pealling push up push down

n crowley said:

A rider who believed that Anquetil's success in time trials was due to the wheels he was using asked for a loan of a set of his wheels. Within 3 kms. that rider had wrecked those wheels with the pedalling style he was using. As I said, we have been through all this before on other threads.

what did he do? hit them with a hammer which was attached to his pedals.

n crowley said:

Applying maximum force through 180 deg. of the pedal stroke or total elimination of the dead spot area is a very simple task when you know how and I have explained it before on earlier threads on this site. Elimination of upper dead spot area also means automatic elimination of lower area.
It's a simple case of fire/reload----pull/push. The legs do the firing and reloading while the arms do the pulling and pushing. Maximum power is fired from the hips to the pedal at 11 and continues to 5, reloading means instant and total unweighting and drawing back of idling leg to 10 for a special spring loaded effect and instant takeover of power application at 11. The pulling of the arm supplies the resistance while the pushing stabilizes for easier total unweighting in addition to supporting all the upper body weight. Despite all the pushing and pulling, an onlooker would not even know the upper body was being used. One other important item of note is that this is a linear style in which direct downward or vertical pedal pressure is never used.
Anquetil used that linear style and an example its smoothness was given by J Bobet who rode during those years. A rider who believed that Anquetil's success in time trials was due to the wheels he was using asked for a loan of a set of his wheels. Within 3 kms. that rider had wrecked those wheels with the pedalling style he was using. As I said, we have been through all this before on other threads.

Would I be correct in assuming there is some heel dropping going on in there? It sounds suspiciously like what I like to do while climbing.

Mansmind said:

11:00 -12:00 15%
12:00 - 1:00 25%
1:00 - 2:00 50%
2:00 - 4:00 100%
4:00 - 5:00 50%
5:00 - 6:00 25%
6:00 - 7:00 15%
John

Thanks for guessing the possible power at each point, I'd like to suggest which muscles can be used at these points (assuming seated).

10:00 - 2:00 the Vastus Medialis can give some assistance. It's not a natural cycling muscle but it can be trained to produce power in your pedal stroke.

1:00 - 5:00 the Quadrecept muscle group and the hamstrings, much as you would see if doing a 45% leg press The calves can also produce some power in this section.

4:00 - 10:00 the hamstrings and Gluteal muscles can produce power on the up stroke.

Sure the quads are the most powerful (easily seen on a leg press) but why would you ignore the output of the other muscles? Even the small output from the Vastus Medialis can make a substantial difference over a race.Naturally the more you train these muscles the more output they will supply.

Mansmind said:

Would I be correct in assuming there is some heel dropping going on in there? It sounds suspiciously like what I like to do while climbing.

No, there is no heel dropping, the power is coming from the hips, not the thigh muscles and it is applied tangentially from the hip to the pedal axle with the same power generating muscle work at all times. Thigh, calf muscles and greater use of the ankle make this continuous tangential power application possible. That power distribution would be 11-5 o'c 100% all the way but due to unweighting effect, additional gravity effect power would be added in the 1-5 area of the stroke. That continuous tangential power from hip to pedal axle explains why vertical pedal pressure is never used with this technique.

it was at one time commonly accepted that pulling up would be an advantage, by propelling the bike. it is now accepeted that the amount of force provided by pulling up is not great enough to be the primary means of propelling the bike, as it is versus the much greater force of the downward stroke.

what it (unweighting) does do is contribute to counteracting the resistance of the weight of the upward stroke, which is an antagonist to the downward stroke.

elite cyclists could be expected to provide much more downward force than mere mortals, especialy if they are tested during a period of "mashing" the big meat type cranking.
i cannot help but think of not throwing the baby out with the bath water here to those who would advocate neglect of any pulling up force which provides productive unweighting.

give it a try either way, if your spin is not intuitive you may stand (or remain seated) to become more efficient.

n crowley said:

Coyle's knowledge of pedalling appears to have been very limited. If he had compared those who pushed down more with no unweighting of idling pedal against those who pushed down more with correct total unweighting of idling pedal only and no unnecessary pulling up, results would have been very different. Pulling up and unweighting are two very different types of pedalling and that is where the confusion is arising.

