Question for the Coaches: Power meter use and pedal technique, what say you? (Page 3)
-
No new posts
General Discussion | Triathlon Talk » Question for the Coaches: Power meter use and pedal technique, what say you? | Rss Feed ![]() |
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller | Reply |
|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() This user's post has been ignored. |
|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() This user's post has been ignored. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() | ![]() Wait wait. Is someone saying a company will try to sell me something by trying to convince me it can do things which may actually not be anything I really need or want? Oh the humanity! |
![]() ![]() |
Expert![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Tom Demerly. - 2012-01-20 4:32 PM The Summation: You can't "coach" pedal stroke. You're either a toe pedaler (Anquetil) or you're a heel masher (Merckx, Hinault). You can improve the symetrical application of power around the pedal stroke and this likely makes pedaling more physiologically efficient once the neurological task is ingrained. So let me see if I'm understanding what you're saying... If one were to have a powermeter and tested it against another factor, say, stress on the body or heart rate, then one just might be able to determine the optimal pedal technique for a given athlete, whether it be high cadence, low cadence, toe up or down, pressure application, etc? Man o man, where the heck have I heard that before? hahahaha. Maybe doing this stuff for 26 years teaches you a thing or two. Maybe not though. I'm sure I'll be shot down in approximately 1 nanosecond. Off for a night mountain bike ride. You guys enjoy your evening! |
![]() ![]() |
Master![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() FeltonR.Nubbinsworth - 2012-01-20 3:27 PM JohnnyKay - 2012-01-20 12:44 PM sand101 - 2012-01-20 12:11 PM (On a personal note my knee surgery left me with some imbalance that it actually would be useful to me to be able to quantify both sides independently. For me this is a real issue.) IDK. Interesting, maybe. It remains completely unclear to me that it would be useful. I have a back injury that resulted in left leg atrophy of the calf, numbness in the hamstring and foot. single legged drills shows that my left leg is 50-60watts lower than my right. Is this useful, helpful? I find it somewhat important since my left him flexor was in severe pain the day after longer trainer ride, the right handled it great the left was severely overtaxed on a very simple workout.. should I be relaying on my good leg to carry 80% of the load, or should I be working to strengthen the weaker leg to bring it to 50-50 .. how do I measure that? seems pretty useful to measure independently with single legged drills. The injury question is very interesting. I wonder if it could be used in a way to help redevelop more quickly. Up until they are reasonable close. Otherwise, once able to ride, it's just ride within yourself and the weaker leg will come back reasonably close over time. The strong leg will likely be limited for awhile. But when looking at running, we don't take a massive bound with the strong leg just because we can, we limit it so both are operating similar to each other. That was with a person who should be able to make a full recovery. Something like an amputee (for example) could be different. They won't make a full recovery and could be significantly unbalanced. |
![]() ![]() |
Elite![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() I guess I'm not following something here. I'm not really concerned with my pedaling technique, but I do think it's interesting to know if one leg is more dominant than the other. i.e. if I do a 3 hour ride, and can see that I've developed 60% of my power with my right leg vs 40% with my left leg (very likely a big exaggeration)- would that not be important? If I feel some odd twinges or seem to get more fatigued on one leg rather than the other, and can take a look at individual data for each leg during a ride, does that not maybe provide some information (note - I said maybe). I'm not sure why you wouldn't want to know this data - perhaps it's not worth $1500 - but also think there could be useful information from the L/R data. |
|
![]() ![]() |
Elite![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() My bad Fred, I think I did a rotten job of explaining. In essence: A. With pedal stroke form, you got what you got. You probably can't, and likely shouldn't, try the change to appearance of your pedal stroke. B. With pedal stroke application of force, your "Spin Scan" or the vectors you apply force to the pedal- you can change that and may do well to in the interest of efficiency. It takes time, drills, riding a fixed gear- all that "old school" stuff no one has heard of. Now, doing "B" may influence "A", a bit of a contradiction, but I'll suggest "B" is an approach that has been employed with success by competitive cyclists since the 1920's and six-day racing. "A", in and of itself, is a tough call without much argument to support it. Hmmm.. I don't think that explaination is any clearer... Edited by Tom Demerly. 2012-01-20 10:12 PM |
![]() ![]() |
Coach![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() So in the interest of this thread I spent a little time during my work breaks checking out abstracts & papers on pubmed. I found several studies that LOOKED for assymetry in both cyclists & non-cyclists and didn't find any (2 studies of 16 and 18 subjects each), and I also found several studies that looked at effectiveness & efficiency of different styles...e.g. "pulling up". Pulling up improved effectiveness (increased power output), but lowered efficiency. Finally several other studies looking at muscle recruitment patterns of novice vs. experienced cyclists. The experienced cyclists showed better muscle recruitment patterns. What I did not find was any study that looked at the efficiency measurements of the novice vs. experience cyclists who had the different recruitment patterns, nor efficiency of cyclists vs. triathletes (who also had similar recruitment patterns as novice cyclists). I'm not saying they don't exist, but in 20 minutes or so of browsing pub med, reading the papers I could get and checkign references, I couldn't find the above studies. I wouldn't be willing to accept that they are not out there with such a short, casual literature search. it's all very intresting. THe big question is whether or not there is a shortcut to improving muscle recruitment patterns so that novice cyclists & triathletes can approach the pattern of experienced cyclists without just "riding lots" and secondly, what is the improvement in efficiency, if any, of improved recruitment patterns. Tom, regarding the toes down setup of Antequil...with such long cranks, in order not to have the knee come up to high and the thigh to chest angle too sharp, the seat would have to come up higher than standard...which means he'd have to reach lower at the bottom of the pedal stroke, pointing his toes. I'm not sure that this is explained by his lower leg structure...more likely it's explained by his preferred muscle recruitment of the larger muscles of the hamstrings & quads...but that's just my hypothesis. Edited by AdventureBear 2012-01-20 11:19 PM |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() This user's post has been ignored. |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() This user's post has been ignored. |
![]() ![]() |
Master![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Fred D - 2012-01-21 6:53 AM [ Tom, a few things: 1. I felt your explanation about the Garmin tri sports situation was excellent, thank you. I didn't order from them but appreciate your response. 2. There is no science to support our 'B' supposition. At least none I'm aware of. Improving spin scan is something you can train yourself to do,in fact in 2008 I did this exact thing, improving my score from 60 to about 80. Unfortunately that's all that improved for me. I haven't tracked it since 2008 and have made great strides of improvement in my cycling by simply just riding. I would argue that the onus of proof is on the people with the supposition, ie; the onus will be on Garmin to provide scientific data to prove that monitoring pedaling efficiency actually makes a difference. Until then it's a great marketing gimmick IMHO. 3. For gawd's sake man there is a limit on the number of smiley faces a man is allowed to use in an Internet response. I am actually considering revoking your 'man card'. Shape up sir. Fred, Just curious; did your spin scan stay at 80 or drop back down to 60. My spin scan drop back down to 60 and is currently avg 60 R/L. |
|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() This user's post has been ignored. |
![]() ![]() |
Coach![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() I bet the number has dropped if your overall power went up. ![]() But the R/L measurements in the computrainer are just projected values for the opposite leg sicne it doesn't actually measure each leg independantly. You can "fool" the computrainer into a good L leg spin scan number with only the R leg. Try it! Another note...the US OTC is using the Wattbike software for their triathletes (not sure about the cyclists). They feel pretty confident that improving their "spin" has improved the efficiency and performance of the triatheltes...they've all improved their polar view numbers/appearance (basically the same thing as the spin scan as far as I can tell), but even when talking with the physiologists who were working there, when I addressed the application of pedal force (and even with posters of force application on the opposite wall of the studio), THey seemed unfamiliar with the idea that as power increased, shape of power application changed. They weren't familiar with other reserach that had been done in the very same lab...with posters on the wall. So what does it all mean? If magical thinking in reality helps you get faster then something in that process is working for you. Keep it up. ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
