# one leg drills



## DaveG (Feb 4, 2004)

This winter I have been doing TrainerRoad base training regimen. It has some workouts that do isolated leg drills. I have to say I feel a bit silly doing these. Is there research that shows value in doing this?


----------



## trevorderuise (May 28, 2014)

DaveG said:


> This winter I have been doing TrainerRoad base training regimen. It has some workouts that do isolated leg drills. I have to say I feel a bit silly doing these. Is there research that shows value in doing this?


From my own personal experience, I've seen tremendous improvement in my pedaling technique since I started doing these several years ago. They may seem silly, but learning to pick your foot up from the bottom of your stroke and getting the legs to move in fluid circles rather than just hammering is an incredibly easy way to obtain some "free power" that so many cyclists ignore by not focusing on the fundamentals like this. 

I don't know of any studies off the top of my head, but Coach Chad (our Level 1 USAC coach who designs all of our workouts and training plans) definitely would not have you doing them if he hadn't found some concrete evidence of their effectiveness. If you'd like, feel free to shoot me a PM with your email and I can connect you with him to discuss further. He'd be glad to provide an explanation if you're still feeling weary. 

-Trevor from TrainerRoad


----------



## Donn12 (Apr 10, 2012)

One legged drills are crucial to improving your pedal stroke. They have made me much smoother and I now bounce less at higher cadences.


----------



## kbiker3111 (Nov 7, 2006)

DaveG said:


> This winter I have been doing TrainerRoad base training regimen. It has some workouts that do isolated leg drills. I have to say I feel a bit silly doing these. Is there research that shows value in doing this?


There is virtually no research that shows value to one leg drills. Certainly none showing someone with a limited schedule of riding will see the most possible gains from them. 

Two key reasons. 
-There is very little evidence that one pedaling style makes a rider stronger than another pedaling style. The easiest and largest gains are made in aerobic fitness, simply being able to ride your bike harder, for longer. Therefor you can make all the gains in the world with a more efficient pedal stroke but you won't be much faster.
-One leg drills severely limit how hard you can ride (if you have a powermeter this becomes immediately obvious). If your FTP is normally 200 watts, you'll be lucky to sustain 100 watts for very long with one leg (especially at first). While you're doing those one leg drills you aren't riding very hard and not creating as much of a training load.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

I suggest using as many legs as you have available to train with.

Isolated leg drills only make sense if:
- you are training for one-legged events
- and if not then you do so with a counterweight on non-drive crank, and in general as a way to train a little while one leg/foot is injured. 

Without a counterweight, the pedalling action is significantly removed from regular pedalling it's really not all that cycling specific anymore.

This is the sort of thing I mean:

View attachment 303878


View attachment 303879


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

DaveG said:


> I have to say I feel a bit silly doing these.


I would as well. For some years now, it's been shown conclusively that elite cyclists generate virtually all of their power on the down stroke and don't worry much about what happens during the rest of the crank circle.

One-legged drills have you generate upward force ("pull up") on the non-power stroke when seated. But studies using pedals measuring amount and direction of force have clearly shown that better competitive cyclists do not do that. These are not new studies, and I'm sort of surprised coaches still have riders pulling up on pedals.


----------



## DaveG (Feb 4, 2004)

*good discussion, thanks*

Sounds like there is some serious debate on the usefulness of this. I recall reading a similar article that most pro riders still pedal squares. I'll put most of my effort into just getting fit and another responder suggested


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

DaveG said:


> Sounds like there is some serious debate on the usefulness of this.


At the heart of this never-ending debate is the fact that having significant positive force act on the pedal throughout the entire crank circle would indeed be the perfect way to pedal.

But because human anatomy prohibit us from doing that efficiently and for more than just a few moments, it's just wishful thinking. If pulling up on the pedals would be useful, pro riders would do it. It is simply not logical to think that a pro would relinquish anything legal that could make him or her faster than a competitor.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

Every study I've ever seen shows that cyclists apply power during only ~ half of the circle. When being measured, that is typically the over the top to bottom portion. The myth of applying power around the circle has long been debunked.

