Page 7 - Poor man's Powercranks? (PPC)

24-02.-2007, 05:04 AM

#91

acoggan

Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2003

Posts: 2,588

Re: Poor man's Powercranks? (PPC)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fday

you put words in my mouth that I referred to him as a "high powered" researcher.

I see. So, what exactly did you mean to convey by repeatedly stating:

"This study was done by a very reputable group..."

"...this well respected group..."

"...these authors have an excellent reputation..."

"...I was told by a researcher in Australia that he had an excellent reputation for doing good work."

Etc.

24-02.-2007, 06:07 AM

#92

Fday

Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2005

Location: California

Posts: 670

Re: Poor man's Powercranks? (PPC)

Quote:

Originally Posted by acoggan

Exactly what I said is exactly what I meant. I have never heard anything detrimental regarding the acedemic integrity of any member of this group plus when I told people this study was in the works to people who knew of them I was told they had an excellent reputation. If you have information to the contrary please let me know and I might change my view. If not, back off.

Now, lets get back to discussing the Coyle study instead of dissing those who happened to have studied PowerCranks.

Frank

24-02.-2007, 07:44 AM

#93

ric_stern/RST

Community Team

Join Date: Nov 2002

Location: Newport, South Wales

Posts: 3,830

Re: Poor man's Powercranks? (PPC)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fday

But you're the one that kept 'bigging' him (and his group) up. Andy, has just said that he hasn't previously published in this field of exercise physiology. He usually publishes in environmental physiology.

Let me rephrase this. Andy is a leading expert in exercise physiology, and has written papers on e.g., the demands of cycle racing (see http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...l=pubmed_docsum). However, you wouldn't necessarily expect him to be an expert and write a paper on the determinants of performance in say horse racing or gymnastics, would you? Now, he may have a reasonable or good idea of how those sports and the mechanisms involved work, but wouldn't necessarily be an expert (apologies andy, if you know lots about these sports). Similarly, while Cheung may know and be well respected about thermoregulation, it doesn't necessarily mean he knows much about endurance cycling performance (and having read some of the articles that does write about them, i've made a fair point).

Now, Frank, i know you know and understand the above, i'm sure you just play 'daft' to swing the lead.

Ric

__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com

24-02.-2007, 07:56 AM

#94

Fday

Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2005

Location: California

Posts: 670

Re: Poor man's Powercranks? (PPC)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ric_stern/RST

Phooey. The Dixon paper (which is not yet a paper) should be judged on its merits just as the Luttrell study should be, and the Coyle study and every other study out there (including Dr. Coggan's). Unless the authors are known for doing fraudulent work, lets discuss the papers. Stop obfusicating. Let's discuss these papers, both their strengths and their weaknesses. I am trying to start with the Coyle study. Pitch in if you have any opinions. Then, let's move on to the Luttrell study for comparison. Then everyone can judge for themselves which is the better paper regarding this topic.

Frank

24-02.-2007, 08:04 AM

#95

ric_stern/RST

Community Team

Join Date: Nov 2002

Location: Newport, South Wales

Posts: 3,830

Re: Poor man's Powercranks? (PPC)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fday

Phooey. The Dixon paper (which is not yet a paper) should be judged on its merits

You're the one who keeps bringing it up. I don't believe it has any merits. An abstract is an abridged version of the actual paper, which should include all the information (in a shortened form). There's no control group mentioned. The study falls to pieces. End of.

Ric

__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com

24-02.-2007, 03:29 PM

#96

Fday

Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2005

Location: California

Posts: 670

Re: Poor man's Powercranks? (PPC)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ric_stern/RST

What did your statistician say about the absolute need for a control group to keep a study from "falling to pieces"? Anyhow, this is more obfuscation. It is time we start talking about the relative merits of these various articles/studies. Forget Dixon, let us just talk about Coyle (no control group) vs Luttrell (control group) and what they say (or don't say) about pedaling mechanics. What are you and Dr. Coggan afraid of? If Dr. Coggan is the expert you claim he should be able to easily convince me and those lurking here as to what these papers mean and how they should be "properly" interpreted. After all, Doctor means teacher.