Member![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Ok so I just got a powermeter on Thursday and as such, the first thing I did was read "Training and Racing with a Power Meter" by Allen and Coggan from cover to cover. I do recall reading about quadrant analysis and training specificity. I would say that using the data from a power meter to identify cadences selected during different scenarios can be pretty insightful. For instance, if you are mashing up hills at a low cadence, you may be depleting muscle glycogen faster than if you were to spin up at a more optimal cadence due to increased type II recruitment (although I'm still a little unclear about this as are the authors). Also, plotting power vs cadence can help you identify the point at which power drops. To quote the book: "In cycling, besides making yourself more aerodynamic, there are only two variables involved in going faster: You can pedal harder and you can pedal faster. The scatterplot can help you to understand which one of these options (or combination of them) might be more beneficial for you to set goals in as you train." So will I use my power-meter to integrate pedaling technique into my training or racing? If by pedaling technique you mean cadence, then yes. If not, then I'm really not sure what the question is about. Maybe you could try different pedaling techniques to see which is best by trial and error, but that seems like a lot of research to do especially since any change in technique will likely require an adaption period of an unknown time frame. In reality though, how much can pedaling efficiency really be improved beyond a certain point? Unless you are somehow sabotaging your pedaling stroke by pushing both pedals down at the same time, I don't really imagine that much could be changed. It is hard enough for runners to effectively improve technique, just ask Jack Daniels about heel striking vs mid-foot striking. Maybe with these new force meters coming out on the market (never have been force meters largely available until now), there will be some research done on pedaling stroke efficiency, but I'll leave that to the people with PhDs in exercise physiology performing large studies. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() AdventureBear - 2012-01-21 10:02 AM Another note...the US OTC is using the Wattbike software for their triathletes (not sure about the cyclists). They feel pretty confident that improving their "spin" has improved the efficiency and performance of the triatheltes...they've all improved their polar view numbers/appearance (basically the same thing as the spin scan as far as I can tell), but even when talking with the physiologists who were working there, when I addressed the application of pedal force (and even with posters of force application on the opposite wall of the studio), THey seemed unfamiliar with the idea that as power increased, shape of power application changed. They weren't familiar with other reserach that had been done in the very same lab...with posters on the wall. So what does it all mean? If magical thinking in reality helps you get faster then something in that process is working for you. Ah, yes. Informational inertia. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]()
beebs - Um, I think you should re-read this part of the book. They're not saying "here's the range of cadence or pedal force to use." They're saying "here's the range of cadence or pedal force you used" during that specific ride. It's like your monthly credit card statement: it tells you where you spent your money but it doesn't tell you where you should have spent your money. Pedal force-pedal velocity plots tell you something about the range of demands for a ride. You'll always want to train your power; that's the most important thing because a high FTP can make up for a multitude of sins. However, a secondary consideration is that TTs, crits, hill climbs, and rolling road races all have different demands so, if you have the time, you'll want your training to reflect the demands of the type of race you do. 2012-01-21 8:54 PM Ok so I just got a powermeter on Thursday and as such, the first thing I did was read "Training and Racing with a Power Meter" by Allen and Coggan from cover to cover. I do recall reading about quadrant analysis and training specificity. I would say that using the data from a power meter to identify cadences selected during different scenarios can be pretty insightful. For instance, if you are mashing up hills at a low cadence, you may be depleting muscle glycogen faster than if you were to spin up at a more optimal cadence due to increased type II recruitment (although I'm still a little unclear about this as are the authors). Also, plotting power vs cadence can help you identify the point at which power drops. To quote the book: "In cycling, besides making yourself more aerodynamic, there are only two variables involved in going faster: You can pedal harder and you can pedal faster. The scatterplot can help you to understand which one of these options (or combination of them) might be more beneficial for you to set goals in as you train." |
|
![]() ![]() |
Champion![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Tom Demerly. - 2012-01-20 6:32 PM You can improve the symetrical application of power around the pedal stroke and this likely makes pedaling more physiologically efficient once the neurological task is ingrained. What do you mean by symetrical application of power? Shane |
![]() ![]() |
Champion![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() MDVJR - 2012-01-20 6:44 PM I dont push down when the peddles reach the top. I push down when I reach about 4 o'clock position though the 8-9 o'clock position in a dragging motion. Seriously? If so, then I would say you do need to work on your pedalling technique! Shane |
![]() ![]() |
Champion![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Tom Demerly. - 2012-01-20 7:31 PM With respect, I'll suggest the competitive outcomes of 15 combined Tour de France victories may support a preponderance of evidence in lieu of a "concrete science" hypothesis. With respect, I would call that an argumentum ad verecundiam. Further, since we don't know anything about the pedalling dynamics of these riders during their 15 victories, we cannot assume they were pedalling in circles (or just pushing down harder). We can make all the arguments we want about how they were pedalling, however, without force plate analysis we are just guessing based on our intution. While the science of pedalling technique is far from complete, the balance of evidence seems to indicate that to create more power, one simply needs to push harder. Obviously some coordination is required but since (for the most part) our feet are attached to the pedals, it is hard to mess with the pedal stroke too much. Shane |
![]() ![]() |
Champion![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Tom Demerly. - 2012-01-21 12:11 AM B. With pedal stroke application of force, your "Spin Scan" or the vectors you apply force to the pedal- ... That is not what SpinScan is measuring. ...you can change that and may do well to in the interest of efficiency. And you may not - however, since I don't know anyone who has the tools to measure efficiency either on their trainer or on the road, this would seem to be a moot point. Shane |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() This user's post has been ignored. |
|
![]() ![]() |
Elite![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() Fred D - 2012-01-22 2:40 PM gsmacleod - 2012-01-22 1:27 PM Actually I think the last sentence is really, really interesting. I think it is hard to mess with the pedal stroke, but it is probably possible to make it better, but even more likely possible to make it WORSE. Kind of like over analyzing your golf swing, sometimes does more harm than good.Tom Demerly. - 2012-01-20 7:31 PM With respect, I'll suggest the competitive outcomes of 15 combined Tour de France victories may support a preponderance of evidence in lieu of a "concrete science" hypothesis. With respect, I would call that an argumentum ad verecundiam. Further, since we don't know anything about the pedalling dynamics of these riders during their 15 victories, we cannot assume they were pedalling in circles (or just pushing down harder). We can make all the arguments we want about how they were pedalling, however, without force plate analysis we are just guessing based on our intution. While the science of pedalling technique is far from complete, the balance of evidence seems to indicate that to create more power, one simply needs to push harder. Obviously some coordination is required but since (for the most part) our feet are attached to the pedals, it is hard to mess with the pedal stroke too much. ShaneOr your swim stroke.... |
![]() ![]() |
Coach![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
Member![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() RChung - 2012-01-22 12:16 PM
beebs - 2012-01-21 8:54 PM Ok so I just got a powermeter on Thursday and as such, the first thing I did was read "Training and Racing with a Power Meter" by Allen and Coggan from cover to cover. I do recall reading about quadrant analysis and training specificity. I would say that using the data from a power meter to identify cadences selected during different scenarios can be pretty insightful. For instance, if you are mashing up hills at a low cadence, you may be depleting muscle glycogen faster than if you were to spin up at a more optimal cadence due to increased type II recruitment (although I'm still a little unclear about this as are the authors). Also, plotting power vs cadence can help you identify the point at which power drops. To quote the book: "In cycling, besides making yourself more aerodynamic, there are only two variables involved in going faster: You can pedal harder and you can pedal faster. The scatterplot can help you to understand which one of these options (or combination of them) might be more beneficial for you to set goals in as you train." Um, I think you should re-read this part of the book. They're not saying "here's the range of cadence or pedal force to use." They're saying "here's the range of cadence or pedal force you used" during that specific ride. It's like your monthly credit card statement: it tells you where you spent your money but it doesn't tell you where you should have spent your money. Pedal force-pedal velocity plots tell you something about the range of demands for a ride. You'll always want to train your power; that's the most important thing because a high FTP can make up for a multitude of sins. However, a secondary consideration is that TTs, crits, hill climbs, and rolling road races all have different demands so, if you have the time, you'll want your training to reflect the demands of the type of race you do. I think you should re-read my reply because that is not what I was implying. Have you read that chapter? |
![]() ![]() |
Coach![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ![]() beebs - 2012-01-22 11:20 PM Have you read that chapter? I think he's read all of them multiple times...and he might as well have written them. Mr. Chung is one if the most respected contributors to the wattage forum. |
General Discussion | Triathlon Talk » Question for the Coaches: Power meter use and pedal technique, what say you? | Rss Feed ![]() |
|