That said, being clipped in allows a rider to choose where/how to apply the power, be it top to bottom (push/mas) or bottom to top (pull). The utility is not to deliver more power or power more evenly, but to redistribute the load to different muscles at different times to extend the duration to fatigue. In principle periods of pushing vs. pulling, at different times, can extend the overall time to fatigue.

FWIW, Friel and Chapple both advocate one-legged drills for improving pedaling efficiency, learning to better unweight the pedal better as it moves from bottom to top.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

ibericb said:


> FWIW, Friel and Chapple both advocate one-legged drills for improving pedaling efficiency, learning to better unweight the pedal better as it moves from bottom to top.


I don't know about those one-legged drills. But there's no doubt that unweighting the pedal as it comes up is a good thing. In one of the first pedaling studies (Cavanagh et al.) using force-measuring pedals, it was amazing to see some elite track riders actually exerting downward (negative!) force on the upward-moving pedal. Then again, they regularly won their events anyway.


----------



## mimason (Oct 7, 2006)

If you want to improve your pedal stroke get a fixed gear but just don't blow out a knee.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

In addition to Friel and Chapple, Pruitt also likes one-legged drills, along with riding rollers and riding one loose off-road surfaces to improve pedaling technique.


----------



## kbiker3111 (Nov 7, 2006)

> FWIW, Friel and Chapple both advocate one-legged drills for improving pedaling efficiency, learning to better unweight the pedal better as it moves from bottom to top.





ibericb said:


> In addition to Friel and Chapple, Pruitt also likes one-legged drills, along with riding rollers and riding one loose off-road surfaces to improve pedaling technique.


And what is that pedaling efficiency worth?


----------



## jajichan (Jul 9, 2014)

DaveG said:


> This winter I have been doing TrainerRoad base training regimen. It has some workouts that do isolated leg drills. I have to say I feel a bit silly doing these. Is there research that shows value in doing this?


Total waste of time.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

kbiker3111 said:


> And what is that pedaling efficiency worth?


Haven't a clue; haven't ever seen anyone even attempt to quantify it. If you seriously want to know I suggest you pose the question to Friel, Chappelle or Pruitt, all of whom have advocated the drills in print.


----------



## jajichan (Jul 9, 2014)

wim said:


> I don't know about those one-legged drills. But there's no doubt that unweighting the pedal as it comes up is a good thing. In one of the first pedaling studies (Cavanagh et al.) using force-measuring pedals, it was amazing to see some elite track riders actually exerting downward (negative!) force on the upward-moving pedal. Then again, they regularly won their events anyway.


This makes sense to a certain extent. 

I've found that in very short, intense efforts (namely accelerating) that I will drop my heel to the max and just try to rip upwards, both standing and sitting. But this is very short, very intense and certainly not something I could do for minutes/hours.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

as a general rule, if Friel endorses it then it's wrong....



ibericb said:


> Every study I've ever seen shows that cyclists apply power during only ~ half of the circle. When being measured, that is typically the over the top to bottom portion. The myth of applying power around the circle has long been debunked.
> 
> That said, being clipped in allows a rider to choose where/how to apply the power, be it top to bottom (push/mas) or bottom to top (pull). The utility is not to deliver more power or power more evenly, but to redistribute the load to different muscles at different times to extend the duration to fatigue. In principle periods of pushing vs. pulling, at different times, can extend the overall time to fatigue.
> 
> FWIW, Friel and Chapple both advocate one-legged drills for improving pedaling efficiency, learning to better unweight the pedal better as it moves from bottom to top.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Given this:


wim said:


> In one of the first pedaling studies (Cavanagh et al.) using force-measuring pedals, it was amazing to see some elite track riders actually exerting downward (negative!) force on the upward-moving pedal. Then again, they regularly won their events anyway.


It's also pretty normal for elite road cyclists as well, so it should come as no surprise.



wim said:


> But there's no doubt that unweighting the pedal as it comes up is a good thing.


