OK, I'm firmly on the fence on this one. I agree with Ric that a typical power improvement of 40% sounds ridiculous but there's a part of me that accepts that just because we can't explain something doesn't mean it isn't happening (i.e. Powercranks working, even if not to the level claimed).
Sooooooo, here's some fuel to the fire. A quotation from an old Cycling News interview with Bjarne Riis:
CN: What was the main thing that helped you win the 1996 Tour?
BR: The one factor that most helped was the improvement to my pedalling action. Using video and computer equipment I worked to improve the point at which I started to put force onto the rotating crank arm. I was able to start putting force onto the pedal almost 20 degrees earlier than the previous year. This improvement in power, along with a smoother action gave me the significant increase in power, which in turn gave me the Tour.
Let battle recommence...
http://www.cyclingnews.com/riders/2003/interviews/?id=bjarneriis03
Sooooooo, here's some fuel to the fire. A quotation from an old Cycling News interview with Bjarne Riis:
CN: What was the main thing that helped you win the 1996 Tour?
BR: The one factor that most helped was the improvement to my pedalling action. Using video and computer equipment I worked to improve the point at which I started to put force onto the rotating crank arm. I was able to start putting force onto the pedal almost 20 degrees earlier than the previous year. This improvement in power, along with a smoother action gave me the significant increase in power, which in turn gave me the Tour.
Let battle recommence...
http://www.cyclingnews.com/riders/2003/interviews/?id=bjarneriis03