ago, it can only be done by experimenting and searching for a completely different way to apply the power.
 
Re: Re:

backdoor said:
Simulated work-loops predict maximal human cycling power
James C. Martin, Jennifer A. Nichols
Journal of Experimental Biology 2018 : jeb.180109 doi: 10.1242/jeb.180109 Published 17 May 2018
ArticleInfo & metrics PDF
Abstract
...
Thus, during maximal cycling, humans maximize muscle power at the hip and knee, but the ankle acts to transfer (instead of maximize) power. Given that only the timing of muscle stimulation onsets and offsets were altered, these results suggest that human motor control strategies may optimize muscle activations to maximize power.
...
-----------------------
I haven't attempted to access the entire article yet, but I'm confused by the above wording -
"these results suggest that human motor control strategies may optimize muscle activations to maximize power."

I can't determine if the word 'may' is intended to mean that CURRENT TYPICAL motor control strategies MIGHT ALREADY optimize muscle activations to maximize power.
OR that motor control strategies MIGHT BE CHANGED to optimize muscles activations to maximize power.

Regardless, the described simulation process for muscle activation seems like a possible way to analyze the power generated by the pedalling technique described by BACKDOOR / Noel. A good follow-on article would be to analyze the muscle endurance and efficiency of the simulated pedalling technique(s) that generate the highest power, compared to the current typically used pedalling technique(s).

Jay
 
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
Re: Re:

JayKosta said:
backdoor said:
Simulated work-loops predict maximal human cycling power
James C. Martin, Jennifer A. Nichols
Journal of Experimental Biology 2018 : jeb.180109 doi: 10.1242/jeb.180109 Published 17 May 2018
ArticleInfo & metrics PDF
Abstract
...
Thus, during maximal cycling, humans maximize muscle power at the hip and knee, but the ankle acts to transfer (instead of maximize) power. Given that only the timing of muscle stimulation onsets and offsets were altered, these results suggest that human motor control strategies may optimize muscle activations to maximize power.
...
-----------------------
I haven't attempted to access the entire article yet, but I'm confused by the above wording -
"these results suggest that human motor control strategies may optimize muscle activations to maximize power."

I can't determine if the word 'may' is intended to mean that CURRENT TYPICAL motor control strategies MIGHT ALREADY optimize muscle activations to maximize power.
OR that motor control strategies MIGHT BE CHANGED to optimize muscles activations to maximize power.

Regardless, the described simulation process for muscle activation seems like a possible way to analyze the power generated by the pedalling technique described by BACKDOOR / Noel. A good follow-on article would be to analyze the muscle endurance and efficiency of the simulated pedalling technique(s) that generate the highest power, compared to the current typically used pedalling technique(s).

Jay
The fact is, by adapting the indoor tug o'war motor control strategies of the lower leg for use in pedalling around TDC, you can activate the most powerful muscle in your lower body (that up to now has been lying idle) to maximize your power from each pedal stroke by producing the same torque at 12, 1 and 2 as at 3 o'c.
 
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
Re: Re:

PhitBoy said:
backdoor said:
Nothing new in this abstract
Yeah, just add it to the list of all the other studies that have used work loop modeling to predict whole limb maximal potential. Oh wait... there aren't any others.
Like Jay , I only saw the abstract. How can this time consuming complicated work lead to the perfect pedalling technique, which I believe is simply about giving your brain the correct objectives and it will soon figure out not only the combination of your most powerful muscles needed for that purpose but also where to use them. Or is this more of a physiological rather than a pedalling study.
 
Simulation of muscle usage and its effect on power and endurance could result in tremendous changes in many sports. It could be a predictor of whether a change in technique has a high probability of giving better performance - and thereby lessen the reluctance of athletes to devote training time on a 'maybe'.

If there is any follow-on analysis of pedalling technique that does include high use of the muscles to move the ankle/foot before and thru TDC it might validate your ideas. A complication is whether the simulation tool can also include the torso and arm muscle usage that is involved with pedalling.

Jay
 
Jun 18, 2015
171
2
3,835
Re:

Hi Jay:
We maximized the power that every muscle produced throughout the pedal cycle and came up with patterns that look almost identical to what cyclists do. That means there is nothing else the muscles can do to produce power in some other technique. Any other technique will be less powerful, not more. The differences we saw at the ankle occur during the middle of the recovery portion of the cycle where an active ankle extension would be counter productive. That is, even though soleus could produce more power during that portion of the cycle, doing so would produce negative power on the crank.
I hope this clarifies.
Cheers,
Jim

JayKosta said:
Simulation of muscle usage and its effect on power and endurance could result in tremendous changes in many sports. It could be a predictor of whether a change in technique has a high probability of giving better performance - and thereby lessen the reluctance of athletes to devote training time on a 'maybe'.