So given that winners and elites often show this trait, how then can this be assumed to be a good thing?

Pedalling dynamics and measurement of forces and elements that contribute to them is actually pretty complex. Reducing things to even this level is glossing over much of what goes on.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

As I've previously stated, one legged drills from a pedalling technique improvement perspective is a red herring.

However there are some _potentially_ interesting training stimulus possibilities, *but only with properly counterweighted cranks that very few have or have ever used*. Used in such a manner one may find they are able to pedal harder than 1/2 of their two legged power since they are less constrained by cardiac output which may peak when needing to supply both legs.

Whether such training stimulus is beneficial or worth the hassle is another matter entirely.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> So given that winners and elites often show this trait, how then can this be assumed to be a good thing?


Because the wins occurred in spite of the negative effective ("effective" here as opposed to "unused") forces, not because of them. It can't hurt to learn how to reduce those forces. And yes, pedaling dynamics are complex--no argument here from me.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

wim said:


> Because the wins occurred in spite of the negative effective ("effective" here as opposed to "unused") forces, not because of them. It can't hurt to learn how to reduce those forces. And yes, pedaling dynamics are complex--no argument here from me.


Has it occurred to you that such negative forces might not actually hinder performance but are rather a _possible_ sign of better performing athletes?

It might seem counter intuitive, but if a model/premise (in this case say not having negative torque = better performance) doesn't fit reality (e.g. the actual trait shown by those who win bike races = some negative torque), then it's not reality that's got the problem but the model or premise.

If the premise were correct you would expect over the century+ of cycling competition winners, which is the best way of filtering out what does/does not result in superior performance, would _on average_ have developed a technique that eliminates such traits. But they haven't. Why is that?


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

wim said:


> It can't hurt to learn how to reduce those forces.


Well learning how to reduce those forces has been learned and studied. That's the easy bit. 

The problem is it hasn't led to an improvement in performance.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> Has it occurred to you that such negative forces might not actually hinder performance but are rather a _possible_ sign of better performing athletes?


It has not. But it's an interesting notion and I'll give it some serious thought.


----------



## RL7836 (Jun 17, 2014)

Some of the responses treat this as an all or nothing proposition - why?

One leg drills don't need to be done during a strong interval (as suggested by the rider who said you'd only be able to generate half your power - duh!)

As suggested in TR, the exercise is for a relatively short duration (20 sec to 1 min per leg) & is done during a low intensity section of a recovery-type ride. As your muscles develop & form improves, you can extend the time.

As Trevor noted, I've also found that these drills help keep my spinning smooth & have definitely helped to extend my max cadence.

Since there doesn't seem to be any disagreement on the *complexity* of muscle involvement during various sections of a pedaling stroke - my question would be - is there any possible downside to doing these drills? 

- they aren't taking anything away from intense parts of drills - since that is not where they're done
- they're definitely developing relatively unused muscles - as discovered by people with soreness after doing the drills
- there's at least anecdotal evidence that it can enhance pedaling smoothness & max cadence

Why all the hate for a simple exercise? ut:


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

if they develop "unused" muscles, then wouldn't the question be why are they unused (i.e., they don't contribute to normal pedaling). 

If anything, doing this at low intensity/power seems to be exactly the wrong thing to do. Many track cyclists do unilateral lifts for strength in the gym - but I've never heard of them doing unilateral pedaling exercises on the track. Seems to me you'd be better off doing what Jason Kenny suggests for improving cadence/speed: 

“If you’re looking to build leg power so that you can improve your cycling speed, you need to discover at what cadence you produce peak power. Most people hit peak power about 115-125rpm. A good training exercise is to find your peak power – that sweet spot when you feel comfortable and strong – and then train just below that cadence in a bigger gear in order to work on your strength, and just above that cadence in a smaller gear in order to work on your leg speed. That kind of training is much better for developing power than just training at massive extremes of high cadence or huge gears.”



RL7836 said:


> Some of the responses treat this as an all or nothing proposition - why?
> 
> One leg drills don't need to be done during a strong interval (as suggested by the rider who said you'd only be able to generate half your power - duh!)
> 
> ...


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

One of the reasons one leg pedaling drills come to the forefront is because noteworthy folks like Friel, Chapple, Pruitt, and dozens of others well known in print and the net recommend them. However, I've yet to see any evidence to support their effectiveness. In essence, it's based on a hypothesis of benefit that has never been proven. At best there are anecdotal accounts of improvement. The reasons are well presented, but without supporting facts.

On the other side there are notable experts who shun the idea of one leg pedaling drills, like Steve Hogg (see his reply to a question posed following one of his blog articles). Again. the arguments are well reasoned, but no facts to show that the drills either don't help or even hinder.

So choose your poison, but as best I can tell it remains untested and unproven ground either way. I guess the question is, how much training time and effort do you want to spend on unproven techniques?


----------



## BelgianHammer (Apr 10, 2012)

ibericb,

One of these days I want to get "Hogged"!! Just wish he'd come to the Old World.

I've told Steve via email that if I can ever get enough of us around here in Belgium that want to be Hogged, we are going to fly him in for a week's stay. Ply him with lots of Belgian Monk beers and Belgian chocolates too. Steve's an all-around great guy, and knowledgeable as all get out and, most importantly, flexible enough to look at everything. By the way, you want to know what the Belgians (that I know) think of one legged drills? They don't. Their idea of getting their cadence up is seeing how much faster they can get their foot speed going in heading towards the bar after a blistering group ride. And if they want more leg power, they simply decide to stand all afternoon/evening long instead of sitting while they blow curls of beer froth on your face singing off key American songs and talking about great America TV shows like Bonanza, Baywatch, Knight Rider and Days of Our Lives (don't ask, the proper extant decade at the moment doesn't mean much here....)


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

BelgianHammer said:


> ibericb,
> 
> One of these days I want to get "Hogged"!! Just wish he'd come to the Old World....
> 
> ... By the way, you want to know what the Belgians (that I know) think of one legged drills? They don't. Their idea of getting their cadence up is seeing how much faster they can get their foot speed going in heading towards the bar after a blistering group ride. And if they want more leg power, they simply decide to stand all afternoon/evening long instead of sitting while they blow curls of beer froth on your face singing off key American songs and talking about great America TV shows like Bonanza, Baywatch, Knight Rider and Days of Our Lives (don't ask, the proper extant decade at the moment doesn't mean much here....)



All sound familiar. My wife is from near Breda, and all of her family is still in the area. We have a number of very dear Belgian friends who live near the border. They still believe in training Eddy style - 200 km group ride, rain /shine/snow/sleet/whatever, 2X per week minimum, and you still do more on your own. One of them is a brewer as well.

Yeah, know all about the favored aged American songs, and TV shows too. When I visit I often have those stepped-back 30 years in time thoughts. Never quite figured that out.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

wim said:


> It has not. But it's an interesting notion and I'll give it some serious thought.


As one thought, consider that the muscles involved in "lifting" a pedal are likely to be less metabolically efficient than those that push down.

Another really important one is the need to parse out the gravitational and inertial elements from muscular ones when examining pedal forces. People are mistakenly thinking all the forces involved at the pedals are due to action of the muscles when they are not.

Some reading for thought:
http://www.me.utexas.edu/~neptune/Papers/essr30(4).pdf

In particular read the section starting on bottom of page 163 headed:
_Consequences for Pedaling Biomechanics_


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> Some reading for thought


Thanks. Just having scanned it for now, I'm amazed. I was certainly aware that gravity and inertia are part and parcel of pedaling mechanics, but Kautz and Neptune are looking at this in a whole new light, at least for me. Something that jumped out at me was their contention that eliminating the radial component of the crank force would require the recruitment of additional muscles, causing metabolic cost to increase. In my simpler terms: you can try to make your pedaling more "effective," but it's going to cost you.