AFAIK the jury us still very much out as to whether 'smooth' pedalling is any better than mashing. For example, attempting to apply force at 12 and 6 o'clock might very well be simply using up precious energy doing a job which is alredy being done by other forces (inertia). In one of the few really good studies on this subject, the very best (elite national-class) cyclists actually made less of an effort to pull up than did those of a lower standard. However I wouldn't jump to any conclusions; what I certainly *wouldn't* assume is that people who claim that smooth pedalling is *definitely* better have any more idea than the guys who are actually investigating this stuff. It's a very complex issue.
Personally I'm going to keep pedalling whatever way seems most natural until someone actually demonstrates that there is a better way of doing things.🙂

L.

You don't see many pros stomping on their pedals, they look *smooth* to me.

To pedal smoothly you don't necessarily have to concentrate on pulling up.

Given enough time on a bike, most cyclists will develop naturally a pedalling style that is most efficient for them as long as their bike is adjusted correctly for them. 😉

It's definetly a case of whatever works best for the individual, but consider the following example.

We have 2 riders doing a time trial.
One is producing 300w with their down stroke and 0w on the up, the other is producing 300w on their down stroke and 100w on their up stroke.

Who's going quicker?

Personally I can produce more power on my up stroke (particularly when mashing my 53 * 11), but I also know my quads arn't as developed as I'd like.

Again bodies will very, but I find my hamstrings have more endurance than my quads. I don't know if this is because of training or muscle composition but my quads fatigue well before my hamstrings.

It varies per person and it requires training to acheive, but why not use all the muscles in your legs?

Brizza said:

It's definetly a case of whatever works best for the individual, but consider the following example.

We have 2 riders doing a time trial.
One is producing 300w with their down stroke and 0w on the up, the other is producing 300w on their down stroke and 100w on their up stroke.

Who's going quicker?

Personally I can produce more power on my up stroke (particularly when mashing my 53 * 11), but I also know my quads arn't as developed as I'd like.

Again bodies will very, but I find my hamstrings have more endurance than my quads. I don't know if this is because of training or muscle composition but my quads fatigue well before my hamstrings.

It varies per person and it requires training to acheive, but why not use all the muscles in your legs?

You seem to be confusing force and power. Any rider could produce 400 or 500 or perhaps even 600w for a short period of time just pushing down on the pedals but they are limited by their heart/lung capacity to a lesser sustainable output of say 300w for any greater length of time. The limiting factor is not the strength/force output of the muscles. Using a less efficient method such as pulling up on the pedals (or using your hands to drive a second crank for that matter) will not result in more power but less as more energy will be wasted by the less efficient method.

pod said:

You seem to be confusing force and power. Any rider could produce 400 or 500 or perhaps even 600w for a short period of time just pushing down on the pedals but they are limited by their heart/lung capacity to a lesser sustainable output of say 300w for any greater length of time. The limiting factor is not the strength/force output of the muscles. Using a less efficient method such as pulling up on the pedals (or using your hands to drive a second crank for that matter) will not result in more power but less as more energy will be wasted by the less efficient method.

Why do rowers continue to use arm + leg muscles ?
Driving a second crank with the arm is not an efficient way to use the arms,
just as with pulling up with the legs reduces the concentration on the main
task of applying downward pedal pressure and results in less overall pedal
power, turning a second set of arm cranks will have the same effect. But
it is possible to put that arm crank power to better use and biomechanically
divert it back to the foot pedals. The use of this combined power is the
secret to more powerful, smoother and safer TT pedalling both from the
performance and medical aspects. This technique completely eliminates the
lower back from the pedalling equation and the smoother pedalling action plus
direction through which the power is applied to the pedal results in less stress
and strain on the knees when using the higher gears.

pod said:

You seem to be confusing force and power. Any rider could produce 400 or 500 or perhaps even 600w for a short period of time just pushing down on the pedals but they are limited by their heart/lung capacity to a lesser sustainable output of say 300w for any greater length of time.

Actually I think your agreeing with me.

Brizza said:

It's definetly a case of whatever works best for the individual, but consider the following example.

We have 2 riders doing a time trial.
One is producing 300w with their down stroke and 0w on the up, the other is producing 300w on their down stroke and 100w on their up stroke.

Who's going quicker?

Personally I can produce more power on my up stroke (particularly when mashing my 53 * 11), but I also know my quads arn't as developed as I'd like.

Again bodies will very, but I find my hamstrings have more endurance than my quads. I don't know if this is because of training or muscle composition but my quads fatigue well before my hamstrings.

It varies per person and it requires training to acheive, but why not use all the muscles in your legs?

Frank Day (inventor of Powercranks) is one man who would agree with you, he claims pulling up can result in a 40 % increase in pedal power. Powercranks
train your pulling up muscles by forcing you to pull up at all times. But he
also admits that most of this increase is the result of the total unweighting
effect and like you he believes the hip flexor muscles can, with serious long
term training, produce worthwhile additional pedal power. Not very many
experts agree with him, the " SLOWTWITCH " forum has proof of that.

n crowley said:

Frank Day (inventor of Powercranks) is one man who would agree with you, he claims pulling up can result in a 40 % increase in pedal power. Powercranks
train your pulling up muscles by forcing you to pull up at all times. But he
also admits that most of this increase is the result of the total unweighting
effect and like you he believes the hip flexor muscles can, with serious long
term training, produce worthwhile additional pedal power. Not very many
experts agree with him, the " SLOWTWITCH " forum has proof of that.

If you could increase your power by 40 % there would be a huge disparity between riders -- supposedly some pros use them and a 40 % difference would be a huge difference...

On the other hand FD has said other good riders/triathletes are using them, and at one time promised one of 'his' riders was going to go for the Hour Record.

A 40 % increase in power is so ridiculous that it would make an 'average' racer (e.g., 3rd cat) go from that level to about top 5 in the TdF...

I assume that PC's have been sold to such racers and i've not heard of anyone jumping from (e.g.) 3rd cat to TdF...

Ric

n crowley said:

But he
also admits that most of this increase is the result of the total unweighting
effect and like you he believes the hip flexor muscles can, with serious long
term training, produce worthwhile additional pedal power.

It doesn't involve a total unweighting but you do lose some of your push. I think this is because of the training it requires. I've done alot of work on my pull and found I've got much better endurance than I had with my push, but I've lost and am now working on my push power.

My quads get a hard workout when I time trial, and though I might be pulling a 53*11 for long periods with my pull stroke, my quads let me know that they've been working hard. (my quads die before my hamstrings so it can't be a total unweighting)

Rather than work on one or the other, I think we should work on both, and I train with platform pedals to work on my down action 😉

Coming from Mtn. biking to the road I pulled up a lot. The most interesting thing was after I got my Powertap. My wattage was wildly variable at first. As time went on the variability smoothed out. But the smoothness seemed to come with with a change in my pedaling. I have more emphasis on the downstroke than before. I know this seems counter intuitive but at least for me it's true.

In following this thread I thought about my out of the saddle sprinting. I can't see how that's ever about pulling up. Sprinting is about max power and I can't imagine how greater power can be generated by pulling up. It would seem that the overwhelming power of the quads and glutes pushing down would overpower any effort to pull up by wide margin.

jerryz said:

Coming from Mtn. biking to the road I pulled up a lot. The most interesting thing was after I got my Powertap. My wattage was wildly variable at first. As time went on the variability smoothed out. But the smoothness seemed to come with with a change in my pedaling. I have more emphasis on the downstroke than before. I know this seems counter intuitive but at least for me it's true.

In following this thread I thought about my out of the saddle sprinting. I can't see how that's ever about pulling up. Sprinting is about max power and I can't imagine how greater power can be generated by pulling up. It would seem that the overwhelming power of the quads and glutes pushing down would overpower any effort to pull up by wide margin.

Interesting post as the only time I KNOW I pull up while pushing is during an initial jump in a very high gear. The cadence when starting out is low enough that I can actually concentrate on doing both at the same time. I know everyone's experience is different, but it sure seems to get me off the line faster. Once I get going however (above 50 rpm) I seem to drop off on the pulling part. I regularly average 95 rpm on my rides, and whether I should be able to or not, it feels as if I'm moving fast enough that I can't really distinguish that I'm pulling up much. Perhaps I am and just don't feel the effort.

frenchyge said:

There may be certain cycling situations you're thinking of when you make that statement, but I assure you it is by no means impossible to do.

Also, don't the hamstrings drive the knee down and back on the downstroke, while the quads lift the knee on the upstroke?

True, but the quads also are primary extensors of the knee, and they play a huge role during most of the downstroke.

The hamstrings are also helping to drive the knee down during the downstroke, but play more of a role in getting it started near the top of the downstroke. So both muscles have their own roles at almost any point in the pedal stroke.

After you come down to the bottom of the stroke, there really isn't much activity coming from the hip flexors or hamstrings to flex the upper leg and knee. Most of the upstroke comes from the relaxation of that leg, and from the actions of the muscles in the other leg that are pushing down for the next downstroke.

Quoted post said:

In following this thread I thought about my out of the saddle sprinting. I can't see how that's ever about pulling up.

Nor can I.

Orange Fish said:

The hamstrings are also helping to drive the knee down during the downstroke, but play more of a role in getting it started near the top of the downstroke. So both muscles have their own roles at almost any point in the pedal stroke.

After you come down to the bottom of the stroke, there really isn't much activity coming from the hip flexors or hamstrings to flex the upper leg and knee. Most of the upstroke comes from the relaxation of that leg, and from the actions of the muscles in the other leg that are pushing down for the next downstroke.

I've heard people talk about using the hip flexors but I can't see how they play an important part or how I could activate them in the pedal stroke.

The hamstrings are used alot in the downstroke as is evident when using a leg press or when doing quats. You can also activate the hamies in the up motion.

To the idoit who suggested that riders don't push with their downstroke if they pull up, I can only suggest that either you have rocks in your head or have never riden a bike as even a 2 year old understands that downward pressure on the pedals of the pedals of their childs bike creates force. Why would anyone not push on the downstroke?

Brizza said:

Nor can I.

I've heard people talk about using the hip flexors but I can't see how they play an important part or how I could activate them in the pedal stroke.

The hamstrings are used alot in the downstroke as is evident when using a leg press or when doing quats. You can also activate the hamies in the up motion.

To the idoit who suggested that riders don't push with their downstroke if they pull up, I can only suggest that either you have rocks in your head or have never riden a bike as even a 2 year old understands that downward pressure on the pedals of the pedals of their childs bike creates force. Why would anyone not push on the downstroke?

I am that idiot, you misunderstood what I wrote. What I meant was, during a
TT the more a rider concentrates on pulling up, the less concentration he will
be able to give to the main task of applying downward pressure and so he ends up with less overall pedal power. Believe it or not, most sustained power
can be achieved in a 10, 25 or 50 mile TT without ever using direct downward
pedal pressure. Its being able to do the impossible ( to everyone else) that
makes a technique so valuable. All pedalling's difficulties come from the fact
that all researchers are basing all studies on their childhood pedalling style
which you refer to above. The most obvious natural way is not always the
best way, [censored] Fosbury confirmed that with his high jump technique.

Crowley, no way pulling up is going to significantly increase endurance power. The downstroke uses multiple muscle groups (including the hamstrings), while the upstroke taxes the hamstrings again. It's better to let them rest during the upstroke. Also, the quads don't fatigue as fast as the hamstrings do.

For sprint power, since it doesn't really matter if the hams fatigue quickly, I've found that (as others have said) that my jump is significantly enhanced by actively pulling up, but I also pull up hard when approaching maximum sprint speed, and yes, out of the saddle. I pull up so hard I can feel my hams bulging. If I don't pull up, I can't crack 60 km/hr, if I do, I can approach 65.
It takes me less than 5 seconds to reach 40 km/hr from a stop.