ECSS - Congress
- Thread starter fergie
- Start date
fergie said:
Was this following a 4 week study of powercranks (is where the riders hadn't adapted to begin with)
fergie said:PezCycling News - What's Cool In Pro Cycling
Nice out of context post there, it was 8 weeks to get used to the SFR workouts. Comes back to the discussion of your experience, was Marco finding the workouts tough because of the cranks or because in general SFR or SE workouts tend to be rather challenging.
And of course Pez being the most reliable of sites to learn about equipment, training and "what the Pro's do"
If the SFR work outs were just as challenging before I'd surmise that he wouldn't have made a statement like that.
But, if anything, the SFR workout should have been less challenging on PCs than a high cadence work out. One of the things any pc ride notes is the extreme difficulty is staying over 80rpm when you ride them for the first few weeks - big gears and lower rpm are recommended.
... And I'll remember to look for rider interviews in the next science magazine... :rolleyes
fergie said:The joys of the Internet, where people can say whatever they want.
Let me know when you and Roadie get published in peer review
That ain't one of my goals in life...
... So feel free to hold your breath waiting.
fergie said:Guess you missed the part where I said that in reviewing all the studies on independent cranks systems all subjects adapted to the cranks in 2-3 familiarisation sessions. Took you 6 weeks. You must be special
Find me one person that said they became truly comfortable with powercranks in two sessions... Just one.
I think Frank should send you a set to try out - complete with a camera to video your first 5 rides. I could do with a laugh when you're blubbering 'but my peer reviewed journal said I'd be good in two rides"
You say a lot of things Fergie... Things like you were going to get your riders on short cranks because there was a paper that showed that they were better... How's that working out for you?
swampy1970 said:
Hmmm that alcohol is clearly affecting your memory. We have been over this before, where did I ever suggest anything with regards to crank length. You may want to discuss that with Frank, he is training a rider to have a go at the World Hour Record on 145mm cranks.
Why would I waste my time with Gimmickcranks. I am making rather good gains using normal cranks like 99.9% of cyclists.
It hilarious watching you get upset because a. you got scammed for a Grand and have to to keep rationalising your purchase and b. that it takes you longer than most to learn how to use them. You are special.
Why not submit to a peer review journal. You have valid and reliable data and have accounted for any other variables that influenced your result. When a 1% effect is considered noteworthy your 40% will surely generate huge excitement in the scientific community
alienator said:
There is nothing magical about linear pedalling, at the higher cadences mashers apply their crank torque linearly, but the all important difference is mashers start and end their linear stroke with minimal crank torque whereas Anquetil's starts with maximal crank torque and ends with 5 o'c crank torque. "Roadhouse" keeps preaching his circular style is the most efficient way of pedalling, he merges his minimal crank torque across the top with his maximal down torque and continues by wasting valuable concentration in the remaining 180 deg. of his stroke, resulting in little improvement across the top and a less effective downstroke. Using the same identical muscles Anquetil's semicircular style merges maximal torque across the top with downstroke's maximal torque resulting in 180 deg. of highly effective crank torque for the same effort. Now that's what I call efficiency in pedalling from one simple change in brain signal at the start of the stroke and explains why Anquetil was top TT rider.
n crowley said:
For who???...
Shame to waste the recruitment of the hamstrings, calves, shin & hip flexor muscles on the pull back, putting more energy into moving the bike forward resulting in increasing speeds.
Because I pull back, this is someway affects a less effective downstroke? Ummm, no it don't. Its all about neural adaptation, repetition & teaching your body the correct movement I'm afraid.
Chapeau! said:Nope its a FACT.
The more muscle/fibers/units you can recruit for any given work, the easier that work becomes.
I'm on a role.
It's actually terribly inefficient because as you increase the amount of muscle involved you increase the energy cost. Fine and dandy for a Sprint event where you get to rest up and replenish those energy stores between rounds but in any event greater than 1000m you are trying to conserve energy and use as little muscle as possible.
Even the 500m and 1000m riders are learning to manage their energy better. I had a rider win the NZ 500m title in a record time who went through the first lap in 5th place but because he didn't use all his muscle and energy in that first lap he was able to maintain his pace on the second lap. Same with the Kilo, Pursuit, One day classic or the Tour de France.