I suppose I really should let go of those old Cavanagh, Sanderson, Daly et al. studies with their wonderful clock- and criterion diagrams and start reading more contemporary literature.


----------



## gus68 (Oct 19, 2010)

I like OLDs but not for efficiency. I use OLDs on my trainer during zone 1 warm ups. 1x8 or some variety. It just breaks up the tedium of straight zone one. It also works your core more than two legs as you have to use your core to during the pull-up phase. 

my $.02


----------



## ziscwg (Apr 19, 2010)

I improved my pedal stroke with rollers not one leggy drills.


----------



## Blue CheeseHead (Jul 14, 2008)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> *only with properly counterweighted cranks *


Ummm, weight is a force. Given the force on a pedal varies through the rotation how would one pick that "proper" counterweight?

The point of the one legged drill is to unweight the non power leg such that the downward force (weight) = 0.


----------



## jmorgan (Apr 13, 2012)

Blue CheeseHead said:


> Ummm, weight is a force. Given the force on a pedal varies through the rotation how would one pick that "proper" counterweight?
> 
> The point of the one legged drill is to unweight the non power leg such that the downward force (weight) = 0.


But the point of "one legged" drills is to use negative force (negative force does not equal 0 force) or pulling up with your one leg. You don't do "one legged" drills where you push down and ever so lightly bring the pedal back over, you pull up. Even if you did the ever so lightly thing trying to keep negative forces low, your leg speed would drop and would not be replicating real world riding, so whats the point? So since the ever so lightly thing is just like a normal turn of the cranks why not add your other leg and workout each one at the same time and just press down on the pedals. 

You do realize Alex probably has a better understanding of pedal dynamics than anyone on this board (he is an amputee racer and cycling coach).


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Blue CheeseHead said:


> Ummm, weight is a force.


That's right.

The mass (be it a mass attached to the pedal or your leg) pulls down with a force (weight) = mass x acceleration due to gravity. The _tangential _force applied to the crank arm will naturally vary depending on the angle of the crank arm, and since that moves in a circular arc, the tangential force will vary in a sinusoidal manner.



Blue CheeseHead said:


> Given the force on a pedal varies through the rotation how would one pick that "proper" counterweight?


Refer to pics in my earlier post:
one leg drills

Around 10-11kg is about right although it might be a little less less for a light rider, maybe a little more for a large rider. You simply start with about that much and adjust so that it feels about right.

It needs to reasonably replicate the approximate mass/inertia of a leg moving up and down.



Blue CheeseHead said:


> The point of the one legged drill is to unweight the non power leg such that the downward force (weight) = 0.


That may well be what you think the point of them are, but if there is no weight on the opposite pedal, then you are having to do much more than if both legs are in place. You are having to lift the leg up, and you have also removed almost half of the rotating mass of the crank/leg system. 

When you are riding with both legs, the weight of one leg going down all but balances out the weight of the other leg coming up. There is also more rotating mass of the crank/leg system.

Being single legged with no counterweight means that normal gravitational balance is lost, and so work is required to lift the single leg each stroke and it also removes half the rotating mass of the pedal/crank/leg system. That's a completely unnatural pedalling action and is no longer practising bicycling but rather it's practising becoming good at single legged cycling. They are not the same motor action, and research into this shows us that there is little if any transference of such different motor skill, and that pedalling dynamics revert to "normal" when you revert to two legged cycling.

By adding a counterweight it helps to maintain the inertial load as well as provide the natural gravitational balance of two legs.

It's use is primarily for when injury means two legged riding isn't possible.

The best drills for pedalling "technique" are racing and riding under pressure.


----------



## marquinhos (Nov 22, 2007)

Hi Alex, 

Thanks for the information shared. The attachments aren't working for me, and I'm looking for the solution you describe of 10-11kg of weight attached to the pedal/crank arm. 

Could you please share your thoughts on the best way to accomplish that? I'm recovering from a knee injury and can only cycle with my left/non-driveside leg...

