ECSS - Congress

btw, how's that kid you were coaching who's dad got him the Power Cranks doing?

So if you can't trust what a high performance coach says then you have to look at the data, oh snap.

No one I coach, who all have improved over the year, has used any form of training gimmick as a substitute for setting goals, training smart and racing hard! Tell us again about this fantasy you have about my riders doing otherwise🙄

roadhouse said:

even if that is the case, weaker does not mean effectively less efficient, right? i mean, and i hate to bring up Lance but i guess i have to, his very high cadence circular pedaling technique (along with blood transfusions and epo), him being the only one that is well known for that high cadence during his reign (Phil Liggett even going as far as to say Lance was the inventor of that technique) took him to victory.

am i missing something?

You're missing the fact that it was Indurain that popularized high cadence pedaling in the mountains..

... And missing the fact that pretty much all Lances' epic mountain top wins had a massive amount of out of the saddle big gear work to get the gap and get the 'job done' - the higher cadence was normally saved for lower power climbing. The one big exception to this was the Alpe Dhuez time trial in 2004.

And as much as I dig phil and Paul, I'd never use phil as a technical reference for information whilst in the middle of an broadcast. Away from the microphone they're very knowledgable chaps.

fergie said:

Link to all abstracts from 2009

Wrong yet again.

So the ecss can't even get their own website correct? Great source of information then...

swampy1970 said:

So the ecss can't even get their own website correct? Great source of information then...

Lame lame lame, just can't come to admit you got suckered for a grand by one of cycling's biggest cons😄

swampy1970 said:

You're missing the fact that it was Indurain that popularized high cadence pedaling in the mountains..

... And missing the fact that pretty much all Lances' epic mountain top wins had a massive amount of out of the saddle big gear work to get the gap and get the 'job done' - the higher cadence was normally saved for lower power climbing. The one big exception to this was the Alpe Dhuez time trial in 2004.

And as much as I dig phil and Paul, I'd never use phil as a technical reference for information whilst in the middle of an broadcast. Away from the microphone they're very knowledgable chaps.

i knew Lance did not 'invent' high cadence pedaling.

Is that the best you can do? Anyone can type BS on the net, face it Preston it's all your good for. Lets us know when you amount to anything in the real world.

fergie said:

Is that the best you can do? Anyone can type BS on the net, face it Preston it's all your good for. Lets us know when you amount to anything in the real world.

Ohhh God!.

We have this knitwit fergie over at cyclingnews, getting on everyones nerves.

Chapeau! said:

Ohhh God!.

We have this knitwit fergie over at cyclingnews, getting on everyones nerves.

you don't say...😄

fergie said:

Is that the best you can do? Anyone can type BS on the net, face it Preston it's all your good for. Lets us know when you amount to anything in the real world.

you'll be hearing of me, no doubt, oh dear little fat man of the stone age. and you're right, i come from absolutely nothing, that's what is making me, that's why i won't back down, not now, not ever and it isn't overnight. hell, i know it's gonna take the rest of a lifetime and it was never about the bike.

fergie said:

Lame lame lame, just can't come to admit you got suckered for a grand by one of cycling's biggest cons😄

Hey, if they'd have shown no promise during the 12 week eval period they would have gone back. Try harder next time with your retorts...

If they had not shown an benefit after 6 months then they would have only been used for testing crank length in lock-out mode.

I bought them to help with Psoas issues - something I've had issues with for years (read the back pain thread). They did what was advertised for that. Also, the one year that I did devote to training on the PCs produced power numbers way in excess of the preceding year and the following year (my training followed a non-typical Jan-July schedule so little training was carried over to the following year)

Yeah... Im a little disappointed at the training thus far this year. Sure I weigh about 4kg less than anytime since 1998 but the power is significantly down. Seems as though even Cannondales $1000 uber cranks as fitted to my new supersix hi-mod, with their best in class weight and stiffness don't provide the same training effect as the PCs.

At least, after taking the time earlier this year to revert to normal cranks 'too see what happens' (as well as to have great fun on the new bike) that I needed to jump on the PCs - and so the 16lb 'dale is up in the rafters and the 23lb Raleigh with THE cranks is back out.

Having long term numbers via 3 years of PT ownership is a good thing. Having a couple of years of other data from the polar cs600 helps to back that data up.