26-02.-2007, 09:13 AM

#97

n crowley

Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2003

Location: dublin ireland

Posts: 415

Re: Poor man's Powercranks? (PPC)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fday

In the Luttrell and Dixon studies was any attention given to the pedaling style of all these riders before the tests began ?

27-02.-2007, 04:29 AM

#98

Fday

Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2005

Location: California

Posts: 670

Re: Poor man's Powercranks? (PPC)

Quote:

Originally Posted by n crowley

In the Luttrell and Dixon studies was any attention given to the pedaling style of all these riders before the tests began ?

No, they simply looked at the "end result" changes that occurred from incorporating PC's into their training program compared to another group who did similar training without PC's.

27-02.-2007, 05:31 AM

#99

Fday

Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2005

Location: California

Posts: 670

Re: Poor man's Powercranks? (PPC)

Quote:

Originally Posted by n crowley

In the Luttrell and Dixon studies was any attention given to the pedaling style of all these riders before the tests began ?

Oops, didn't notice you asked about Dixon also. I don't believe he paid any attention to pedaling style in the subjects. I also don't know if there was a control group of if they measured statistical significance in another way. I don't know this because I have not seen the protocol.

Frank

27-02.-2007, 05:54 AM

#100

n crowley

Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2003

Location: dublin ireland

Posts: 415

Re: Poor man's Powercranks? (PPC)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fday

In both studies there are too many unanswered questions. How can training of hip flexors increase your main downward pedal stroke muscle power to turn those higher gears. What was your pedaling style before you started using PC's.

27-02.-2007, 06:07 AM

#101

Fday

Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2005

Location: California

Posts: 670

Re: Poor man's Powercranks? (PPC)

Quote:

Originally Posted by n crowley

Every study has lots of answered questions. Most studies try to look at just a few questions which makes them doable. In these instances, I think these authors were just trying to answer the question, Do they work better than traditional training? Once that is established, later authors can do the work to figure out exactly why? Research in complicated areas such as this is usually done in small steps.

I, like most people, didn't have a clue what my pedaling style was before PC's. No one knows because very few have ever had their actual pedal forces analyzed (things like computrainer spinscan are a good try but really doesn't do the job as it combines both legs into one output). Without actual pedal force analysis, most people are just guessing as to what their pedaling style really is.

27-02.-2007, 06:13 AM

#102

Fday

Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2005

Location: California

Posts: 670

Re: Poor man's Powercranks? (PPC)

Quote:

Originally Posted by n crowley

Also, I agree training the hip flexors should not increase your "main downward pedal stroke muscle power" (there is a reflex that might make this occur but I doubt it plays a role here) but they still allow you to turn bigger gears because instead of increasing active pedaling muscle mass by simply pushing harder one is now increasing active pedaling muscle mass by combining the muscle forces of the pushers and pullers.

27-02.-2007, 06:59 AM

#103

acoggan

Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2003

Posts: 2,588

Re: Poor man's Powercranks? (PPC)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fday

What are you and Dr. Coggan afraid of?

I'm not afraid of anything. I do, however, reserve the right to not waste my time debating with people who, e.g., know so little about statistics that they don't understand how statistical significance can be achieved in a study lacking a control group.

27-02.-2007, 07:00 AM

#104

acoggan

Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2003

Posts: 2,588

Re: Poor man's Powercranks? (PPC)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fday

this is more obfuscation. It is time we start talking about the relative merits of these various articles/studies.

Aren't you the person who, when pressed, blew off questions by saying "don't ask me, ask the authors!"?

27-02.-2007, 07:37 AM	#105
rmur17 Registered User Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 929	Re: Poor man's Powercranks? (PPC) can i delete this thread now? A couple of weeks ago whilst spinning idly in the aero position during my cooldown I thought I'd come upon a reasonable idea. Seems it was more of a brain-fart than a light bulb going off! Just thinking about it a little more - it seems to me that however lightly I attempt to make the downstroke that even simply the weight of the downstroke leg plus a little momentum simply carries the other leg thru the upstroke. I can't see any detraction from muscularly generated downstroke force to raise the other leg. This is with conventional cranks of course. The hip flexors seem mostly along for the ride. JFP __________________ rmur

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode