pedaling technique

[davek]

Arthur Clune wrote:
> I don't think it's muscular. It's about lungs more than anything. The leg
> strength comes over time. Huge lungs don't.

OK, I can see what you're getting at, but Lance Armstrong has a higher
VO2 Max than Jan Ullrich, doesn't he?

Anyway, I'm not talking specifically about leg strength - anyone can
build up muscle through exercise but the specific way your muscles
develop through exercise might be different to the way my muscles
develop through exercise, and that's largely determined by genetic
factors. It's [partly] why some people are good sprinters and others
better at endurance events.

d.

 

[dannyboy1206]

"Simonb" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> dannyboy1206 wrote:
> > What is the rule when you are pedaling do you spin your legs in lower
> > gears or do churn the legs round in high gears.Some people say you
> > build muscle endurance quicker in the higher gears but other people
> > say it damages your knees can anyone help.
> >
> > Cheers
>
> I just pedal at whatever speed feels best. Dependiong on length of journey,
> terrain, energy levels, wind direction. Sometimes churning, sometimes
> spinning.

Thanks everyone you've been very helpful

 

[Simonb]

davek wrote:
> Simonb wrote:
>> I just pedal at whatever speed feels best. Dependiong on length of
>> journey, terrain, energy levels, wind direction. Sometimes churning,
>> sometimes spinning.
>
> I think that's what I was trying to say in my previous posts about my
> ride yesterday evening.

Same goes for in-saddle or out-of-saddle riding -- rather than spend time
considering which would be most efficient-- I'd rather just do what my body
wants to do at that particular moment (usually what's most comfortable).

 

[AndyMorris]

elyob wrote:
>
> Sometimes I cycle like Ullrich, sometimes like Armstrong... never,
> ever, as well though.

Me too.

Armstrong's gears at Ullrich's cadence.

Down.hill


--
Andy Morris

AndyAtJinkasDotFreeserve.Co.UK


Love this:
Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes
http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

 

[Richard Corfield]

dannyboy1206 wrote:

> What is the rule when you are pedaling do you spin your legs in lower
> gears or do churn the legs round in high gears.Some people say you
> build muscle endurance quicker in the higher gears but other people
> say it damages your knees can anyone help.

As a kid I used to climb hills in top gear, and pull the wheel out of line
doing it. I did a time trial back then and did that, with everyone around
me saying "change down", and didn't do very well. 20 miles as a first time
trial as a child wasn't so good either.

Pushing hard in high gear really is a different kind of technique to
spinning. You swing your hips into it more and use the big muscles at the
back of your legs to drive down. I suppose it also comes of having ordinary
pedals back then so not being able to force them in any other direction.

I ride recumbent most of the time now, so things may be a little different.
I have clipless shoes (that clip onto the pedals, weird name isn't it), and
tend to just throw my legs round in circles using all the muscles. My thigh
muscles are more involved now, which may be particularly good on the
recumbent as you're sitting on the others (but quite laid back, so not all
of your weight).

It works better with a longer boom, so a comment elsewhere here about a
higher seat on an upright seems to make sense. Best just play. I found with
my boom set to the textbook heel on pedal at full stretch position, I felt
that my legs were being cramped up too close. Some people also try shorter
cranks on the bike, and report that it works well. I've stuck with the
normal (which apparently are made for men of about my height anyway).

I've found that the technique does allow me to go notably faster, uphill or
downhill. I'm using more muscles differently. Thinking of it as throwing
the pedals round in circles seems to make working out the timing happen
naturally. I've wondered if I'm not taking full advantage of my strength in
pushing down (or forward for recumbent) because of timing, but the
technique works well and I think that will come.

The spinning technique doesn't mean stupidly low gear that you don't feel
any resistance. You're still allowed to feel some resistance, but may find
that you naturally want a lower gear. It takes some getting used to, and
going faster presumably involves more work, so switching techniques at
first seems to help. Its also great on slippy conditions like ice, as the
power output is smoother so less likely to wheelspin.

- Richard

--
_/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ Richard dot Corfield at ntlworld dot com
_/ _/ _/ _/
_/_/ _/ _/ Time is a one way street,
_/ _/ _/_/ _/_/_/ Except in the Twilight Zone.

 

[Al C-F]

On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 01:22:12 +0100, "AndyMorris"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Armstrong's gears at Ullrich's cadence.
>
>Down.hill

I believe that, when asked, Eddy Merckx claimed that his secret was to
'spin the pedals quickly - in a big gear'.

Hope this helps.
--

Cheers,

Al

 

[Usenet]

In message <[email protected]>, Call me Bob
<[email protected]> writes
>Well, there you go, I've said it out loud now for all to hear. That's
>what goes through my mind everytime I read the "it'll bugger your
>knees" line.
>
>You can all point out my ignorance and stupidity now. I promise to
>take it like a man...

Well - I agree with you . . .
I tend not to follow 'accepted opinion' as I normally find it's just a
collection of mis-remembered half-truths and personal likes/dislikes.

--
Martin @ Strawberry Hill

 

[jacob]

> stopped having terrible knee troubles[1] walking down big hills (as a
> hillwalker, not a cyclist) /after/ I took to spinning lower gears with
> clipless pedals.
>
> Aside from the problems I had walking down the hills, being able to go
> further on the bike without just finding my legs had no ooomph left in
> them is reason enough for me to prefer higher cadences than I used to
> use. Not that I'm in the continual super-high revs department by any
> stretch of the imagination, but I certainly spin lower gears than I used
> to and can run at much higher values for short, sharp climbs too.

Getting down hills (on foot) is much easier if you do a gentle jog -
i.e. series of small running steps if necessary in zig zag line so you
are not going straight down. It sounds like hard work if you haven't
tried it but it's much easier than you'd think and gentler on the
knees as you are not stopping with each step and jarring your knees
like slow descenders do.
I've been doing it for years ever since I was overtaken by a fell
runner and decided to copy his example .
This is not OT as it is similar to spinning when cycling - smaller but
quicker steps = less strain.

cheers

Jacob

 

[Mark]

jacob wrote:
>> stopped having terrible knee troubles[1] walking down big hills (as a
>> hillwalker, not a cyclist) /after/ I took to spinning lower gears
>> with clipless pedals.
>>
>> Aside from the problems I had walking down the hills, being able to
>> go further on the bike without just finding my legs had no ooomph
>> left in them is reason enough for me to prefer higher cadences than
>> I used to use. Not that I'm in the continual super-high revs
>> department by any stretch of the imagination, but I certainly spin
>> lower gears than I used to and can run at much higher values for
>> short, sharp climbs too.
>
> Getting down hills (on foot) is much easier if you do a gentle jog -
> i.e. series of small running steps if necessary in zig zag line so you
> are not going straight down. It sounds like hard work if you haven't
> tried it but it's much easier than you'd think and gentler on the
> knees as you are not stopping with each step and jarring your knees
> like slow descenders do.
> I've been doing it for years ever since I was overtaken by a fell
> runner and decided to copy his example .
> This is not OT as it is similar to spinning when cycling - smaller but
> quicker steps = less strain.
>
> cheers
>
> Jacob

It may be less strain on the knees but I find using that technique running
down hill quite tiring.
--
Mark