pealling push up push down

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

What I mean is you can concentrate on two different objectives at the same because for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction Say what?

and in the case of unweighting it's positive and gives an increase in power to the upper pedal, where pulling up or circular pedalling is concerned this reaction gives negative results with a reduction in downward power as an attempt is made by the muscles to balance the power input of both legs. Ok, you've lost me.

I also believe there is concentration and total concentration. Your understanding of unweighting is also different to mine, by unweighting I mean a conscious instant removal of leg weight off the pedal and neutral action after that with leg rising as it it does when walking or running. Total concentration is the sole domain of Chuck Norris. Pity the fool that thinks otherwise.

I just want to see you attempt to ride PowerCranks for a mere 5 minutes and do what most of us do during the first attempt - which is fail miserably and do so in a really spectacular and painful manner.

As for a circular pedalling definition. it's generally understood to be attempted tangential power application at all times to the crank throughout its 360 deg. revolution.I think we best leave that one to the legend of Jacques Anquetil.

Say what?



I just want to see you attempt to ride PowerCranks for a mere 5 minutes and do what most of us do during the first attempt - which is fail miserably and do so in a really spectacular and painful manner.




And all because ???


Following the probing by Frank over the past few days and after some experimentation today on the trainer, even though I had no interest in it, I am 100% confident that I have now cracked the secret of Armstrong's fast pedalling style. While not as powerful as Anquetil's linear style, his (correct unweighting mashing) technique should be ideal for the technical areas of time trials. It gives a rider a 30 deg. earlier start to his pedal stroke and feels as if you are applying continuous power but this is due to the false impression created by that unavoidable hidden pause which I mentioned earlier. That less aerodynamic sloped back position also has a more powerful effect. Even if it's not Armstrong's style, I can guarantee it's worth learning.

I don't think he has given up the idea of pedaling in circles because he thinks he is. I think you are defining "pedaling in circles" differently than he or I do. How do you define pedaling in circles? Anyhow, the whole idea is, if he doesn't have to think about what he is doing on the PC's then, hopefully, when he returns to regular cranks, he will continue to pedal in the same style.

What you are describing as the "perfect unweighting mashing style" cannot apply to him because he was describing as conncentrating on applying power over 200º of the stroke, which would have to involve more than just the downward part of the stroke.





How do you define "pedaling in circles" ?

How do you define "pedaling in circles" ?My definition is close to yours, which was "As for a circular pedalling definition. it's generally understood to be attempted tangential power application at all times to the crank throughout its 360 deg. revolution." Except I would remove the words attempted and tengential.

So, I would say it is the application of some positive force around the entire 360º pedaling circle, or in other words, there can be no negative power at anytime around the 360º pedaling circle. While tangential power application is better, it is not required to fulfill the definition. And, the positive power can be quite small, and usually is, on the upstroke.

I disagree that your definition is "generally understood". I think most people think of "circular pedaling" as being the application of even positive force around the 360º pedal circle. This definition requires the rider to pull up substantially against the pedals on the upstroke, rather than simply fully unweighting.

While tangential power application is better, it is not required to fulfill the definition.


It is if your name is Perfection. As you are in the mood for explanations, what is your exact definition of unweighting ? Do you still believe circular is more powerful than mashing ?

It is if your name is Perfection. As you are in the mood for explanations, what is your exact definition of unweighting ? Do you still believe circular is more powerful than mashing ?Unweighting is taking the weight off the rising pedal, reducing the negative force (everyone does this to some extent when riding a bicycle). Complete unweighting is required for circular pedaling, using my definition (or, didn't you understand it). And, there is nothing incompatible with "mashing" (putting the vast majority of the effort on the downstroke) and circular pedaling. So, I see different types of circular pedaling possible. Smooth circular pedaling, mashing circular pedaling, etc.

Unweighting is taking the weight off the rising pedal, reducing the negative force (everyone does this to some extent when riding a bicycle). Complete unweighting is required for circular pedaling, using my definition (or, didn't you understand it). And, there is nothing incompatible with "mashing" (putting the vast majority of the effort on the downstroke) and circular pedaling. So, I see different types of circular pedaling possible. Smooth circular pedaling, mashing circular pedaling, etc.



Circular pedaling involves divided concentration or attention between both legs at all times, resulting in a weaker down stroke; mashing involves total concentration on a more powerful down stroke, there is no in between or hybrid style.

Circular pedaling involves divided concentration or attention between both legs at all times, resulting in a weaker down stroke; mashing involves total concentration on a more powerful down stroke, there is no in between or hybrid style.Circular pedaling, when it is done unconsciously, doesn't divide any attention and allows for the rider to concentrate on any particular aspect of the stroke they want to, including pushing down powerfully. The trick is how to get it to be to the point of being the natural, unconscious, way of pedaling. That is what the PC's accomplish, if they are used enough.

Circular pedaling, when it is done unconsciously, doesn't divide any attention and allows for the rider to concentrate on any particular aspect of the stroke they want to, including pushing down powerfully. The trick is how to get it to be to the point of being the natural, unconscious, way of pedaling. That is what the PC's accomplish, if they are used enough.



