Cadance

frenchyge said:

Everything else has been Ric, me, and now Andy saying that there's *not* a certain style that needs to be adopted -- with you apparently arguing the contrary. 😉

Read my posts more closely without pre-conceived ideas about what I say.

Early in this thread I've said there isn't one way/one style, and that one could/should experiment for themselves over weeks/months to see what might help them. I have been "arguing to the contrary" about the relevance of the study Ric mentioned and asked if there were any relevant studies, and I have done similar WRT to AC's comments on the topic but some of them are so far from the real world of many, many riders that one just laughs and walks away.

Frenchgye, I think you would find the utility of FixedGearFever.com forums to be quite good. In general you'll find the real-world experience of the contributors is quite a lot more than here. Much of what the FGF folks know could help you on the road.

WarrenG said:

Early in this thread I've said there isn't one way/one style, and that one could/should experiment for themselves over weeks/months to see what might help them. I have been "arguing to the contrary" about the relevance of the study Ric mentioned and asked if there were any relevant studies, and I have done similar WRT to AC's comments on the topic but some of them are so far from the real world of many, many riders that one just laughs and walks away.

In fact, there really is just "one way/one style", i.e., cyclists of all abilities generate the vast majority (i.e., typically >90%) of their power by stomping down on the pedals. What people do when the pedal is rising does vary, but this variation is largely only of academic interest, since there is no relationship to whether one actively pulls up or not to any measure of either physiology or performance. It is only if/when people begin to conciously attempt to pull up more that they are likely to see changes in, e.g., efficiency, but these changes are actually detrimental - that's why the spewing of ill-informed folk wisdom by people such as yourself (or Frank Day) tends to raise the hackles of anyone who really understands the biomechanics of pedaling.

WarrenG said:

Read my posts more closely without pre-conceived ideas about what I say.

I'm reading what you say, but the fact that you keep saying it leads me to believe that you must be disagreeing with something, at least in your mind. I just can't figure out what that thing is. 🙂

WarrenG said:

I have been "arguing to the contrary" about the relevance of the study Ric mentioned and asked if there were any relevant studies

The study definitely shows that it's not necessary to pedal circles to generate high power or ride like a pro, which is why it was cited.

WarrenG said:

Frenchgye, I think you would find the utility of FixedGearFever.com forums to be quite good. In general you'll find the real-world experience of the contributors is quite a lot more than here. Much of what the FGF folks know could help you on the road.

It's actually Frenchy-ge, and I don't know about FGF. Aren't those fixie guys kinda snobby towards regular cyclists -- you know, like Mac users or Hybrid vehicle owners? :p

frenchyge said:

Aren't those fixie guys kinda snobby towards regular cyclists -- you know, like Mac users or Hybrid vehicle owners? :p

It's actually worse than that: Warren is referring specifically to track racers, not people who might ride a fixed gear just for the fun of it. The number of cliques, personality conflicts, etc., you find at a typical track/track race rivals what you would see among adolescents at a junior high school. I think it is a function of 1) the fishbowl atmosphere that exists when everyone must share the same facility, and 2) the sorts of personalities common among "explosive" (male) athletes in any sport.

acoggan said:

It's actually worse than that: Warren is referring specifically to track racers, not people who might ride a fixed gear just for the fun of it. The number of cliques, personality conflicts, etc., you find at a typical track/track race rivals what you would see among adolescents at a junior high school. I think it is a function of 1) the fishbowl atmosphere that exists when everyone must share the same facility, and 2) the sorts of personalities common among "explosive" (male) athletes in any sport.

AC, how about you post your sentiment above at FGF so people can know you a little better?

Your impression of track cyclists is contrary to what I find at my local track and at masters nat's and worlds. If you actually spent some time engaging with people around the infield without the attitude you've just expressed and tried to enjoy the comeraderie that is widespread at such events you might learn this. Be in the room during awards ceremonies and listen to the support for each rider getting medals, especially for the ones who have been around awhile. The comeraderie is one of the best things about these events. Elite events are less friendly.

Last week at Masters nat's a few of us who do as many road events as track events were chatting about how much friendlier things are at track events compared to road events. We supposed that it's due to the extended periods of time spent together in relatively close confines-the opportunity to chat and learn from each other, and that maybe track racers tend to be a bit extroverted. Even the people who are extremely focused on winning at these events are among the friendliest people I've met in cycling and it is enjoyable to be around them.

Frenchy-ge, people who refer to it as riding a "fixie" are generally as you describe, but they have little in common with the people who post at FGF, who are mostly track riders/racers. Maybe they are more tolerant of people like me who use a PC all day and a Mac in the evening. Hybrid car? Too slow!

WarrenG said:

AC, how about you post your sentiment above at FGF so people can know you a little better?

Feel free to post it over there - I doubt that you'll find many that disagree with me, since, e.g., they've all seen the video of, e.g., the "Carney incident", or been witness to other similar spectacles.

WarrenG said:

Your impression of track cyclists is contrary to what I find at my local track and at masters nat's and worlds.

Masters cyclists are different - we're all old enough to have outgrown the sorts of childish behavior to which I am referring (well, most of us, anyway).

WarrenG said:

Elite events are less friendly.

See, you apparently agree with me.

WarrenG said:

Last week at Masters nat's a few of us who do as many road events as track events were chatting about how much friendlier things are at track events compared to road events. We supposed that it's due to the extended periods of time spent together in relatively close confines-the opportunity to chat and learn from each other, and that maybe track racers tend to be a bit extroverted. Even the people who are extremely focused on winning at these events are among the friendliest people I've met in cycling and it is enjoyable to be around them.

Now I'm going to agree with you: you don't see much camraderie among road cyclists, since people tend to show up, race, and then go home, rather than sitting around for hours and hours with nothing to do but chat with people other than their teammates. As a consequence, though, you also see a lot fewer conflicts of the type you tend to find at the track (although Adam Hodges-Myerson might disagree with me 🙂).

Of course, I suppose my perspective could be biased, since I haven't spent much time hanging around the infield during "grass root" type track races, but instead have usually done so at bigger events like elite nationals, world cup qualifiers, etc., and/or at historically-important tracks like T-town...

acoggan said:

Feel free to post it over there - I doubt that you'll find many that disagree with me, since, e.g., they've all seen the video of, e.g., the "Carney incident", or been witness to other similar spectacles..

...And similar incidents at road events. Your characterization of the people at FGF is unfounded and track racers in general is ignorant. Post your comments at FGF.

WarrenG said:

...And similar incidents at road events.

Personally, I never seen anything close to that at any of hundreds and hundreds of road races that I've been to over the last 30+ years.

WarrenG said:

Your characterization of the people at FGF is unfounded and track racers in general is ignorant...Post your comments at FGF.

My comments are about the atmosphere you find at most tracks, not about anyone in particular (including those who frequent fixedgearfever.com). I'll be happy to share them over there, though...

I was reading through the discussion and had somethign to ask/add.

You guys mentioned that when your power output is less, the most efficient cadence also decreases. So, of course, I have nothing near the pros. I'm also a tiny guy (53 kg) and find it that I like to TT around 95-105 rpms and climb >83 rpms. Even my Z2 rides are >90 rpms. So, on the one hand, I am generating lower power outputs (220 FT about), so does that mean maybe I should be climbing and TTing at lower cadences???

acoggan said:

In fact, there really is just "one way/one style", i.e., cyclists of all abilities generate the vast majority (i.e., typically >90%) of their power by stomping down on the pedals.

That's true and is mainly due to the fact that it's the style they adopted as children and like Coyle and Martin is the only style they know. This explains why pedaling research has been in a dormant state for the past half century. If you were asked to apply power with the right hand to a handcrank, would you use the same technique when applying power between 11 and 5 o'c, i.e. "stomping" down with your hand between 1 and 5 o'c only ? What can be done with a hand crank between 11 and 5 is also possible with a foot crank in the same 180 degrees of the pedaling circle.

n crowley said:

That's true and is mainly due to the fact that it's the style they adopted as children and like Coyle and Martin is the only style they know. This explains why pedaling research has been in a dormant state for the past half century. If you were asked to apply power with the right hand to a handcrank, would you use the same technique when applying power between 11 and 5 o'c, i.e. "stomping" down with your hand between 1 and 5 o'c only ? What can be done with a hand crank between 11 and 5 is also possible with a foot crank in the same 180 degrees of the pedaling circle.

Congratulations!

You have passed the Kool-Aid test and are now a full fledged member of the cult.

acoggan said:

In fact, there really is just "one way/one style", i.e., cyclists of all abilities generate the vast majority (i.e., typically >90%) of their power by stomping down on the pedals. What people do when the pedal is rising does vary, but this variation is largely only of academic interest, since there is no relationship to whether one actively pulls up or not to any measure of either physiology or performance.

http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=850

"The really interesting thing that this study found was that... there was a very strong inverse relationship between VO2max and cycling efficiency in this group (of top pro cyclists). This is similar to the results from another study on the same thing in world-class runners. The riders with the relatively low aerobic capacity (VO2max) were able to compensate for this handicap by being much more efficient, resulting in their requiring less energy to generate a particular power output.

...the smoother and more efficient you can train your pedaling stroke, the less energy you require to maintain any power output or speed..."

acoggan said:

The number of cliques, personality conflicts, etc., you find at a typical track/track race rivals what you would see among adolescents at a junior high school. I think it is a function of 1) the fishbowl atmosphere that exists when everyone must share the same facility, and 2) the sorts of personalities common among "explosive" (male) athletes in any sport.

Originally Posted by WarrenG
"AC, how about you post your sentiment above at FGF so people can know you a little better?"

acoggan said:

...I doubt that you'll find many that disagree with me...

And the survey says... 2 agree with you and 38 disagree with you. Is that "many"? I know, I know. Just because 95% of the people surveyed provided anecdotal evidence that you're wrong doesn't make it true.

http://www.fixedgearfever.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=2010

WarrenG said:

http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=850

"The really interesting thing that this study found was that... there was a very strong inverse relationship between VO2max and cycling efficiency in this group (of top pro cyclists). This is similar to the results from another study on the same thing in world-class runners. The riders with the relatively low aerobic capacity (VO2max) were able to compensate for this handicap by being much more efficient, resulting in their requiring less energy to generate a particular power output.

...the smoother and more efficient you can train your pedaling stroke, the less energy you require to maintain any power output or speed..."

The fallacy of your claim here, and of Dr. Cheung's statement, is that the riders in this study who were more efficient were NOT - REPEAT, NOT - those who pedaled more smoothly!! IOW, their high efficiency was not due to how they applied force to the pedals, but instead must have had some other (e.g., biochemical) basis.

WarrenG said:

And the survey says... 2 agree with you and 38 disagree with you. Is that "many"? I know, I know. Just because 95% of the people surveyed provided anecdotal evidence that you're wrong doesn't make it true.

http://www.fixedgearfever.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=2010

First, do you really think that a survey posted to a track racing site that only generates 40 responses represents some sort of valid measurement? Indeed, the only reason that I posted it as a survey was to try to avoid clogging up the board with endless personal accounts of how people felt that they had been treated well or badly when at tracks (to no avail, obviously).

Second, if you read people's responses you'll see that even if they apparently voted "friendly", several posters alluded to the sorts of things I had in mind, e.g., how new riders often feel intimidated when they first go to the track, how in such an environment "a voice from on high" may single people out for public criticism, etc., etc., etc. IOW, it appeared to me that several people agreed with me that the confines of a track (and the need to regulate people's behavior in the name of safety) tends to bring out the worst in people. I've never, for example, seen a bunch of riders clustering near the last corner of a criterium to make fun of the line that people in others races use when starting their sprint, yet people will often gather in the stands of a track race to criticize somebody's flying 200 m TT line, their starting technique, etc.

Then again, maybe I've just spent too much time hanging around at elite track events, where in just the last year or so we've had people spit on and throw their helmets at other competitors while they're still on their bikes, blatantly pull another rider's handlebars out from under them in full view of the crowd and the officials, etc., etc., etc. As I said before, in over 30 y I've never seen such things happen at a road event (which is probably due to the fact the wide-open venue tends to diffuse such situations...as another poster on fixedgearfever.com alluded to).

acoggan said:

The fallacy of your claim here, and of Dr. Cheung's statement, is that the riders in this study who were more efficient were NOT - REPEAT, NOT - those who pedaled more smoothly!! IOW, their high efficiency was not due to how they applied force to the pedals, but instead must have had some other (e.g., biochemical) basis.

Your opinion disagrees with his, and reality. I'm okay with that.

WarrenG said:

Your opinion disagrees with his, and reality. I'm okay with that.

My opinion definitely disagrees with his, but not with reality: the study that he cited shows precisely what I said above, which anyone who has read it themselves already knows. (One of my pet peeves as a scientist is when people miscite studies, and in that regard I'd have to say that I'd give Dr. Cheung a failing grade in this particular instance.)

acoggan said:

First, do you really think that a survey posted to a track racing site that only generates 40 responses represents some sort of valid measurement?

How pathetic. 95% disagreed with you. Only two votes agreed with you and since both of those were among the first few of 40 responses they are somewhat suspect, or yours.

acoggan said:

Second, if you read people's responses you'll see that even if they apparently voted "friendly", several posters alluded to the sorts of things I had in mind, e.g., how new riders often feel intimidated when they first go to the track, how in such an environment "a voice from on high" may single people out for public criticism, etc., etc., etc. IOW, it appeared to me that several people agreed with me that the confines of a track (and the need to regulate people's behavior in the name of safety) tends to bring out the worst in people.

And then they also went on to say that was a minor experience compared to what they find the vast majority of the time and among the vast majority of the people they encounter at tracks. As for bringing out the worst, actually it's the opposite. As some people know, and mentioned, track riders tend to look out for each other more than road riders do.

acoggan said:

Then again, maybe I've just spent too much time hanging around at elite track events, where in just the last year or so we've had people spit on and throw their helmets at other competitors while they're still on their bikes, blatantly pull another rider's handlebars out from under them in full view of the crowd and the officials, etc., etc., etc. As I said before, in over 30 y I've never seen such things happen at a road event (which is probably due to the fact the wide-open venue tends to diffuse such situations...as another poster on fixedgearfever.com alluded to).

Your tiny little window on the world... That stuff happens much more frequently in road events. Chopping wheels, running people into curbs or off the road surface, grabbing, pushing, shoving, etc. and not just in the last 400 meters. You just don't see it because the entire course is not on display. Google on Gaggioli and Fonseca for just two of the public examples that are similar to the only two track examples we know about.

38 disagree with you. 2 agree.

WarrenG said:

Your tiny little window on the world...

Might I remind you that I've spent more time hanging around the infields of elite track races (e.g., World Cup qualifiers, nationals) than you have?

WarrenG said:

That stuff happens much more frequently in road events.

So you're saying that you've seen people at road races pull the handlebars out from under someone, or, while standing on the side of the road (track), spit at other riders or throw helmets at them? I can't say that I ever have...

WarrenG said:

Chopping wheels, running people into curbs or off the road surface, grabbing, pushing, shoving, etc. and not just in the last 400 meters.

That sort of [censored] is not what I'm talking about...it's the way it spills over into more egregious behavior, and/or before and after racing that's the issue.

WarrenG said:

You just don't see it because the entire course is not on display.

Indeed, I think it is the fact that everyone and everything is essentially always on display at the track that makes for the all-too-frequent juvenile behavior.

2 agree with you. 39 disagree with you. Your arrogant disregard of reality is funny! 😄