pealling push up push down

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

However if when you begin to start cycling at early age for example, and you are encourage to apply a complex collection of forces to a pedal/crank not just stomp down evidence seems to suggest you become a better cyclist ?


It is this advice and the gearing restriction of young riders that prevents them from searching for their own best way to power the pedals and kept the mysterious powerful pedalling of Anquetil in time trials a secret for so long. Even when Anquetil was invincible in time trials, his coach tried to force him to change his technique to the circular style. There are three basic styles with a suitable time and place for all three and I believe you could be a far better cyclist when you succeed in perfecting all three. But because of the brainwashing of all young riders, even today's top researchers are only aware of two and because of this have put the wrong interpretation on the results of their research.

It is this advice and the gearing restriction of young riders that prevents them from searching for their own best way to power the pedals and kept the mysterious powerful pedalling of Anquetil in time trials a secret for so long. Even when Anquetil was invincible in time trials, his coach tried to force him to change his technique to the circular style. There are three basic styles with a suitable time and place for all three and I believe you could be a far better cyclist when you succeed in perfecting all three. But because of the brainwashing of all young riders, even today's top researchers are only aware of two and because of this have put the wrong interpretation on the results of their research.

I'm no expert so you are not going to get an argument from me. It's just when I was a less trained cyclist my legs would fatigue on a hill and I'd sit in the saddle and focus on lifting my pedals to attempted to stop from falling completely off the back of the pack. These days my legs are up to the task, my focus is on when and where to expend or conserve my energies as I seem to completely fatigue as opposed to just not having no legs. I'm completely oblivious to my pedaling action, focus is on effort and cadence and the other riders.

i tried searching all over for what the push up part of proper pedalling mans but to no avail. I do not comprehend what the pushing up part is, i.e. what do youpush up???? Some help would be appreciated as I have searched all over and cant seem to comprehend what pushing up is, i can understand what pushing down is thoughTry to keep your heals pointed down while you pedal to avoid the ballet pointy toe. This technique is especially useful on climbs; I concentrate on keeping my heels down and that helps me pull up. Courtesy of Coach Aldo at the Alabama cycling camp.

It is this advice and the gearing restriction of young riders that prevents them from searching for their own best way to power the pedals and kept the mysterious powerful pedalling of Anquetil in time trials a secret for so long. Even when Anquetil was invincible in time trials, his coach tried to force him to change his technique to the circular style. There are three basic styles with a suitable time and place for all three and I believe you could be a far better cyclist when you succeed in perfecting all three. But because of the brainwashing of all young riders, even today's top researchers are only aware of two and because of this have put the wrong interpretation on the results of their research.

There is a point there … "that is if you a good a one thing why do another thing that you are less good at"

The whole pedaling in circles debate is a bit of nonsense really. Everybody who rides a bike for any length of time in cleated pedals will do more then just stomp down. The idea of training more of the smaller muscle to contribute to the pedaling action is not without merit. I read somewhere that about 40% of leg muscle mass is recruited in cycling while 70% is recruited in running. I don't know where these stats come from and not sure that it is true, it must vary from one bloke to the next. However reason dictates that more contributing muscles = more power. Otherwise why have clip in pedals, which I've been told will allow one to produce as much as 30% more power.

i tried searching all over for what the push up part of proper pedalling mans but to no avail. I do not comprehend what the pushing up part is, i.e. what do youpush up???? Some help would be appreciated as I have searched all over and cant seem to comprehend what pushing up is, i can understand what pushing down is though


In simple terms:
top of the stroke = kick foward, the forward leg
middle of the up/down stroke = lift with the rearward knee
bottom of the stroke = scrape backwards the mud of the forward shoe

However this is a training thing, sometimes when I want some real power I point my toe and stomp down !

In simple terms:
top of the stroke = kick foward, the forward leg
middle of the up/down stroke = lift with the rearward knee
bottom of the stroke = scrape backwards the mud of the forward shoe

However this is a training thing, sometimes when I want some real power I point my toe and stomp down !




What effect does cadence increase have on the start of a stomper's effective pedal stroke ?

What effect does cadence increase have on the start of a stomper's effective pedal stroke ?

Not quite sure I understand the question, I can only speak for myself on this, need to accelerate to pass, stomp, cadence increases, (90/100 to 105/115) done as opposed to getting out of the saddle however I don't / can't sustain this, max 3 min effort I reckon then back to a smoother pedal stroke.

Not quite sure I understand the question, I can only speak for myself on this, need to accelerate to pass, stomp, cadence increases, (90/100 to 105/115) done as opposed to getting out of the saddle however I don't / can't sustain this, max 3 min effort I reckon then back to a smoother pedal stroke.