If there is any follow-on analysis of pedalling technique that does include high use of the muscles to move the ankle/foot before and thru TDC it might validate your ideas. A complication is whether the simulation tool can also include the torso and arm muscle usage that is involved with pedalling.

Jay
 
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
Re: Re:

PhitBoy said:
Hi Jay:
We maximized the power that every muscle produced throughout the pedal cycle and came up with patterns that look almost identical to what cyclists do. That means there is nothing else the muscles can do to produce power in some other technique. Any other technique will be less powerful, not more. The differences we saw at the ankle occur during the middle of the recovery portion of the cycle where an active ankle extension would be counter productive. That is, even though soleus could produce more power during that portion of the cycle, doing so would produce negative power on the crank.
I hope this clarifies.
Cheers,
Jim

[
That study and your conclusions are even more ridiculous than what I had first imagined. As I said nothing new, just more of the same repetitive tinkering with existing pedalling styles and then searching for a different result in keeping with the definition of insanity. How can work loop modeling predict the maximal potential of the soleus muscle used in the pedalling power stroke when all existing pedalling styles leave it lying idle during this sector of the pedalling circle. The recovery stroke is for recovery, not for trying to generate torque. From the short explanation that I read, work loop modeling is for individual muscles, not for a combination of the three most powerful muscles (glutes quads and soleus) working as a unit that can generate maximal torque around TDC and beyond, as is the case with the perfect pedalling technique.
 
Re: Re:

backdoor said:
PhitBoy said:
Hi Jay:
We maximized the power that every muscle produced throughout the pedal cycle and came up with patterns that look almost identical to what cyclists do. That means there is nothing else the muscles can do to produce power in some other technique. Any other technique will be less powerful, not more. The differences we saw at the ankle occur during the middle of the recovery portion of the cycle where an active ankle extension would be counter productive. That is, even though soleus could produce more power during that portion of the cycle, doing so would produce negative power on the crank.
I hope this clarifies.
Cheers,
Jim

[
That study and your conclusions are even more ridiculous than what I had first imagined. As I said nothing new, just more of the same repetitive tinkering with existing pedalling styles and then searching for a different result in keeping with the definition of insanity. How can work loop modeling predict the maximal potential of the soleus muscle used in the pedalling power stroke when all existing pedalling styles leave it lying idle during this sector of the pedalling circle. The recovery stroke is for recovery, not for trying to generate torque. From the short explanation that I read, work loop modeling is for individual muscles, not for a combination of the three most powerful muscles (glutes quads and soleus) working as a unit that can generate maximal torque around TDC and beyond, as is the case with the perfect pedalling technique.
Noel, please stop. You really haven't a clue what you are crapping on about.
 
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
Re: Re:

Alex Simmons/RST said:
backdoor said:
PhitBoy said:
Hi Jay:
We maximized the power that every muscle produced throughout the pedal cycle and came up with patterns that look almost identical to what cyclists do. That means there is nothing else the muscles can do to produce power in some other technique. Any other technique will be less powerful, not more. The differences we saw at the ankle occur during the middle of the recovery portion of the cycle where an active ankle extension would be counter productive. That is, even though soleus could produce more power during that portion of the cycle, doing so would produce negative power on the crank.
I hope this clarifies.
Cheers,
Jim

[
That study and your conclusions are even more ridiculous than what I had first imagined. As I said nothing new, just more of the same repetitive tinkering with existing pedalling styles and then searching for a different result in keeping with the definition of insanity. How can work loop modeling predict the maximal potential of the soleus muscle used in the pedalling power stroke when all existing pedalling styles leave it lying idle during this sector of the pedalling circle. The recovery stroke is for recovery, not for trying to generate torque. From the short explanation that I read, work loop modeling is for individual muscles, not for a combination of the three most powerful muscles (glutes quads and soleus) working as a unit that can generate maximal torque around TDC and beyond, as is the case with the perfect pedalling technique.
Noel, please stop. You really haven't a clue what you are crapping on about.
I would if someone would tell me where I am wrong in my explanation of the perfect technique, which in brief simply involves joining the maximal forward power producing technique from another powerful sport for the first half of your power stroke (11-2)with the maximal downward power producing technique of mashing for the second half (2-5), together they give 180 deg of highly effective torque from each pedal stroke with no dead spot sector. I hate seeing the misinformation being spread by these studies which (except for Anquetil) has kept pedalling unchanged since the invention of the bicycle.
 
Re: Re:

backdoor said:
Alex Simmons/RST said:
backdoor said:
PhitBoy said:
Hi Jay:
We maximized the power that every muscle produced throughout the pedal cycle and came up with patterns that look almost identical to what cyclists do. That means there is nothing else the muscles can do to produce power in some other technique. Any other technique will be less powerful, not more. The differences we saw at the ankle occur during the middle of the recovery portion of the cycle where an active ankle extension would be counter productive. That is, even though soleus could produce more power during that portion of the cycle, doing so would produce negative power on the crank.
I hope this clarifies.
Cheers,
Jim

[
That study and your conclusions are even more ridiculous than what I had first imagined. As I said nothing new, just more of the same repetitive tinkering with existing pedalling styles and then searching for a different result in keeping with the definition of insanity. How can work loop modeling predict the maximal potential of the soleus muscle used in the pedalling power stroke when all existing pedalling styles leave it lying idle during this sector of the pedalling circle. The recovery stroke is for recovery, not for trying to generate torque. From the short explanation that I read, work loop modeling is for individual muscles, not for a combination of the three most powerful muscles (glutes quads and soleus) working as a unit that can generate maximal torque around TDC and beyond, as is the case with the perfect pedalling technique.
Noel, please stop. You really haven't a clue what you are crapping on about.
I would if someone would tell me where I am wrong in my explanation of the perfect technique, which in brief simply involves joining the maximal forward power producing technique from another powerful sport for the first half of your power stroke (11-2)with the maximal downward power producing technique of mashing for the second half (2-5), together they give 180 deg of highly effective torque from each pedal stroke with no dead spot sector. I hate seeing the misinformation being spread by these studies which (except for Anquetil) has kept pedalling unchanged since the invention of the bicycle.
It's not possible to turn around the beliefs of the self deluded.

The onus is on you to demonstrate your assertions have a basis is reality by providing some actual data. You have failed to do so for as long as I can recall, nearly a couple of decades.

You have been provided the opportunity to do so at biomechanical research facility, and many have explained how this can be done without a lot of effort or cost (via a basic intervention protocol and power measurement). Yet you persist with your delusion and refuse to test it with the simplest of measures currently available to the cycling public.

That you dismiss those with actual data so casually is simply hand waving on your part.
 
Jun 4, 2015
785
0
3,280
Re: Re:

Alex Simmons/RST said:
I would if someone would tell me where I am wrong in my explanation of the perfect technique, which in brief simply involves joining the maximal forward power producing technique from another powerful sport for the first half of your power stroke (11-2)with the maximal downward power producing technique of mashing for the second half (2-5), together they give 180 deg of highly effective torque from each pedal stroke with no dead spot sector. I hate seeing the misinformation being spread by these studies which (except for Anquetil) has kept pedalling unchanged since the invention of the bicycle.
It's not possible to turn around the beliefs of the self deluded.

The onus is on you to demonstrate your assertions have a basis is reality by providing some actual data. You have failed to do so for as long as I can recall, nearly a couple of decades.

You have been provided the opportunity to do so at biomechanical research facility, and many have explained how this can be done without a lot of effort or cost (via a basic intervention protocol and power measurement). Yet you persist with your delusion and refuse to test it with the simplest of measures currently available to the cycling public.

That you dismiss those with actual data so casually is simply hand waving on your part.
There is no self delusion about the elimination of cycling's worst lower back pain when you yourself are a victim. Lower back pain is the most common medical problem in cycling and medical experts after over a century of research have failed to find a solution or even relieve this pain. The explanation for their failure lies in the fact that natural pedalling is the root cause of this torture that has forced many out of the sport. Change peak torque application from 3 o'c to the 1.30 position and the problem is solved because greatest pedalling resistance is now being supplied by the powerful hips instead of a defective lower back and all upper body weight is supported by the working arms without any stressing of the arms.
What effect would the application of additional maximal torque at 12 and 1 o'c have on the power from your pedalling stroke, according to PhitBoy's results from his latest study it would reduce it. His conclusion from that study should have read, 'when using natural pedalling any attempt to change muscle usage will result in less power than that of the mashing technique'. How would you answer that question ?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY