# Pro Heights/Saddle Heights



## Lelandjt (Sep 11, 2008)

I'm curious how tall and long legged some pros are. I'm guessing all the climbers are short but for a classics/time trial/GC rider I'd think some femur length would be useful and some of them look tall, but maybe that's just cuz they're next to short climbers. Indurain, Cancellara, and Froome are a couple I'm thinking of. Rider height and seat height (BB to saddle top?) is what I'm curious to see.


----------



## looigi (Nov 24, 2010)

Froome is 6'1" and Wiggins is 6'3". Schlecks are 6'1". Teejay 6'1". Nibali 5'11". Aru 6'. Valverde and Contador 5'9". None of these would I consider short. Porte is 5'8" and Quintana is 5'6".


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

Potsovivo is short, at 5' 5". Saddle height, in terms of leg extension, seems to vary quite a bit from rider to rider? Maybe it just looks like that on TV?


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

What makes you think there would be anything unique about the saddle height a pro cyclist chooses? Can the stretch their bones or something?


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

PBL450 said:


> Potsovivo is short, at 5' 5". Saddle height, in terms of leg extension, seems to vary quite a bit from rider to rider? Maybe it just looks like that on TV?


Well, if you pay attention to head-tube size on their bikes...you might get some odd conclusions. Most of those guys ride bikes small for them.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Marc said:


> Well, if you pay attention to head-tube size on their bikes...you might get some odd conclusions. Most of those guys ride bikes small for them.


And then there's sloping top tubes too.


----------



## cnardone (Jun 28, 2014)

Jay Strongbow said:


> What makes you think there would be anything unique about the saddle height a pro cyclist chooses? Can the stretch their bones or something?


I think he is wondering if the physical trait, longer than average legs, is a common denominator to the pros.

Kind of like basketball. We all know that basketball players are taller than normal. Beyond that, advanced metrics show that wingspan is is hugely important. Where the best performing players at each position are more often than not shorter than the average player (for their position), but have a much longer wingspan than average.

not sure if I explained it correctly.
cmn


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

cnardone said:


> I think he is wondering if the physical trait, longer than average legs, is a common denominator to the pros.
> 
> Kind of like basketball. We all know that basketball players are taller than normal. Beyond that, advanced metrics show that wingspan is is hugely important. Where the best performing players at each position are more often than not shorter than the average player (for their position), but have a much longer wingspan than average.
> 
> ...


Perfectly clear what you're explaining. Got it.
okay, that would makes sense.

But knowing the average saddle height relative to body height for pros wouldn't tell him anything without knowing the same information for Joe Sixpacks.


----------



## OldZaskar (Jul 1, 2009)

Marc said:


> Most of those guys ride bikes small for them.


Why do they ride bikes/frames that would typically be considered small? 

If they're riding those sizes - relative their height/leg length - and at the top of the sport... maybe we're riding bikes that are too big?


----------



## MMsRepBike (Apr 1, 2014)

OldZaskar said:


> Why do they ride bikes/frames that would typically be considered small?
> 
> If they're riding those sizes - relative their height/leg length - and at the top of the sport... maybe we're riding bikes that are too big?


Aerodynamics. Very simple. Pros ride with their front end as low as possible. This means most times they have to size down on a frame and run a very long stem. Whatever it takes to get aerodynamic.

Does this translate over to normal folk? No.

Seat height has nothing to do with being a pro. Every single person requires roughly the same seat height. It's the drop to the bars that set them apart from the local Fred. They're all about aerodynamics and are flexible and strong enough to handle it. Fred is not and he is not.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

OldZaskar said:


> Why do they ride bikes/frames that would typically be considered small?
> 
> If they're riding those sizes - relative their height/leg length - and at the top of the sport... maybe we're riding bikes that are too big?


Because they aren't riding custom geometry (generally speaking) but geometry designed to sell to the masses. As a result a bike designed for the average 5' 8" racer, for example, would have a head tube to high for a typical pro the same height. So they need to size down, use a longer stem, in order to get a head tube short enough get as low as they want to be.

The other side of the equation is a typical middle age wannabe would have to size up to get a higher head tube and use a short stem.

The average Joe racer who the bike was designed for would be in the middle.


----------



## pittcanna (Oct 2, 2014)

They might ride bikes that are too "small" for them on a casual ride, but when there in a race that bike might be right for them.

Smaller bike you can get more aero
Smaller bike weighs less
Smaller bikes tend to be more responsive
The guys in the pro ranks typically suffer when there racing to maintain that aero advantage


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

OldZaskar said:


> If they're riding those sizes - relative their height/leg length - and at the top of the sport... maybe we're riding bikes that are too big?


Pros have passed through a tough selection process, we have not. We can imitate a pro's position, but it's highly questionable if it'll do us any good.

On the "traits of a pro:" In his book, Hinault claimed that all "great champions" had femurs unusually long in relation to their tibias. Not sure if anyone ever confirmed this.


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

Jay Strongbow said:


> Because they aren't riding custom geometry (generally speaking) but geometry designed to sell to the masses. As a result a bike designed for the average 5' 8" racer, for example, would have a head tube to high for a typical pro the same height. So they need to size down, use a longer stem, in order to get a head tube short enough get as low as they want to be.


Exactly. 

Peter Sagan typically rides a 56cm. Unless he gets a custom frame. In which case he'll ride a 54cm or 51cm size frame with a 58cm top tube.
Peter Sagan gets custom 'Tourminator' Cannondale SuperSix Evo for Tour
Pro bike: Peter Sagan's Cannondale Synapse Hi-Mod | Cyclingnews.com


----------



## OldZaskar (Jul 1, 2009)

wim said:


> We can imitate a pro's position, but it's highly questionable if it'll do us any good


And ^that^ is the challenge. I wrestle with this. I'm 6'1" with a 37" inseam and ride a 61cm. The head tube looks like a seat tube on most bikes. I feel like I'm always in the wind, even when I'm drafting. On the plus side, I can see over most guys' shoulders and spot potholes ;-)

I could set up a 58 to "fit". But, the question is then - am I making the same power, am I as efficient in that position... would I be more aero, but slower because of a less efficient position.


----------



## tvad (Aug 31, 2003)

OldZaskar said:


> I'm 6'1" with a *37" inseam* and ride a 61cm.


Damn! Those are some long ass legs!


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

OldZaskar said:


> But, the question is then - am I making the same power, am I as efficient in that position... would I be more aero, but slower because of a less efficient position.


It's a good question, and one that is difficult to answer or find ready-made answers for. The main difficulty is being willing and able to spend the time needed for adaptation. There are a number of studies on this, but they almost all record results immediately after a change is made. In actually, it takes days if not weeks for the body to fully adapt. So what appears to be not working could, in fact, be working very well after adaptation.


----------



## looigi (Nov 24, 2010)

tvad said:


> Damn! Those are some long ass legs!


Yes. I'm of average proportions and 5'9" with a 34" cycling inseam. Cycling inseams, measured from the floor to hard against the pubis, are usual 2-4" greater than what a tailor would specify.

For the bike, the terms small or large are relative and pretty meaningless. The bikes and setups optimally accommodate the riding position and capability of the riders. I ride a bike that would be large for me compared to a similarly sized and proportioned pro.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

It seems that with the giant saddle to bar drop that is increasingly the norm, the deep drop "Belgium" style bars have gone the way of the dinosaur. 

Once upon a time cyclists who rode with less drop could sit more upright on the tops\hoods while still managing to get low and aero with the deeper bars, but now it seems everyone is low on the tops\hoods and spending less time in the drops. And when in the drops the transition isn't as great as it was when we were seeing more handlebars with deeper drop.


----------



## spdntrxi (Jul 25, 2013)

Agreed ... That'd because hoods can be more aero then drops if done correctly.


----------



## pittcanna (Oct 2, 2014)

The Retrogrouch: Changing Positions: Bike Fit Then and Now

This is a good blog about the changing positions.


----------



## jspharmd (May 24, 2006)

pittcanna said:


> Smaller bike weighs less


Not really an issue with most protour bikes as there is a weight limit they must be above. I've read that many have to add weight back to the bike to get above the limit.


----------



## Notvintage (May 19, 2013)

Marc said:


> Most of those guys ride bikes small for them.


No question, as evidenced by the 120-140mm stems.


----------



## TheMilkMan (Apr 30, 2012)

Look at Ryder Hydesdal set up for further evidence. He typically runs a 150 stem with -17 drop


----------



## Lelandjt (Sep 11, 2008)

Jay Strongbow said:


> What makes you think there would be anything unique about the saddle height a pro cyclist chooses? Can the stretch their bones or something?


What makes you think I'd think they are unique? I just wanted to know cuz it might give a better idea of femur length than their height does. I just measured my saddle height for the first time and I'm curious which pros have a similar body type to mine. With a saddle that has some cushion and flex it's 85cm. With another saddle that is very firm it's 84.
I use 175mm cranks with Shimano pedals and shoes but I was hoping these things would be constant enough to be able to compare.


----------



## Lelandjt (Sep 11, 2008)

OldZaskar said:


> Why do they ride bikes/frames that would typically be considered small?
> 
> If they're riding those sizes - relative their height/leg length - and at the top of the sport... maybe we're riding bikes that are too big?


It's cuz frames are made with too long head tubes these days. I've always riden the same length top tubes but my new (very racy) frame is gonna require me to use one of those Woodman 3mm headset covers while previous bikes had normal Chris King headsets and sometimes a spacer. After building my new bike last night I was wondering if I should have downsized and used a longer stem than I've been liking for the last 18 years.


----------



## Peter P. (Dec 30, 2006)

velodog said:


> It seems that with the giant saddle to bar drop that is increasingly the norm, the deep drop "Belgium" style bars have gone the way of the dinosaur.
> 
> Once upon a time cyclists who rode with less drop could sit more upright on the tops\hoods while still managing to get low and aero with the deeper bars, but now it seems everyone is low on the tops\hoods and spending less time in the drops. And when in the drops the transition isn't as great as it was when we were seeing more handlebars with deeper drop.


Good observation; I never looked at it this way.

Personally, I don't think pro riders "size down". I still think they're using typical "2/3 of inseam" formulas for frame sizing. What I see is sloping top tubes giving the bike the appearance of being smaller, and pros slamming stems because all the other pros are slamming stems, not because it's a fit issue. Aero is overrated, even for racing. The ability to comfortably hold your head up and view the road for hours on end trumps the claims of "more aero" any day.

The saddle to bar drops on pro bikes are so extreme today that riders spend even more time on the brake hoods. Why not just raise the bars so the drops can become more useful?


----------



## pedalbiker (Nov 23, 2014)

Lelandjt said:


> What makes you think I'd think they are unique? I just wanted to know cuz it might give a better idea of femur length than their height does. I just measured my saddle height for the first time and I'm curious which pros have a similar body type to mine. With a saddle that has some cushion and flex it's 85cm. With another saddle that is very firm it's 84.
> I use 175mm cranks with Shimano pedals and shoes but I was hoping these things would be constant enough to be able to compare.


No. And I can't imagine femur length actually being relevant to performance in any meaningful way. 

If your femurs are disproportionately long you'll have a much tougher time getting low in the front as well unless you resort to very short crank arms or move your seat very far forward. You knees would hit your chest when you get low, otherwise.


----------



## pedalbiker (Nov 23, 2014)

Peter P. said:


> Good observation; I never looked at it this way.
> 
> Personally, I don't think pro riders "size down". I still think they're using typical "2/3 of inseam" formulas for frame sizing. What I see is sloping top tubes giving the bike the appearance of being smaller, and pros slamming stems because all the other pros are slamming stems, not because it's a fit issue. Aero is overrated, even for racing. The ability to comfortably hold your head up and view the road for hours on end trumps the claims of "more aero" any day.
> 
> The saddle to bar drops on pro bikes are so extreme today that riders spend even more time on the brake hoods. Why not just raise the bars so the drops can become more useful?


Sprints and out of the saddle efforts in the drops can necessitate the drops being lower. In addition, as has been mentioned, for most people it is more aerodynamic to be on the hoods with forearms parallel to the ground. 

You could raise your bars to achieve the same effect in the drops, but then you're back to the drops being too high for sprinting (not a factor for a lot of people, but for classics guys it could be). 

Some make it work regardless, others might favor one position over another.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

pedalbiker said:


> No. And I can't imagine femur length actually being relevant to performance in any meaningful way.


The correct assumption is that you can exert more force (Newtons) with a longer lever than a shorter one. But to make a bicycle go fast, you need to generate power (Watts), with force only being one player in this. So your statement is a valid objection.

Just as an aside: When looking at force transmission (again, not power) on a bicycle, you will see that it occurs through a series of five connected levers (femur, crank, chainwheel radius, cog radius, wheel radius. Some say that the foot is also a lever in this force transmission chain, but there are those who will tell you that it does not contribute to forward propulsion.


----------



## steelbikerider (Feb 7, 2005)

I wish I could find my Hinault book because I thought about the femur length too. seems like it was 1.18. Merckx, Hinault, Moser, and Lemond were all about the same.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

steelbikerider said:


> I wish I could find my Hinault book


I knew exactly where mine was, so here you are, from page 64:

" The cyclist's lever, the femur, can be longer or shorter relative to the tibia in different people.

The norm in the ratio of the thigh to the lower leg (as we defined them) is an average of 1.11 in men....A clearly larger ratio between these segments of the leg has been observed in several great champions such as Fausto Coppi (1.18), Eddy Merckx (1.16) and Bernard Hinault (1.20) whom we dare mention here in the third person. Climbing abilities are improved...."

This is from an early edition of the book; there were some changes made in later editions, I think. Good old Hinault, "dare mention here" in his own book, ever so humble.....


----------



## The Moontrane (Nov 28, 2005)

wim said:


> I knew exactly where mine was, so here you are, from page 64:
> 
> " The cyclist's lever, the femur, can be longer or shorter relative to the tibia in different people.
> 
> ...


Yes, but on the next page are 7 pictures totally unrelated to the OP's question, which is why I shouldn't have posted. 

Fine paper stock for that book, right? :ihih:


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

The Moontrane said:


> Yes, but on the next page are 7 pictures totally unrelated to the OP's question, which is why I shouldn't have posted.
> 
> Fine paper stock for that book, right? :ihih:


Apparently, there was no money to pay a book designer or a better translator. And for those who don't have the book: those 7 pictures are all images of Hinault's hands in various places on his handlebars. The caption under one of them again dares mentioning Hinault in the third person so we know whose hands we're seeing here.

But really, the book has some very good information in spite of the goofy design and wooden English. And you have to keep in mind that it came out long before the internet and served a real need. Much of cycling literature around that time consisted of repackaged pre-World War II lore.


----------



## bikeman68 (Feb 10, 2009)

pittcanna said:


> They might ride bikes that are too "small" for them on a casual ride, but when there in a race that bike might be right for them.
> 
> Smaller bike you can get more aero
> Smaller bike weighs less
> ...


 But pro's are a different breed than the many consumers, who often have long torso with short legs (not pro like) so that calls for a far less seat post extension to get a good bike fit. Many would have rounded backs and cramped, with more stress on spine trying to get a smaller frame and ride with a seat extension of the said pro's . So better off you stick with a more conventional method in bike sizing, Just remmeber you want the proper handlebar reach when in drops, but WITHOUT a massive stem size that hurts the bike handling so you ride in a wavy path, really self defeating in efficiency eh?


----------



## bikeman68 (Feb 10, 2009)

*seat height*



Lelandjt said:


> What makes you think I'd think they are unique? I just wanted to know cuz it might give a better idea of femur length than their height does. I just measured my saddle height for the first time and I'm curious which pros have a similar body type to mine. With a saddle that has some cushion and flex it's 85cm. With another saddle that is very firm it's 84.
> I use 175mm cranks with Shimano pedals and shoes but I was hoping these things would be constant enough to be able to compare.


 as an experienced road cyclist, I get the idea you have cranks 1 size longer than average, and that 1cm seat height variation is alot even with 2 different seats, Maybe you might want to try 172.5 if you pedal squares or bounce in saddle? Height is critical too for ideal comfort and spin,so get it to ideal setting, also the setback is often overlooked in that critical knee over pedal setting, I should have a bike fit camp


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

with a longer femur is it really better leverage though? the muscles are connected to the bones at roughly the same length along the leg regardless of how long the leg is. tall people arent going to be stronger just because theyre taller infact it seems the opposite is the case when it comes to powerlifters:
"Generally speaking, any powerlifter with a short stature will have a mechanical advantage over a taller lifter "
"A short torso and femur provide a mechanical advantage for the Squat. "
Perfect Body for Powerlifting - Temple of IronTemple of Iron (temple-of-iron.com)


----------

