# Efficient Peddling Question



## Norcal_Mike (Sep 25, 2010)

*Efficient Pedaling Question*

I am trying to improve my peddling form with hopes of being more efficient for long hours on the bike. It has been suggested that you do not push down on the pedals, but rather push your toes forward or pedal like you are scraping something off your shoe.

I have been experimenting with different techniques and pushing my toes forward does seem to feel a bit better, but I don't know if this is even correct. I also don't have a good concept of what to "feel" on the up (return or recovery) stroke... do you slightly lift up?

I am looking for visual aid suggestions for more efficient pedaling. Thanks!!


----------



## V3T (May 19, 2011)

There are many different pedaling styles that exist. I found riding rollers helped me find my form.


----------



## huckleberry (Jun 26, 2005)

One simple way to become a better "peddler" is to learn how to take no for an answer and keep trying...


----------



## Norcal_Mike (Sep 25, 2010)

huckleberry said:


> One simple way to become a better "peddler" is to learn how to take no for an answer and keep trying...


Hahaha.... nice and well deserved.


----------



## wipeout (Jun 6, 2005)

On the upstroke you want to lift enough so that your other leg isn't pushing on dead weight. One thing you can try is the one leg drill - clip out and just use one leg for a few minutes, repeat with the other leg. That will give you a feel for a more optimized pedal stroke.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

wipeout said:


> On the upstroke you want to lift enough so that your other leg isn't pushing on dead weight. One thing you can try is the one leg drill - clip out and just use one leg for a few minutes, repeat with the other leg. That will give you a feel for a more optimized pedal stroke.


And is pretty useless exercise unless you are inertially weighting the opposite pedal.

For the OP:
1. Make sure your bike is well set up for you - good pedaling starts with good position on the bike
2. Focus on effort and choose a gear that feels good
3. Do 1 & 2, ride lots and the pedaling action will take care of itself

Here's an item on different pedaling technique:
http://www.stevehoggbikefitting.com/blog/2011/05/pedalling-technique-what-is-best/


----------



## wipeout (Jun 6, 2005)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> And is pretty useless exercise unless you are inertially weighting the opposite pedal.


Really? Every coach I know stressed one leg drills on a slight incline to learn efficient pedal stroke how to pedal in a complete circle. You are the first I've heard say otherwise.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

wipeout said:


> Really? Every coach I know stressed one leg drills on a slight incline to learn efficient pedal stroke how to pedal in a complete circle. You are the first I've heard say otherwise.


Perhaps because I don't base my coaching on myth and folklore, but evidence and sound principles.

Single legged pedaling, without the opposing pedal being intertially weighted, makes you good at single legged pedaling. Pedaling in "circles" making you better is a myth. It's all about the downstroke.


----------



## Cableguy (Jun 6, 2010)

I used to do a lot of single leg drills, I'm still not sure if they were more beneficial than regular training which is why I stopped doing them. Like Alex said, because there is no force on the opposite pedal pushing down while you're starting to come up with your clipped in leg, your clipped in leg needs to pull up more to compensate and apply force more evenly throughout the entire pedal stroke. So it would seem you're effectively training your legs to pedal non-optimally. 

However, there could be an advantage with one leg training in that because only one leg is active, your body can supply more oxygen to that individual clipped in leg allowing it to work more. Perhaps this would allow your leg muscles to get stronger faster?


----------



## wipeout (Jun 6, 2005)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> Perhaps because I don't base my coaching on myth and folklore, but evidence and sound principles.
> 
> Single legged pedaling, without the opposing pedal being intertially weighted, makes you good at single legged pedaling. Pedaling in "circles" making you better is a myth. It's all about the downstroke.


I guess we agree to disagree.

I sure would like to see any scientific data supporting your claim because most other elite coaches highly recommend one leg drills, such as Joe Friel who I assume knows what he is doing:

http://www.trainingbible.com/joesblog/2009/12/pedaling-drills.html


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

wipeout said:


> I guess we agree to disagree.
> 
> I sure would like to see any scientific data supporting your claim because most other elite coaches highly recommend one leg drills, such as Joe Friel who I assume knows what he is doing:
> 
> https://www.trainingbible.com/joesblog/2009/12/pedaling-drills.html


Try the following references:

Coyle et al., 1991 Physiological and biomechanical factors associated with elite cycling performance
Korff et al., 2007 Pedaling technique and efficiency 
Martin et al., 2001 Learning to produce max power

Coyle's paper demonstrates that the more powerful endurance cyclists (time trial) had a greater peak down force relative to overall pedal forces. They were the least "circular" in force application. In addition, they also demonstrated, on average, some negative torque on the upstroke (i.e. they don't pull up), yet this was more effective and efficient. Here's the summary data in a chart from Coyle study:










Group 1 are the elite national level riders, Group 2 are state level riders.

Tha nature of pedal forces as measured in the Coyle research were also replicated in the data by Kautz. Typically, tangential pedal forces look like this when charted:










Korff's paper showed that pedaling actions that involved more "pulling up" was significant less efficient and less effective. Actions that emphasised "circular" style was also less efficient than regular preferred/natural pedaling technique, but not as bad as when the emphasis was a focus on the pull up. The data suggests that the muscles that flex the leg are inherently less efficient than those which extend it.

Both demonstrate that the upstroke negative torque is mostly just due to gravity and is mostly balanced by the weight of the other leg (hence why such drills, if done, should be done with the non drive side pedal inertially weighted).

Martin's paper demonstrated that it only takes 3 days practice (with a total of less than 40 seconds of effort) to learn the technique required to produce maximum power.

Ironically, I appear in a item with Joe Friel in Pez Cycling News today about training zones.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

*One more.*

• P. Cavanagh, D. Sanderson. _The Biomechanics of Cycling: Studies of the Pedaling Mechanics of Elite Pursuit Riders._

Often-cited bedrock study which established the fact that elite cyclist don't pedal as everyone thought they did, or should. Well worth reading and nicely illustrated with clock diagrams and graphs clearly showing effective forces, unused forces and negative forces.


----------



## wipeout (Jun 6, 2005)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> Try the following references:
> 
> Coyle et al., 1991 Physiological and biomechanical factors associated with elite cycling performance
> Korff et al., 2007 Pedaling technique and efficiency
> ...


Awesome, thanks! :thumbsup:


----------



## AZPOWERHOUSE (Dec 16, 2008)

Alex-

Out of Curiosity do you have any graphs that show both left and right foot power (on the same graph) for one complete spin? Thanks.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

AZPOWERHOUSE said:


> Alex-
> 
> Out of Curiosity do you have any graphs that show both left and right foot power (on the same graph) for one complete spin? Thanks.


No. Well not that I can recall. You need force measurement pedals for that as used in the studies above. Jim Martin would be the go to guy for this.

Beware relying on devices that purport to do this (e.g. Computrainer, Wattbike) as they are not measuring the forces independently (IOW - the cranks are connected).

You can also get an SRM power meter set up to do same with it's not very well know torque analysis option - but again the cranks are connected so it's not a true representation of each foot in isolation.


As for other information on this, there is also an excellent chapter in Professor Asker Jeukendrup's book, High Performance Cycling, which goes over the biomechanics of pedaling and explains using physical first principles the folly of "circular pedaling". I forget exactly which chapter right now - my books are at home.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

AZPOWERHOUSE said:


> Out of Curiosity do you have any graphs that show both left and right foot power (on the same graph) for one complete spin? Thanks.


No _power_ curves, so not exactly what you asked for. But here's the Cavanagh-Sanderson diagram of effective horizontal _force_ at the rear wheel generated by an elite rider through one crank revolution at 100 rpm and about 400 watts.