Maybe someone should run a PC test as long as the weight training article you mentioned in the first post. 20+ weeks would definitely be enough time to p1ss on your bonife regarding PCs.

swampy1970 said:

Maybe someone should run a PC test as long as the weight training article you mentioned in the first post. 20+ weeks would definitely be enough time to p1ss on your bonife regarding PCs.

Nice yarn but in 10 years of Gimmickcranking no one has achieved anything of note that they can genuinely show was due solely to the cranks.

Good one roadie, you let us know when you achieve anything, anything, my pick is you will stay a bottom feeder for life. Your type always do. Just remember anyone can say stuff on the net, your only qualification is internet access.

Chapeau, welcome, just what this site needs, another troll contributing their warped world view.

Hopefully the moderators do the same job they have done with you guys on other forums.

fergie said:

Good one roadie, you let us know when you achieve anything, anything, my pick is you will stay a bottom feeder for life. Your type always do. Just remember anyone can say stuff on the net, your only qualification is internet access.

sorry, i won't even acknowledge i know your ass come that time.

Never happen Preston, you were born a loser and will always be a loser. If you and Swampy think you have something to say then submit it to somewhere for publication and see how far you get😄

Is posting on the internet all your good for Preston? You and Swampy should submit your findings to a peer review journal if you are so sure of your facts. Helpful tip for you would be not to submit in crayon and for Swampy to not leave any alcohol stains on the manuscript.

Folks, please keep it civil, or this thread will be locked and possibly trashed.

Thank you.

you're welcome.

roadhouse said:

sorry but I have to disagree with you and strongly concerning mashing increasing your cadence with effectiveness and your advise that circular pedaling has no incentive as it absolutely decreases those dead spots, not enlarges them.

"Most of the power in your pedal stroke is generated between the 2 o'clock and 5 o'clock positions in the pedal rotation. The best way to maximize pedaling efficiency through the whole rotation is to think of your legs as drawing circles, not as pistons pushing up and down. Experts in pedaling mechanics agree that there are two "dead spots" (sections where power drops significantly) in all cyclists' pedal rotations: when your foot is at the top and bottom of the stroke. Cyclists who learn to push their feet forward at the top of the pedal stroke and pull backwards at the bottom have the least slack in dead spots and ultimately ride faster."

Excluding gravity effect, to apply any torque to the crank you need brain concentration. At high cadence in mashing for each pedal stroke the brain has only to concentrate on applying a vertically downward force to the crank for less than the diameter of the pedalling circle and it takes a short cut through those dead spot areas, the higher the cadence the more effective the short cut. Whereas with circular your brain needs over three times this concentration period as it struggles to cope with four different force application directions around the pedalling circle. The brain's work rate has limitations so circular would have reached its max cadence at a figure where mashing would be only starting to get to the serious action. Your PC mate Swampy stated PC's cured his Psoas problems, yet on the back pain thread he attributed the cure to "Psoas Bodyworks". Now that Frank appears to have ridden away into the sunset, saddle bags full of the PC spoils, maybe it's time to draw the final curtain on PC's.

n crowley said:

Excluding gravity effect, to apply any torque to the crank you need brain concentration. At high cadence in mashing for each pedal stroke the brain has only to concentrate on applying a vertically downward force to the crank for less than the diameter of the pedalling circle and it takes a short cut through those dead spot areas, the higher the cadence the more effective the short cut. Whereas with circular your brain needs over three times this concentration period as it struggles to cope with four different force application directions around the pedalling circle. The brain's work rate has limitations so circular would have reached its max cadence at a figure where mashing would be only starting to get to the serious action. Your PC mate Swampy stated PC's cured his Psoas problems, yet on the back pain thread he attributed the cure to "Psoas Bodyworks". Now that Frank appears to have ridden away into the sunset, saddle bags full of the PC spoils, maybe it's time to draw the final curtain on PC's.

we can leave both Frank and PC's out of this, if you wouldn't mind. and i also don't know what swampy said about any Psoas and I'm not interested at this moment.

Now outside of that, you are saying that circular pedaling technique requires a certain mental fortitude because you have to think about how to use your legs instead of just being, well, dumb about it all and just riding. Well, i've known that for some years now.

A PHD from Harvard still beats a bachelors from a community college, right?

But that was not the original debate, the debate was irregardless of how much brain power you have to use, circular pedaling decreases dead spots and increases efficiency.

Do you have anything to negate that fact?