Thanks much!!


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

marquinhos said:


> Hi Alex,
> 
> Thanks for the information shared. The attachments aren't working for me, and I'm looking for the solution you describe of 10-11kg of weight attached to the pedal/crank arm.
> 
> ...


Try these:

https://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd226/ASimmons/IMG_0316.jpg

https://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd226/ASimmons/IMG_0317.jpg

https://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd226/ASimmons/IMG_0275_zps9d0e3dea.jpg

It's tricky as you need a secure way of doing it. I use SLAM pedals which are built for the purpose but I don't know if you can buy them any more. I mostly use them for power meter calibrations.

The other hassle is where to put your non-drive leg. It gets a bit awkward/uncomfortable, and also you won't be sitting on saddle quite the same.


----------



## marquinhos (Nov 22, 2007)

Thanks much. Took a little bit of thinking, but I came up with this:





















I sacrificed an old pedal for the axle, used regular 1" iron plates, some plastic sleeves to increase the diameter of the axle and some washers to help keep things in place. The pedal axle has a 5/16 thread at the end so I could use a nut to tighten everything in place.

Will test it in a few minutes, seems like it will work quite well. 



Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> Try these:
> 
> https://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd226/ASimmons/IMG_0316.jpg
> 
> ...


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

marquinhos said:


> Thanks much. Took a little bit of thinking, but I came up with this:
> 
> I sacrificed an old pedal for the axle, used regular 1" iron plates, some plastic sleeves to increase the diameter of the axle and some washers to help keep things in place. The pedal axle has a 5/16 thread at the end so I could use a nut to tighten everything in place.
> 
> Will test it in a few minutes, seems like it will work quite well.


Nice - will be interested to hear how you got on. It's still a little different, and I found having to rest other leg somewhere was awkward.

Need enough floor clearance too!


----------



## marquinhos (Nov 22, 2007)

Very good indeed. The motion feels much more natural. Yesterday I rode 30 minutes but was a bit unsteady on my Elite In/Out trainer. Today I switched to a Kurt Kinetic and the solid platform (along with firm trainer roller/tire interface) made everything much smoother. 

I got 60 minutes of riding at 165watts which would have been very difficult without the counterweight. My average heart rate was 150bpm which would usually yield a solid endurance pace and 250-260watts with both legs working. Either way, I'm thrilled I can ride my bike and get decent workouts in. 

I had a minor issue with my adductor (I think...) on my working leg getting tight/sore afterwards, but nothing alarming. Probably something to deal with my injured leg sitting straight off to the side as to be far enough from the moving weights. 

At any rate, great success!! Thanks again for the advice.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

marquinhos said:


> Very good indeed. The motion feels much more natural. Yesterday I rode 30 minutes but was a bit unsteady on my Elite In/Out trainer. Today I switched to a Kurt Kinetic and the solid platform (along with firm trainer roller/tire interface) made everything much smoother.
> 
> I got 60 minutes of riding at 165watts which would have been very difficult without the counterweight. My average heart rate was 150bpm which would usually yield a solid endurance pace and 250-260watts with both legs working. Either way, I'm thrilled I can ride my bike and get decent workouts in.
> 
> ...


nice work.

60-minutes to start with! I'm not surprised you had a niggle. In general I'd suggest starting with shorter efforts and building up 

And interesting that you were able to sustain more than half of your expected 2-legged power. This is what I mean about the CV system being available to supply one-leg and not two in this earlier post:
one leg drills

I'd be pretty surprised if anyone could sustain non-counterweighted single leg pedalling for such a duration. They certainly wouldn't be able to sustain it at the same power level. Other than perhaps those trained that way, e.g. amputee cyclists.


----------



## BikeLayne (Apr 4, 2014)

I probably am not going to do one leg drills myself but I did recently buy a set of rollers. If you want to ride the rollers then you are in for some changes in how you pedal. Anyway good or bad I am going for it and I am willing to change.


----------