It's interesting to note that the rider does not feel this fluctuation and, in most cases, even thinks that the force he exerts at the pedal is steady. The reason for this mistaken assumption is that forces at the pedal are only partly effective. In other words, only a percentage of the force applied to the pedal actually results in forward propulsion. When resisting forces are large (like climbing a steep hill), most riders do begin to feel this fluctuation.

The effective force depicted by the heavy black line is the horizontal force measured at the end of a vertical lever constituted by the radius of the wheel—where the rubber meets the road, so to speak. Most people are amazed how small it actually is (8 - 45 newtons = 2 - 10 lb) But if you ever had a bike on the stand and held the rear wheel against pressure on the pedal, you know how easy it is to keep the wheel from rotating, even against significant pedal pressure.

Just as a footnote: to really appreciate any of this theorizing, it's good to have an understanding of the fundamental differences between force (newton), torque (newton meter), power (watt) and human muscular strength. In popular cycling literature, these terms are merrily interchanged, often leading to massive confusion. In particular, the term "power" is misused a lot for "strength" and "force."


----------



## AZPOWERHOUSE (Dec 16, 2008)

Wim - Thanks, that is what I was looking for.

So at the 90 and 270 degrees, the total horizontal force is the sum of the absolute values of each leg so it is approximately 57N ? or am I wrong because I am not understanding why they are showing the sum instead of the absolute value sum? Or are the legs working against each other?


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

AZPOWERHOUSE said:


> Or are the legs working against each other?


Yes, you understand it correctly. Forces < 0 are a negative forces, which, somewhat simplified, means that they are directed against forward propulsion. One example would be a downward force on the upstroke pedal. It does help to minimize these negative forces, but that does not mean "pulling up" in the sense of generating an actual upward force.

What makes this even more complex than it seems are forces at the pedal. Resultant crank force is always the product out of radial force and tangential force. Radial force wants to lengthen the crank, tangential force moves the crank around. The theory of "round pedaling" is that all the force acting on the crank is (or at least should be) tangential force, but that's a biomechanical impossibility. Crude sketch attached, but you get the idea.

But really, you have to see all this vectoring and curve plotting in perspective. It's hardly ever mentioned, but a rider has very little time to bring forces to bear on the pedal. For example, at a cadence of 90, it takes 0.66 seconds to complete one crank revolution. Since there's only about a 90-degree quadrant in which you can bring a lot of effective force onto the pedals, you're left with 0.66 divided by 4 = 0.16 seconds per leg in which to do your thing. So, a simple "stomp hard and stomp quick" would not be such a bad mantra if you want to win races.


----------



## velocanman (Jul 15, 2011)

Definitely need to confirm your position is good. 

The above discussion is interesting from a power perspective. I still feel that good leg extension and smooth pedaling is more efficient over the long rides.

Check out my book "Watch Your Line" available on Amazon. It covers bike fit, pedaling efficiency, smooth form, and skill drills.


----------



## AZPOWERHOUSE (Dec 16, 2008)

Wim, Thanks for the info.


----------



## onlineflyer (Aug 8, 2005)

Get a fixie and ride it on the road and ride it on rollers. You'll be amazed at the results.


----------



## wipeout (Jun 6, 2005)

onlineflyer said:


> Get a fixie and ride it on the road and ride it on rollers. You'll be amazed at the results.


I don't know about that - I rode fixie exclusively for many months and the first few days on a geared bike, my pedal stroke was horrid, very choppy. About the only thing fixed did for me was help me learn how to spin fast.


----------



## Scott D (Oct 10, 2010)

> stomp hard and stomp quick" would not be such a bad mantra if you want to win races


 Something does not seem right, Maybe this holds true for elite athletes who are at a very high outputs and they already have very smooth pedal strokes. but, it must be more efficient to spread the workload to more muscles for distance especially at the power levels lower category racers are at. Otherwise platform pedals could be more efficient than clipless and that certainly is not the case.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Scott D said:


> it must be more efficient to spread the workload to more muscles for distance especially at the power levels lower category racers are at. Otherwise platform pedals could be more efficient than clipless and that certainly is not the case.


Nope. More muscles doesn't necessarily mean more efficient, especially if the muscles introduced are themselves inherently less efficient to start with.

The reason clipless help is making sure we remain firmly in the same place on the pedal so we can push down hard with confidence. But one can put out same power on flat beds as they do with clipless.


----------



## Scott D (Oct 10, 2010)

More on the subject here http://bikeandbody.blogspot.com/2011/05/clipless-versus-platform-pedals.html


----------



## F.P. (Jul 26, 2005)

rollers... and be like Jens, "shut up legs"....


----------



## seanharvey (Jul 8, 2011)

I can't tell you what the text book answer is but I'll tell you what works for me. Spinning, not pressing here or lifting there. I know I'm doing it right because my energy output is less (as in much less leg stress) and my speed goes up. When I press and pull, it's a chore.

Sitting here thinking about it...I do this, think of a clock. From about 8-10 I'm pulling up; 10-1 is pushing forward; 2-4 is pushing down; and pulling back from 4-7. Those are just general figures but it's the best I can think of.

Basically I try to keep the same force on the crank the same all the way around...just how it's delivered changes.


----------



## Gimme Shoulder (Feb 10, 2004)

For me it's hard to get that stroke you're looking for by thinking directly "don't push", "scrape your shoes", "peddal circles", etc. Try this...think of your peddals as raw eggs that you can't break, while at the same time holding or increasing your cadence. Your brain can wrap itself around this concept a little easier, and your legs just do what they're supposed to do without you having to focus on them. You'll be surprised at the muscles you feel come into play.


----------



## bradXism (May 10, 2011)

Loved,loved, loved the tech info, However I still believe get on your bike and ride.
Old, Old school and not putting my money into the latest coolest thing 
Sitting in my bike seat I am still so damn pretty. (Its why I wear bike shorts anyway I started distance with running and was obsessed with form. Then transferred that obsession to cycling. The old racers forced me onto a fixed gear with a 42X19. Which for my age and strength was a pretty fast spin most of the time. Efficiency came with it. I don't know what the philosophy or coolest training is now.
I would go with the previous recommendation of proper position, easier gear and spin faster. If you are brand new to the sport(I prefer lifestyle) go much easier than comfortable. When I am dying, my body so wants to pedal a square. In order to stay pretty, which is more important than being fast, I concentrate on getting my foot 'Over the top'. Not a huge pull put past that dead spot. Investment wise I wouldn't spend on anything other than a set of rollers. The ones with a fan for resistance will give off a noise you can listen to and tell when you are getting sloppy, if you aren't that efficient at all, you are going to fall off. The second benefit is that you can use it for the intended purpose for staying fit in the winter.

Don't imitate someone else because they are faster than you. They might just be stronger and can overcome their crappy stroke with power..for a little while. There was this TDF level guy in the early 80's, Sean Kelly who seemed to have it all wrong and he was still there anyways..go figure.


----------



## new2rd (Aug 8, 2010)

To keep it simple, a smooth pedal stroke would allow 110 RPM's or higher without bouncing. I tried the one leg method and about the only thing I learned was how much my other leg should be pushing on the downstroke... it feels ridiculous to pull up without having any weight on the other pedal. I can tell if I'm spinning properly by loosening my shoes. If my feet slide forward, down, back, and up I know that my motion is smooth and circular. I still feel that most of the effort and power comes from the downstroke. 

What do you all think of this?


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

new2rd said:


> What do you all think of this?


I think it's called "flogging a dead horse".

Get a good really good bike fit, focus on power (effort) level and choose a gear that feels good.


----------



## heliski (May 16, 2009)

Wow, loving this thread. Reminds me of engineering....in a good way. 

But it started with a question about the angle of the pedal on the down stroke, right?
Seems like it was toes down vs. toes up / scraping something off your shoe. 

During an LBS fitting the shop owner said I was pointing my toes, when I should be 'scraping'.

Input appreciated.
tj


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

heliski said:


> Wow, loving this thread. Reminds me of engineering....in a good way.
> 
> But it started with a question about the angle of the pedal on the down stroke, right?
> Seems like it was toes down vs. toes up / scraping something off your shoe.
> ...


Get a better bike fitter.

PEDALLING TECHNIQUE – Which is best? » Bike Fit » Feet » Steve Hogg's Bike Fitting Website


----------



## heliski (May 16, 2009)

Thanks, Alex. That article is PERFECT

Next question: best bike fitter in the East Bay?
tj
HELISKI.com


----------



## Gervase (Aug 22, 2009)

Well, I don't care about scientific studies saying using the whole leg won't help...because I have been focusing on "turning" the pedals, just like cadel Evans. It works for me. I hopped on some rollers having never ridden them before & surprised myself & friend because my pedaling technique was good. 
Definitely uses all the leg pulling pushing all the way around. .66 of a second " who cares" it becomes subconscious & u just do it. 
I think if u just focus on pushing the back of the leg will be lazy. I have practiced so much on "turning" that I know i am still doing it at mid 90's rpm.,
where it def helps is on a steep hill where cadence has to drop, just push...& someone "turning" those pedals has a more efficient stroke that balances muscle loading so that I can clear lactate better from my legs & obviously using my more powerfull glut & hamys. 
Cadel Evans even has a special bike made that he uses at the beginning of his season just to develop this turning stroke more, good for him he does not take notice of scientific experts!


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Gervase said:


> Well, I don't care about scientific studies saying using the whole leg won't help...because I have been focusing on "turning" the pedals, just like cadel Evans. It works for me. I hopped on some rollers having never ridden them before & surprised myself & friend because my pedaling technique was good.
> Definitely uses all the leg pulling pushing all the way around. .66 of a second " who cares" it becomes subconscious & u just do it.
> I think if u just focus on pushing the back of the leg will be lazy. I have practiced so much on "turning" that I know i am still doing it at mid 90's rpm.,
> where it def helps is on a steep hill where cadence has to drop, just push...& someone "turning" those pedals has a more efficient stroke that balances muscle loading so that I can clear lactate better from my legs & obviously using my more powerfull glut & hamys.
> Cadel Evans even has a special bike made that he uses at the beginning of his season just to develop this turning stroke more, good for him he does not take notice of scientific experts!


What you think/feel is happening when you pedal and what actually happens are two different things.

Cadel Evans is quite aware of much of the sports science and understands its application quite well.


----------



## Gervase (Aug 22, 2009)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> What you think/feel is happening when you pedal and what actually happens are two different things.
> 
> Cadel Evans is quite aware of much of the sports science and understands its application quite well.


This is Quite Excellent.....


----------



## Gervase (Aug 22, 2009)

Ok, cadel Evans book: "close to flying" page 173, 1/2 way down the page. He talks about the special bike he has had constructed painted gold, with this : 
" it's to force me to use my hamstrings as well as my quadriceps. The idea is this : the pedals have a free wheel, clutched axle assembly and unless you pull the crank arm up, it will not follow the natural flow and urge of the other crank arm. You can push them down, but first you have to pull them back and up and forward- or else it just hovers at the bottom of the pedaling arc. It took me ages to perfect"
He has an unusual muscle bulging from the back of his knee that physiotherapists are intrigue with. This has developed from his pedaling style. 
So "TURN those pedals don't just push them or your wasting all the power you have in the back of your leg, start now cause believe me it takes like cadel says "AGES" to develop


----------



## garryc (Sep 27, 2011)

*Just ride more...*



Norcal_Mike said:


> I am trying to improve my peddling form with hopes of being more efficient for long hours on the bike. It has been suggested that you do not push down on the pedals, but rather push your toes forward or pedal like you are scraping something off your shoe.
> 
> I have been experimenting with different techniques and pushing my toes forward does seem to feel a bit better, but I don't know if this is even correct. I also don't have a good concept of what to "feel" on the up (return or recovery) stroke... do you slightly lift up?
> 
> I am looking for visual aid suggestions for more efficient pedaling. Thanks!!


Just ride more and try to keep your cadence up above 90 rpm.


----------



## SunnyinCO (Oct 26, 2010)

I got a coach for the 1st time last year and he had me do some, not a ton, of 1 leg drills. I started with 1 set for 30 sec, working up to 10 for 1 min over the course of a ride. Not sure why but these helped me in two ways:
1. Relieved my lower back pain, probably because of #2
2. Strengthened my hip flexors. These have been tight and weak since I was born

Definitely helped me endurance race better, at least my intuition.


----------



## Gervase (Aug 22, 2009)

this is the "total" leg working, with all the leg working, it's sharing all the work so lactate clears better, more mitochondria are recruited and develop, increases the amount of blood vessels and flow to the muscles. 
You would not run just using your quads, you hamstrings also pull your leg back, and it's the same on the bike.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Gervase said:


> this is the "total" leg working, with all the leg working, it's sharing all the work so lactate clears better, more mitochondria are recruited and develop, increases the amount of blood vessels and flow to the muscles.
> You would not run just using your quads, you hamstrings also pull your leg back, and it's the same on the bike.


Hardly.
Cycling is not running.


----------



## Gervase (Aug 22, 2009)

The pedals/Cranks "turn", just like the grinder on an america's cup racing boat. You would not just push with your triceps to "turn" the arms of the winch, and so neither should you just use your quads. '
Full power, use all your leg, to push, and pull the crank arms all the way around. 
Think of your feet as you would your hands, so that your legs are working all the way around the circle.
I used the running analogy to get others thinking.....to consider that you only use your quads for most of the power.....is "old school".
See my post about Cadel evans.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Gervase said:


> The pedals/Cranks "turn", just like the grinder on an america's cup racing boat. You would not just push with your triceps to "turn" the arms of the winch, and so neither should you just use your quads. '
> Full power, use all your leg, to push, and pull the crank arms all the way around.
> Think of your feet as you would your hands, so that your legs are working all the way around the circle.
> I used the running analogy to get others thinking.....to consider that you only use your quads for most of the power.....is "old school".
> See my post about Cadel evans.


Cycling is not yachting.

It's not a matter of old school or new school. It's just fact that our power is delivered in the down stroke and attempts to use other muscles in an effort to apply power on other parts of the pedal stroke are pretty pointless.

Suggest you do some reading up on what actually goes on with pedal forces before continuing with this line of thought. This is an excellent summary with plenty of links:
http://www.plan2peak.com/files/32_article_JMartinCrankLengthPedalingTechnique.pdf

the pedal technique section starts from page 17.

Enjoy.


----------



## Gervase (Aug 22, 2009)

The most powerful muscles of the leg are the Glutes and Hamstrings, If it's good enough for Cadel evans to train utilizing these muscles more fully, i think the world (well most) coaches will reevaluate training methods. 
"Cycling is not yachting".....I used analogies to make it more simple to understand the concept. Being clipped in, is to allow you to use "all your leg", otherwise why bother being clipped in? it's not about just pushing, that is "old school". Being clipped in allows you to more effectively use the hamstrings glutes, assisting the quads.


----------



## Gervase (Aug 22, 2009)

Alex this was in the "plan2peak.." site that you referred me too. NOTE they refer to "pedaling circles" & Just like Cadel has said, and in the post I put, this takes along time to perfect. This is why most cyclists, rubbish the concept, it takes time, and commitment. 
Pedal technique premises
1. Elite cyclists have highly developed pedaling
technique that makes them more efficient
2. Efficient pedaling requires pedaling ”circles” or producing even torque throughout the cycle
3. Devloping the technique to produce maximal power, especially at high pedlaing rates, takes years of training


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Just because you think you are using your hamstrings to any great extent (or you think Cadel thinks that) doesn't make it so. Analogies are fine, but they should be relevant.

We are clipped in so that we can push down hard with confidence and know the foot won't slip from the pedal and is in the exact same place each time. Particularly helpful when sprinting or accelerating hard, or when changing position on the bike (e.g. sitting to standing)

Have you read the material yet or are you going to continue with a belief based approach to cycling dynamics?


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Gervase said:


> Alex this was in the "plan2peak.." site that you referred me too. NOTE they refer to "pedaling circles" & Just like Cadel has said, and in the post I put, this takes along time to perfect. This is why most cyclists, rubbish the concept, it takes time, and commitment.
> Pedal technique premises
> 1. Elite cyclists have highly developed pedaling
> technique that makes them more efficient
> ...


yes - and the document then goes on to show why each of those premises are false.


----------



## Gervase (Aug 22, 2009)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> Just because you think you are using your hamstrings to any great extent (or you think Cadel thinks that) doesn't make it so, Sure but it doesn't mean that it doesn't either "just because you think so". Analogies are fine, you did not think they were fine before, ie "cycling is not running", "cycling is not yachting" why are you being conscillatory about that now? but they should be relevant.
> 
> We are clipped in so that we can push down hard with confidence and know the foot won't slip from the pedal and is in the exact same place each time. Particularly helpful when sprinting or accelerating hard, or when changing position on the bike (e.g. sitting to standing) sure, also helps to pull those pedals around the whole of the circle
> 
> Have you read the material yet or are you going to continue with a belief based approach to cycling dynamics?


 Yes, I read that study at least a year or two ago. From memory they could not conclude which crank length was best, for whom ever...yet they can deduce that pulling up does not make much difference. Yes I will continue with my "belief based" approach to cycling dynamics, becasue that is what we all do. We look at the evidence and form a belief about what we are doing, or how we approach things. If you were less sarcastic about what you have said to me, you would have more credibiitly. Rubbishing someones opinion, because they disagree with you, or your "beliefs" really does not further the argument. I suspect you and i will disagree about cycling dynamics. My suggestion to you, would be to watch the tour de france riders, especialy when putting in some real power in particular on climbs. You will notice that the top riders bodies "snake" this is because that are using their core muscles HARD as they use all their leg, pushing, and pulling all the way around. They are not bobbing up and down, with each push. it's pretty obvious, when you really observe their riding style. Evans in the TT this year was really doing it.
I think though, I can say no more, it is as you say...belief.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

My apologies for presenting some actual evidence and if you find that to be sarcastic. It's not intended that way. My credibility (or yours) isn't the issue. Debate the merits of the argument and the evidence.

Provide us with some pedal force data from professionals to demonstrate what you are saying. It would be interesting to see data that runs counter to the pedal force analysis performed on professional riders to date. This is a classic case of what people intuitively think is going on, isn't. But don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.

If you want to pursue anecdotes (i.e. Cadel - for whom I assume you don't actually have any pedal force data to back up your claim), then how come after having a lower leg amputation 4 years ago and now riding with a cycling prosthetic (in which it is impossible to do anything other than push down when I pedal), I have managed to equal or better my previous best sustainable power outputs?


----------



## Gervase (Aug 22, 2009)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> My apologies for presenting some actual evidence and if you find that to be sarcastic. It's not intended that wayYou sure about that? just re-read that first sentence.. My credibility (or yours) isn't the issue. Debate the merits of the argument and the evidence.
> 
> Provide us with some pedal force data from professionals to demonstrate what you are saying. It would be interesting to see data that runs counter to the pedal force analysis performed on professional riders to date. This is a classic case of what people intuitively think is going on, isn't. But don't let the facts get in the way of a good storyMore sarcasm!.
> 
> If you want to pursue anecdotes (i.e. Cadel - for whom I assume you don't actually have any pedal force data to back up your claim), If I was cadel I would keep it secret too, but I stated what he wrote in his book about the special bike he has, which he uses at the beginning of the season, designed specifically to develop the whole of his leg. Notable is an unusual muscle that bulges from behind his knee, becasue of the "pulling up" while on his bike. then how come after having a lower leg amputation 4 years ago and now riding with a cycling prosthetic (in which it is impossible to do anything other than push down when I pedal), I have managed to equal or better my previous best sustainable power outputs?