You are confusing unweighting and circular pedaling, unweighting as you know it can be done naturally but circular pedaling requires a conscious effort at all times and direction of power application is continually changing. PC's would be more of a hindrance than a help in the mashing style (normal or unweighting). PC's teach a rider the objectives of the circular style and train his muscles for that style and that is all they are capable of doing.

You are confusing unweighting and circular pedaling, unweighting as you know it can be done naturally but circular pedaling requires a conscious effort at all times and direction of power application is continually changing. PC's would be more of a hindrance than a help in the mashing style (normal or unweighting). PC's teach a rider the objectives of the circular style and train his muscles for that style and that is all they are capable of doing.If unweighting was natural then people would do it. Studies have shown that even guys who do 51 minute 25's don't unweight the pedals that much if at all.

Personally I'd like to see what the folks who do sub 47's do but that's a different discussion entirely.

I don't "think" of a circular style when I was pedalling on PC's - I concentrated on pushing hard.... as hard as I could at the rpm I was riding at. I didn't have to think about the rest of the pedal stroke as I HAD to complete the upstroke.

If I was pressed to give a description of how my pedaling had changed I'd say that my thighs (thankfully) now bore the brunt of the pain - both on the up and down stroke. If you could imagine your thighs just going up and down and the top and bottom of the pedal stroke being somewhat incidental in the grand scheme of things then you wouldn't be too far off the mark, although I do have to say that pedaling like this did allow me to focus on pushing across the top on the pedal stroke sooner.

Here's how weird I though the PC's were. An entry from the training diary

"I finished the ride feeling sore but the weirdest was still to come. An hour later I actually felt physically sick and that my legs were still moving even though I was just chilling out on the couch. Weird, very weird."

I'd spent years trying to achieve the goal of how to pedal properly yet when I was forced too it just kicked my ass, completely and utterly.

IPersonally I'd like to see what the folks who do sub 47's do but that's a different discussion entirely.There are two papers that address this issue,

Physiological and biomechanical factors associated with elite endurance cycling performance by
E. F. COYLE, M, E. FELTNER, S, A. KAUTZ, et. al. and

Pedaling technique of elite endurance cyclists, changes with increasing workload at constant cadence, Intl J of Sport Biomechanics, 7, 29-53, 1991, Kautz, Feltner, Coyle, Baylor

The first papr looks at the pedaling technique of elite cyclists and comppared it to national class cyclists. The second technique looked at the pedaling technique of elite cyclists at various work loads.

The first paper is freuently taken as haven proven that the secret to riding faster is to "just push harder". Instead, what it shows pretty convincingly is if one wants to push harder one needs a more extensive aerobic athletic background. That being said, what does it say about the back stroke? The elites pretty much unweighted on the backstroke (there was some variation) whereas the national class athletes were pulling up on the backstroke substantially. So, the elites were pedaling in circles as I describe it but the national class athletes, the lesser cyclists of the bunch were pulling up. How is one to interpret this? It is frequently interpreted wrongly. One needs to look at the second paper I listed to interpret this correctly, I believe.

In the second paper, they took elites and pushed them to failue and watched how they changed pedaling style. As the elites got close to failure an interesting thing happened, their pedaling style started to look just like the national class athletes in the study above.

It appears that unweighting is a style that the very best use all the time and that pulling up with some force on the pedals is a pedaling style that even the very elite use when they are close to failure.

(edit) We all know from other studies that it has been shown that most cyclists do not completely unweight on the upstroke, although they all partially unweight to some degree or another. It would appear that as we get better and better the better we unweight on the upstroke and as we get closer and closer to failure, we try to invoke additional muscles into the equation to delay the inevitable.

Anyhow it is all pretty interesting. These papers are 40 and 43 on the list that can be found here:

http://www.edb.utexas.edu/coyle/publications.php

There are two papers that address this issue,

Physiological and biomechanical factors associated with elite endurance cycling performance by
E. F. COYLE, M, E. FELTNER, S, A. KAUTZ, et. al. and

Pedaling technique of elite endurance cyclists, changes with increasing workload at constant cadence, Intl J of Sport Biomechanics, 7, 29-53, 1991, Kautz, Feltner, Coyle, Baylor

The first papr looks at the pedaling technique of elite cyclists and comppared it to national class cyclists. The second technique looked at the pedaling technique of elite cyclists at various work loads.

The first paper is freuently taken as haven proven that the secret to riding faster is to "just push harder". Instead, what it shows pretty convincingly is if one wants to push harder one needs a more extensive aerobic athletic background. That being said, what does it say about the back stroke? The elites pretty much unweighted on the backstroke (there was some variation) whereas the national class athletes were pulling up on the backstroke substantially. So, the elites were pedaling in circles as I describe it but the national class athletes, the lesser cyclists of the bunch were pulling up. How is one to interpret this? It is frequently interpreted wrongly. One needs to look at the second paper I listed to interpret this correctly, I believe.

In the second paper, they took elites and pushed them to failue and watched how they changed pedaling style. As the elites got close to failure an interesting thing happened, their pedaling style started to look just like the national class athletes in the study above.