Unlike the circular style where attempted continuous 360 degree power appliction is used, with the stomping style power application is made by sharp injections of power to a fast moving crank. This power application begins to take effect somewhere between 12 and 3 o'c, what I am asking is, does increasing cadence move the start of power application closer to 12 or 3 o'c.

Unlike the circular style where attempted continuous 360 degree power appliction is used, with the stomping style power application is made by sharp injections of power to a fast moving crank. This power application begins to take effect somewhere between 12 and 3 o'c .

Without putting too fine a point on this … if i get out of the saddle the power application I think is more to the 3 o'c, if I just stomp in the saddle it is more midway between 12 and 3 o'c. Not really my focus when I'm doing this. Power and cadence increase is a combined lift in performance for a bust of acceleration.

does increasing cadence move the start of power application closer to 12 or 3 o'c .

I don't know ?

I've been using Powercranks for a mere two months and despite this short period, I've noticed a few bizzare things, some expected, some not:

- My cadence has been shot to hell... 80rpm in any gear is hell on wheels. Someday I'll get back to around 90rpm for hours on end.... someday.

- I've got past the having to think about pulling up. Pulling up and pushing across the top is now natural which leaves me more time to concentrate on pushing down harder. I don't think about "pedaling in circles" as it just happens, it HAS to happen with these things and with that distraction out of the way it's easier to concentrate on pushing down and form.

- Despite only being able to ride for 2 hours and having limited exposure to these cranks, my hill climbing has improved significantly. During the past 2 years I've been climbing up the local mountain, 5 miles average 9% at around 7 mph (there are places where the grade gets to around 25%) using plots from the training sessions logged with my Polar CS600 I can see that even on my heavier steel bike (23lb with Adjustable Powercrank Vs 17.5lb for my carbon/ali bike) I'm faster. I'm also 10lbs heavier than I was back in July too. Given the extra combined 16lb in weight and not being able to do the 5 to 6 hour training sessions on the mountain I'm a happy camper with the extra 1mph. I'm slowly losing the weight and can't wait until I lose that 16lbs.

- Oddly, heart rate for a given speed below threshold is lower now with the Powercranks than it was just two months ago. I would have expected at this early stage that it would be the other way around.

- I'm developing muscles I never had when I was racing years ago, most notiably in the front/inner thigh area. "Her indoors" approves :)

These are just my observations. I really wish I had these years ago when I was a mere 140lbs but could do a 56 on the local 25mile tt. Now, less fit and 183lb these things have been more of a jump start back to fitness than anything in the past 2 years and believe me I haven't been slacking.

I've been using Powercranks for a mere two months and despite this short period, I've noticed a few bizzare things, some expected, some not:

- My cadence has been shot to hell... 80rpm in any gear is hell on wheels. Someday I'll get back to around 90rpm for hours on end.... someday.

- I've got past the having to think about pulling up. Pulling up and pushing across the top is now natural which leaves me more time to concentrate on pushing down harder. I don't think about "pedaling in circles" as it just happens, it HAS to happen with these things and with that distraction out of the way it's easier to concentrate on pushing down and form.

- Despite only being able to ride for 2 hours and having limited exposure to these cranks, my hill climbing has improved significantly. During the past 2 years I've been climbing up the local mountain, 5 miles average 9% at around 7 mph (there are places where the grade gets to around 25%) using plots from the training sessions logged with my Polar CS600 I can see that even on my heavier steel bike (23lb with Adjustable Powercrank Vs 17.5lb for my carbon/ali bike) I'm faster. I'm also 10lbs heavier than I was back in July too. Given the extra combined 16lb in weight and not being able to do the 5 to 6 hour training sessions on the mountain I'm a happy camper with the extra 1mph. I'm slowly losing the weight and can't wait until I lose that 16lbs.

- Oddly, heart rate for a given speed below threshold is lower now with the Powercranks than it was just two months ago. I would have expected at this early stage that it would be the other way around.

- I'm developing muscles I never had when I was racing years ago, most notiably in the front/inner thigh area. "Her indoors" approves :)

These are just my observations. I really wish I had these years ago when I was a mere 140lbs but could do a 56 on the local 25mile tt. Now, less fit and 183lb these things have been more of a jump start back to fitness than anything in the past 2 years and believe me I haven't been slacking.






You say you did a 56 for a 25 m tt, if you had POWERCRANKS at that time, where or how could they have improved that TT time.

You say you did a 56 for a 25 m tt, if you had POWERCRANKS at that time, where or how could they have improved that TT time.
I only have two months on these cranks, so apart from the data that I have to reference from last summer against current rides there's not really much I can add of "actual data."

I'm heavier now than I was back in the middle of last year yet faster uphill despite doing pretty much the same training this past few weeks as I had done this time last year.