 How is it impossible? You only lost the lower part of your leg, this means you don't have a calf muscle, but presumably you still have hamstrings, glutes attached in the normal place? Your glutes pull you leg down....you talk about data...how is it possible to develop more power....what about determination? or any other attributes which also can not be quantified or measured? to say that some one who intuitively feels that a certain way of riding must be wrong because the facts don't support it.....well are you not an example of someone who has lost part of a leg, and the facts would suggest that a prosthetic rider can not ride faster than an ably endowed athelete, yet you can? factually that does not make sense does it.


----------



## Gervase (Aug 22, 2009)

Just one thing to consider. When you come in from a really hard ride/race, your legs are sore. in my case Quads, glutes and hamy's. if you have never experience soreness in the glutes or hamstrings, I would be surprised, but if you ask your self this question "have I", then you have to ask yourself "why?". I would suggest that it's because those muscles are working too, and working hard. Now my intuition tells me, they are sore, because of the hard work they are doing. NO scientist is going to convince me with study that says you don't use these muscles much.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Gervase said:


> How is it impossible? You only lost the lower part of your leg, this means you don't have a calf muscle, but presumably you still have hamstrings, glutes attached in the normal place? Your glutes pull you leg down....you talk about data...how is it possible to develop more power....what about determination? or any other attributes which also can not be quantified or measured? to say that some one who intuitively feels that a certain way of riding must be wrong because the facts don't support it.....well are you not an example of someone who has lost part of a leg, and the facts would suggest that a prosthetic rider can not ride faster than an ably endowed athelete, yet you can? factually that does not make sense does it.


I know, weird isn't it?

Alex's Cycle Blog: Mean Maximal Power: A Unique Comparison

or this chart:










I can't really pull up much as attempts to do more tend to pull the prosthetic leg off my stump. Just as well one needs do no more than unweighting their leg.


----------



## Gervase (Aug 22, 2009)

"Belief: something one accepts as*
True or real, a firmly held opinion or conviction"*

Merry Xmas Alex*


----------



## velocanman (Jul 15, 2011)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> Try the following references:
> 
> Coyle et al., 1991 Physiological and biomechanical factors associated with elite cycling performance
> Korff et al., 2007 Pedaling technique and efficiency
> ...


Can you recommend a good text that covers the biomechanics and physics of cycling? I am a mechanical engineer and enjoy this analysis. Thanks...


----------



## bmxhacksaw (Mar 26, 2008)

For the record - I have a really hard time thinking about "pulling up", "scraping off", "thinking circles", etc. in the half second it takes to spin the cranks around. My coach has me doing one leg drills but I'm not too keen on them.


----------



## Chris-X (Aug 4, 2011)

*Remind me again*



Gervase said:


> "Belief: something one accepts as*
> True or real, a firmly held opinion or conviction"*
> 
> Merry Xmas Alex*


what Evens says? I know Floyd is disgraced and all, but I subscribe to his, 'if you want to go faster, pedal harder.' whatever that means technically....


----------



## Gervase (Aug 22, 2009)

Yes..it is hard, but once you do it it becomes stored in our subconcious and you do it with out thinking about it, just like someone learning karate. It is hard to block correctly those punches, but once you have done it thousands of times, it just happens, the subconcious takes over and you react. Or standing on a skateboard for the first time it seems ludicrously dangerous...
Persevere it is well worth training the mind and body.


----------

