Poor man's Powercranks? (PPC)

rmur17 said:

I might have posted this on ST.com but there's been too much rancor re Powercranks over there. Ha ha - perhaps not enough here.

Let me state some assumptions (which I'm 100% prepared to have shot-down or corrected).

1. Powercranks have potential to improve the endurance-oriented performance capability of the hip flexors. Notice I did not say "strengthen" 🙂

2. Hip flexor improvement (as per #1) has the potential to improve sustainble power to the cranks by aiding/abetting/relieving the larger knee and hip extensors (loosely the quads, hamstrings and glutes).

3. Despite points #1 and #2, reports I have read re Powercrank use indicate a fairly long adaptation time during which sustainable power suffers to a large extent. IMHO that constitutes a degree of 'detraining' for the prime moves at the expense of the potential improvement above. Or IOW, it seems illogical.

4. Ignoring the kinetic/momentum effects (which can be minimized by adopting a low cadence), on conventional cranks the force during the upstroke is loosely: Leg weight - downstroke force delivered by opposing leg - pullup force on THIS leg.

5. On Powercranks it would be: Leg weight - pullup force on THIS leg (as the PC mechanism eliminates the opposing leg downstroke force aid.

6. One wishes to investigate the potential for improved hip flexor and overall Power(duration) performance without using Powercranks.

Proposed 'method':
1. Adopt a tight aero position - full on aero position or an extreme position on the drops. Basically tighten the hip angle to or beyond where you'd ride to make the hip flexors work as hard as possible.

2. Dedicate workout time normally set aside for low power work to pseudo PC work (PPC). For example, post workout cooldown or perhaps one light day per week. Any time where overall performance does not matter.

I'm suggesting only 15-min per workout or perhaps 1-hr per week.

3. Spend that time riding with a tight hip angle, low cadence and as close as possible as one can to a 'pull-up' style. Very little to no load on the trainer or CT should accomodate this. Focus on using those small muscles to raise the leg and with as little downstroke force as possible.

Summary:
1. Does not take away from core workout time or attempt to modify normal pedal stroke in any way. Gets in all high to medium power work w/o any probable PC induced detraining.

2. Obtains perhaps a large part of the potential PC advantage (Pareto's 80%).

3. Progress in one's normal training on normal cranks Power(duration) will show whether it's beneficial. Well hard to tell for sure but if you're at a plateau for example or have a long history to compare current progress/regress to.

4. Flame away.

I haven't tried this - just got thinking during my cooldown yesterday which I have been doing mostly in the aero position this winter :o

I think that your assumption #2 is incorrect. Also, I'm not convinced that adopting a very tight hip angle really aids in engaging utilization of the hip flexors - in fact, it probably works against it, since they are now forced to operate at the very lower limit of their length-tension relationship (which, based on the specificity principle, isn't the position in which you'd want to train them anyway...unless, that is, you want to increase your NONsustainable power when in an extreme aero position).

acoggan said:

I think that your assumption #2 is incorrect. Also, I'm not convinced that adopting a very tight hip angle really aids in engaging utilization of the hip flexors - in fact, it probably works against it, since they are now forced to operate at the very lower limit of their length-tension relationship (which, based on the specificity principle, isn't the position in which you'd want to train them anyway...unless, that is, you want to increase your NONsustainable power when in an extreme aero position).

Geez that was fast. Do you have a "Lance-bot" scanning the web for verboten phrases? 🙂

So would you rate it a waste of time compared to plain ole cool-down or a recovery spin?

Last season I had some nasty hip flexor pain in July-August and would love to get rid of that. Increased power would be a side-benefit.

I know my h/f feel worst in a tight aero position so figured that's stressing them most.

rmur17 said:

I might have posted this on ST.com but there's been too much rancor re Powercranks over there. Ha ha - perhaps not enough here.

Let me state some assumptions (which I'm 100% prepared to have shot-down or corrected).

1. Powercranks have potential to improve the endurance-oriented performance capability of the hip flexors. Notice I did not say "strengthen" 🙂

2. Hip flexor improvement (as per #1) has the potential to improve sustainble power to the cranks by aiding/abetting/relieving the larger knee and hip extensors (loosely the quads, hamstrings and glutes).

3. Despite points #1 and #2, reports I have read re Powercrank use indicate a fairly long adaptation time during which sustainable power suffers to a large extent. IMHO that constitutes a degree of 'detraining' for the prime moves at the expense of the potential improvement above. Or IOW, it seems illogical.

4. Ignoring the kinetic/momentum effects (which can be minimized by adopting a low cadence), on conventional cranks the force during the upstroke is loosely: Leg weight - downstroke force delivered by opposing leg - pullup force on THIS leg.

5. On Powercranks it would be: Leg weight - pullup force on THIS leg (as the PC mechanism eliminates the opposing leg downstroke force aid.

6. One wishes to investigate the potential for improved hip flexor and overall Power(duration) performance without using Powercranks.

Proposed 'method':
1. Adopt a tight aero position - full on aero position or an extreme position on the drops. Basically tighten the hip angle to or beyond where you'd ride to make the hip flexors work as hard as possible.

2. Dedicate workout time normally set aside for low power work to pseudo PC work (PPC). For example, post workout cooldown or perhaps one light day per week. Any time where overall performance does not matter.

I'm suggesting only 15-min per workout or perhaps 1-hr per week.

3. Spend that time riding with a tight hip angle, low cadence and as close as possible as one can to a 'pull-up' style. Very little to no load on the trainer or CT should accomodate this. Focus on using those small muscles to raise the leg and with as little downstroke force as possible.

Summary:
1. Does not take away from core workout time or attempt to modify normal pedal stroke in any way. Gets in all high to medium power work w/o any probable PC induced detraining.

2. Obtains perhaps a large part of the potential PC advantage (Pareto's 80%).

3. Progress in one's normal training on normal cranks Power(duration) will show whether it's beneficial. Well hard to tell for sure but if you're at a plateau for example or have a long history to compare current progress/regress to.

4. Flame away.

I haven't tried this - just got thinking during my cooldown yesterday which I have been doing mostly in the aero position this winter :o

I agree with points 1 and 2 plus I would add that they also have the potential to change the general pattern of force application to the pedals further increasing pedaling efficiency.

Regarding point 3, the adaption period is generally over stated. People only see slowing when riding PowerCranks. Most see no detriment and some see almost immediate benefit when going back to regular cranks for racing. It seems people gain efficiency faster than they lose "training" in the "prime movers" as you refer to them. Anyhow, almost everyone who makes a concerted effort is back to regular training distances and efforts within a month to 6 weeks of getting on PC's.

I am not sure I understand your other points. Let me say this. potential energy put into the upward moving leg is recovered as kinetic energy on the downstroke whether that potential energy is put in by the upward pulling muscles or the downward pushing muscles.

So, it seems to me the key to the improvements seen by PowerCrankers comes from training more muscle mass and improving the pedal force dynamic to something much more efficient.

Because of the concerns you have expressed here many seem afraid to start them during the season. We just got an anecdotal report from someone in Spain that might put those fears to rest. Customer started them in March at beginning of season. Rode them during the week in training, raced on regular cranks during weekend. Got tested at the end of the season. The results were so amazing the doctor running the test refused to believe them and repeated it. Anyhow, he had increased his VO2 max 30% in this period.

Anyhow, I don't believe your proposal for training the HF's would work very well. Making it harder to get over the top doesn not mean you will use the HF's more. Rather, most will just compensate by simply pushing harder.

Frank

rmur17 said:

Geez that was fast. Do you have a "Lance-bot" scanning the web for verboten phrases? 🙂

So would you rate it a waste of time compared to plain ole cool-down or a recovery spin?

Last season I had some nasty hip flexor pain in July-August and would love to get rid of that. Increased power would be a side-benefit.

I know my h/f feel worst in a tight aero position so figured that's stressing them most.

tight aero position does "stress" your HF's more because it requires contracting them at "end contraction" length, which is much less efficient and, further, your ligaments may not be as flexible in this position. Training in this position will, most likely, make you better. But, it probably won't be because you are training your HF's better. To train the HF's you actually have to use them.

Frank

Fday said:

To train the HF's you actually have to use them.

Frank

Train or use them to do what ?

n crowley said:

Train or use them to do what ?

to contract with enough force to fully unweight the pedal on the upstroke 90 times a minute or so for however long your bike races (or rides) last. So, that would be 5400 contractions an hour at 90 rpm. 2 or 3 minutes of ILT doesn't hack it. Neither does thinking about it once in awhile.

Frank

Fday said:

to contract with enough force to fully unweight the pedal on the upstroke 90 times a minute or so for however long your bike races (or rides) last.

What benefit does this provide? Why not just push that trailing leg up using your other leg?

acoggan said:

What benefit does this provide? Why not just push that trailing leg up using your other leg?

It adds the effective weight of your downward leg to the muscle pressure you are applying.

Fday said:

to contract with enough force to fully unweight the pedal on the upstroke 90 times a minute or so for however long your bike races (or rides) last. So, that would be 5400 contractions an hour at 90 rpm. 2 or 3 minutes of ILT doesn't hack it. Neither does thinking about it once in awhile.

Frank

But this happens automatically when you do a bit of stationary jogging, all it takes on the bike is a bit of mental training not muscle training.

n crowley said:

It adds the effective weight of your downward leg to the muscle pressure you are applying.

So what? That weight has to be lifted somehow, so what difference does it make which muscles perform the task?

acoggan said:

So what? That weight has to be lifted somehow, so what difference does it make which muscles perform the task?

With training it can take place automatically and then no serious effort is involved but you get the advantage of producing the same pedal power for less muscle work in that downward leg (more efficient), or more power for the same muscle work (more effective) pedaling

n crowley said:

With training it can take place automatically and then no serious effort is involved but you get the advantage of producing the same pedal power for less muscle work in that downward leg (more efficient), or more power for the same muscle work (more effective) pedaling

No, you don't - at least not unless you think it is possible to violate the laws of physics.

acoggan said:

So what? That weight has to be lifted somehow, so what difference does it make which muscles perform the task?

The only issue I have with dispensing of all unweighing techniques (e.g. quads doing all the work) is that a smooth pedal stroke comes in handy on steep hills. I'm speaking from experience and not basing this on any scientific theory. It basically comes down to riding at a constant speed as opposed to having to re-accelerate with every down stroke. I experimented with this and can vouch that choppy pedaling style on an 8% hill is more taxing on the muscles (average power notwithstanding).

Having said that, I think that PC's are an overkill when attempting to improve climbing technique.

n crowley said:

But this happens automatically when you do a bit of stationary jogging, all it takes on the bike is a bit of mental training not muscle training.

Phoeey. I don't know very many people (in fact I know none) who statienary jog lifting the foot 14 inches off the ground and continue to do so for hours.

acoggan said:

What benefit does this provide? Why not just push that trailing leg up using your other leg?

Because it gets you using more muscle mass, DUH!

Or, to ask you the alternative. Why unweight at all? Most people do unweight some you know, the only question is how much do they "pull up" some unweight more than others. Why not push the entire leg weight up with the pushing leg (make the "recovery" completely passive)? Where would be the benefit in that?

Or, if you accept some unweighting is optimal, how much is optimal? And, how did you reach that conclusion?

Frank

acoggan said:

So what? That weight has to be lifted somehow, so what difference does it make which muscles perform the task?

I agree that we get that potential energy back, regardless of how the leg gets to the top. However, it does make a difference if you use new muscles to do it rather than diverting energy from muscles that are trying to apply power to the wheel. Nothing prevents the rider from pushing just as hard as they do now just because they start unweighting more or completely.

Frank

Piotr said:

Having said that, I think that PC's are an overkill when attempting to improve climbing technique.

Overkill??

Fday said:

Overkill??

... because unweighing doesn't require special power training, just a little concentration and practice. The weight of one's leg is plenty resistance and the only resistance one needs. Unless one plans on using hip flexors to propel the bike, which has already been discussed elsewhere ad nauseum. Again, I'm just speaking from experience.

Piotr said:

... because unweighing doesn't require special power training, just a little concentration and practice. The weight of one's leg is plenty resistance and the only resistance one needs. Unless one plans on using hip flexors to propel the bike, which has already been discussed elsewhere ad nauseum. Again, I'm just speaking from experience.

If it only took a little concentration and practice you would think the pros would have figured out how to completely unweight a long time ago. They have not or did not, at least until PC's came along. There is a fairly extensive list of pros who have thought the PC's have added substantial benefit to their training program. Hardly believe you are better, techniquewise, than they are, but I guess it is possible.

If you have been able to get on a pair of PC's and ride them without much of a problem for an hour or so the first time, then you are doing it. If not (of if you have never tried a pair of PC's) then I think you think your "experience" is more than you think it is.