(It's a given that the first couple of weeks on Powercranks if you're using them exclusively is just short and painful intervals at slow speed).

All I can say is that I don't think about what happens between 6 o'clock and 11 o'clock and I just think about pushing harder. It gives you less to think about as you know that if you don't unweight the leg you don't get to pedal again. It's actually quite a liberating feeling, not in a mystical Zen-like way but "nice" none-the-less.

As I don't have a means of measuring instantaneous torque I'd hazzard a guess that my extra speed comes from concentrating on pushing harder, sooner, as I can't imagine "being stronger" this soon into using them. Pedaling does feel consistently smoother than before, but when I get into "the zone" I know I've been there before on rare occaisions on standard cranks. There's been a few times on the turbo (trainer) where I've pushed a little too soon and ended up getting some air time off the saddle...

Of course I say that "I don't think about what happens between 6 o'clock and 11 o'clock" but after two hours I still don't think - I just can't pedal. LOL

What I haven't had time to look at (or even if its possible to get the raw data from the CS600 output - I haven't played with the Polar Protrainer software or whatever it's called) is where I gained the time on the hill, the steep bits or the flatter parts.

Do they work? I'm liking the results so far and I'm not going to be returning them for the money back guarentee... plus I got the adjustable ones, so when I loose the midsection "tub o'lard" I'll be checking out different crank lengths too. Now I already know from past testing (a decade or so ago) I'm faster on longer cranks but the gut gets compressed twice per pedal rev if I use the 185mm TA Alize cranks and it certainly isn't possible to use the Powercranks at that length due to gut squish.

... and I know I did a good number of 56's back in merry old England during the mid 90's. The only time I got a fast course (on "the Boro" on the A1, Yorkshire) on a "good" day I punctured at the far turn. :( Did a couple of 21 minute 10's and a couple of 1-55's for 50miles too. Ah, wonderful days of getting up at 4am to go time trialing on the trusty 531 frame in a skinsuit through the 6am morning fog. Brrrrrrr.

I just don't have power results from any of these riders - what they usually give us are race results, which will not satisfy your requirements - as I have already given you several anecdotes of the kinds of reports we receive and it is clearly unconvincing to you. So, let us say PC's don't provide any cycling improvement. We will just sell them to the triathletes and other sports teams and rehab professionals for the running improvement, injury rehab benefits, and injury prevention benefits they provide. Our running improvement claims are probably more outrageous than the cycling claims. But, you probably don't believe those claims either? So, we will just have to carry on without your seal of approval.

I look forward to the time an adequate study of my claims is actually done to see how close I got to what the actual number really is. When such a study is done then we will probably use that number.



Now that this study has been completed and found Powercranks did not improve power output, are you embarrassed by your claims of 40%. Rotorcranks, Powercranks and circular pedalling are all affected by the same problem which removes any expected advantages; fast moving leg muscles of higher cadences can behave or react differently to slow moving muscles, the rate at which visualization of new ideas and their possible advantages is usually done. But while these fast moving muscles can erase the expected advantages of an inventor's new idea, they can also make possible that which at slow motion visualization speed or static crank position appears to be impossible, (e.g.) with the knowhow and normal equipment you can begin your power stroke with (full 90 deg.) tangential maximum power to the crank before 12 o'c. If PC's enabled a rider to do that, what would they be worth ?

Now that this study has been completed and found Powercranks did not improve power output, are you embarrassed by your claims of 40%. Rotorcranks, Powercranks and circular pedalling are all affected by the same problem which removes any expected advantages; fast moving leg muscles of higher cadences can behave or react differently to slow moving muscles, the rate at which visualization of new ideas and their possible advantages is usually done. But while these fast moving muscles can erase the expected advantages of an inventor's new idea, they can also make possible that which at slow motion visualization speed or static crank position appears to be impossible, (e.g.) with the knowhow and normal equipment you can begin your power stroke with (full 90 deg.) tangential maximum power to the crank before 12 o'c. If PC's enabled a rider to do that, what would they be worth ?Huh? To which study are you referring?

Huh? To which study are you referring?



The research was done by otto@adelphi.edu and fellow scientists. This was in keeping with the findings of the Luttrell study where power increase is concerned. But what else could you expect, the circular style will always be less powerful or effective than the mashing style. Does a PC user use different muscles or exercise them in a different way to that of the "one legged" training rider, in a way that will make them more powerful.

The research was done by otto@adelphi.edu and fellow scientists. This was in keeping with the findings of the Luttrell study where power increase is concerned. But what else could you expect, the circular style will always be less powerful or effective than the mashing style. Does a PC user use different muscles or exercise them in a different way to that of the "one legged" training rider, in a way that will make them more powerful.I thought that might be what you were referring to. first, all we have is the abstract which says it shows no statistical difference between two groups of PC'ers who trained for 90 minutes per week and 180 minutes per week on PC's compared to a control group, so we really don't know what really went on. Second, as you know, there are lots of problems I have with this study, in that some of the cranks that were sent back were broken so it is not possible for those participants to have actually train in the PC fashion (all the cranks could be locked up) yet no one seeme to even notice as we were only aware of this as we inspected the cranks to get ready for resale. If have severe doubts that the participants did what they were supposed to and even if they did, the study did not follow our instructions for best use. What is to be learned from this? I don't know, but it certainly is not telling us much about pedaling style. Maybe when we see the entire study in publication (unlikely) we will know more.

I thought that might be what you were referring to. first, all we have is the abstract which says it shows no statistical difference between two groups of PC'ers who trained for 90 minutes per week and 180 minutes per week on PC's compared to a control group, so we really don't know what really went on. Second, as you know, there are lots of problems I have with this study, in that some of the cranks that were sent back were broken so it is not possible for those participants to have actually train in the PC fashion (all the cranks could be locked up) yet no one seeme to even notice as we were only aware of this as we inspected the cranks to get ready for resale. If have severe doubts that the participants did what they were supposed to and even if they did, the study did not follow our instructions for best use. What is to be learned from this? I don't know, but it certainly is not telling us much about pedaling style. Maybe when we see the entire study in publication (unlikely) we will know more.
So someone did a "scientific study" and didn't bother the install the equipment they were testing properly, nor even maintained it properly during the course of the test? Nice...

One could wonder whether test equipment was actually calibrated if such a poor level of mechanical ability was shown on such a simple installation (of the powercranks).

I think N Crowley is missing the point on what PowerCranks help you do (maybe I missed the point too) but I always thought that it was primarily to help you provide enough positive force to lift the rising pedal.

For me, learning to do that allowed me to concentrate on pushing harder and pushing sooner. You don't have to think about pulling up cause you have no choice.

That said, I better start thinking about walking up stairs... Feck.

So someone did a "scientific study" and didn't bother the install the equipment they were testing properly, nor even maintained it properly during the course of the test? Nice...

One could wonder whether test equipment was actually calibrated if such a poor level of mechanical ability was shown on such a simple installation (of the powercranks).

I think N Crowley is missing the point on what PowerCranks help you do (maybe I missed the point too) but I always thought that it was primarily to help you provide enough positive force to lift the rising pedal.

For me, learning to do that allowed me to concentrate on pushing harder and pushing sooner. You don't have to think about pulling up cause you have no choice.

That said, I better start thinking about walking up stairs... Feck.All I know is all the cranks were lock-up to facilitate the study as some of the participants were to use them part time (in fact, it looks like all the participants used them part time, just some more than others). When they were returned some of the cranks were returned in terrible condition, we were unable to unlock them without a great deal of difficulty and one set had broken clutches. We were never informed that there was ever a problem with any of the product. It just is not clear to me that the study really represents what it purports to represent, expecially when it shows no difference between groups. I could see a study making people slower and I can see one making them faster, depending upon when the test are done during the transition, but I find it hard to imagine any PC study showing no difference. I suspect you as a PC'er can understand what I am talking about. N. Crowley will never understand what the cranks are and what they do I think.

I think the study was conducted with good intentions but it is not clear it was done with enough control over how the equipment was used.

Under the assumption that these gains are real (they seem to be but remember, these have yet to be "proven" in a controlled trial) I believe they come from many sources and I believe I have answered this question for you before. But, here I go again. These are my predictions as to where the benefits will come from. It will be up to the researchers to study this question to find out where they are really coming from (remember, assuming they are real). I would think that 10-25% of the improvement will come from simply unweighting, depending upon the pedaling style of the rider before PC's. then 50-75% will come from changing the coordination to make the delivered forces more tangential to the pedaling circle and improving the forces across the top and bottom, especially the top. And 5-15% perhaps from allowing the muscles to work at a more efficient load, reducing cadence to a more efficient cadence and not making the pushing muscles contract quite as hard as they do now.

That is my prediction. Nobody knows right now. But, if the gains are real they have to come from somewhere and simply unweighting cannot give these kinds of gains, so there have to be other mechanisms. These are some of the other possible mechanisms.

Frank


SWAMPY1970 does not agree with your predictions and you are the inventor.

I think N Crowley is missing the point on what PowerCranks help you do (maybe I missed the point too) but I always thought that it was primarily to help you provide enough positive force to lift the rising pedal.

For me, learning to do that allowed me to concentrate on pushing harder and pushing sooner. You don't have to think about pulling up cause you have no choice.



Do you believe it could be possible for a person using your pedalling style to start pushing even sooner than you do now on the downstroke and if not, why not.