It appears that unweighting is a style that the very best use all the time and that pulling up with some force on the pedals is a pedaling style that even the very elite use when they are close to failure.

(edit) We all know from other studies that it has been shown that most cyclists do not completely unweight on the upstroke, although they all partially unweight to some degree or another. It would appear that as we get better and better the better we unweight on the upstroke and as we get closer and closer to failure, we try to invoke additional muscles into the equation to delay the inevitable.

Anyhow it is all pretty interesting. These papers are 40 and 43 on the list that can be found here:

http://www.edb.utexas.edu/coyle/publications.php
From what I understand none of those riders are sub 50 minute 25 mile time trial riders. What, if anything, differed in pedaling style between those guys the likes of Abraham Olano who apparently wasn't the most gifted in the VO2 max deptartment but could ride a devistatingly fast time trial and could climb pretty good too...

From what I understand none of those riders are sub 50 minute 25 mile time trial riders. What, if anything, differed in pedaling style between those guys the likes of Abraham Olano who apparently wasn't the most gifted in the VO2 max deptartment but could ride a devistatingly fast time trial and could climb pretty good too...Reviewing the paper, I guess you are right. The best 40km time in the elite group was 51 minutes with a mean of 53.9 minutes. However, I believe the interpretation I gave as to what the papers showed though I believe to be correct.

Whether Olano's pedaling style has ever been investigated I don't know. It would be interesting to know what he actually does as he would have to be particularly efficient to be so powerful with relatively low VO2max.

If unweighting was natural then people would do it.



They do, everytime a person walks or runs he/she will unweight their leg off the ground, the clever riders include it in their pedaling. I did mention to Frank in the beginning that there was a similarity between "ankling" and powercranking, they are both an extreme version of the circular style and for those who begin to use these techniques there is also pain. In the case of ankling Sheldon Brown was the perfect example, he suffered for a month after doing 30 miles on his first test of the technique. But after much research on the ankling technique, it was found to have no advantages, but it does help in perfecting the circular style.

If I was pressed to give a description of how my pedaling had changed I'd say that my thighs (thankfully) now bore the brunt of the pain - both on the up and down stroke. If you could imagine your thighs just going up and down and the top and bottom of the pedal stroke being somewhat incidental in the grand scheme of things then you wouldn't be too far off the mark, although I do have to say that pedaling like this did allow me to focus on pushing across the top on the pedal stroke sooner.



I'd spent years trying to achieve the goal of how to pedal properly yet when I was forced too it just kicked my ass, completely and utterly.[/QUOTE]



When does your focus on pushing across the top end and the pressing down begin, using minutes past 12 o'c to describe it. Do you believe this technique which you now have will be sufficient to cover all the demands of competitive riding.

And all because ???


Following the probing by Frank over the past few days and after some experimentation today on the trainer, even though I had no interest in it, I am 100% confident that I have now cracked the secret of Armstrong's fast pedalling style.
You should write a book on it and make millions.

You should write a book on it and make millions.

Book no good, like Anquetil's linear pedaling, it needs a detailed explanation and demonstration, now they can get two for the price of one. This fast pedaling technique can do even more effectively with normal cranks what the Rotorcrank inventor attempted and failed to do with his expensive crank equipment. Improvement in performance is all about mental/biomechanical adjustment and not some magical over priced new equipment.

Book no good, like Anquetil's linear pedaling, it needs a detailed explanation and demonstration, now they can get two for the price of one. This fast pedaling technique can do even more effectively with normal cranks what the Rotorcrank inventor attempted and failed to do with his expensive crank equipment. Improvement in performance is all about mental/biomechanical adjustment and not some magical over priced new equipment.
A DVD then....

I thought that might be what you were referring to. first, all we have is the abstract which says it shows no statistical difference between two groups of PC'ers who trained for 90 minutes per week and 180 minutes per week on PC's compared to a control group, so we really don't know what really went on. Maybe when we see the entire study in publication (unlikely) we will know more.


Further information on this from the ACSM conference states that 10 triathletes who trained for 3 hrs per week with PC's and usual training performed no better in a 20 km cycle tt and considerably worse in a 5 km run. Another group who trained for 1 and a half hrs per week with PC's and usual training performed 5.1 % better in the cycle tt and 1.3 % better in the run. This is not consistent with your advice to all users, which is continuous use of PC's is necessary for best results.

Further information on this from the ACSM conference states that 10 triathletes who trained for 3 hrs per week with PC's and usual training performed no better in a 20 km cycle tt and considerably worse in a 5 km run. Another group who trained for 1 and a half hrs per week with PC's and usual training performed 5.1 % better in the cycle tt and 1.3 % better in the run. This is not consistent with your advice to all users, which is continuous use of PC's is necessary for best results.
If I only trained for 3 hours a week at anything I'd expect to see no improvement either.

Given my experience I'd expect them to be worse after 10 weeks - I know I was. It took at least 3 months (12 weeks :P ) before I was even able to seemingly train hard enough to call it training rather than "suffering through it"

Given that I took a forced 8 weeks off the bike recently, and also recently fitted a normal set of cranks on the bike, I can tell that my pedaling is still "powercrank" enhanced. I know I never used to pedal like this before...