Arch cleats??

Ergoman

How many of the names that you mention have actually used arch cleats in the competitions you mention? I researched all the names online and couldn't find one reference to arch cleats or photo of any of them riding arch cleats. It would seem that if anyone rode arch cleats to a big victory it would be sensational cycling news. The results of any of these competitions would be public record and that there would be no legal restriction to listing them.

biomac

Ergoman, for your convenience find a short list of some of the better known names:
www.clavi.ch (A. Clavadetscher; 24hour Record road and European Record track; xxAlps; '03-'06);
www.multisports.com (Paula Newby-Fraser, Ironman Hawaii and California; '01-'02);
www.ljungskog.com (Susanne Ljungskog, Road World Championships; '01-'07);
www.tylerhamilton.com (Tyler Hamilton,'07 road, but training only);
www.olivierbernhard.com (Olivier Bernhard; Ironman New Zealand '03);
www.beatknechtle.ch (Beat Knechtle;entire '04, Decatriathlon);
www.thomasrohregger.com (Thomas Rohregger;'07, road);
www.bramboeck.com (Eva Bramböck;'05-'07, triathlon)
Should you not get a response, I will be happy to submit the original pictures, showing the athlete in arch cleat position/biomac shoes at the respective races I claimed.
The Internet has only few limits, so Good luck!
Götz Heine

frenchyge

Aside from a higher torque and lower angular velocity, I'm not sure what additional differences a longer crank would produce with regards to mechanical power transfer. Have you found that the 'mighty' feeling riders describe correlates to using a larger gear and lower cadence during riding that would be expected with a longer crank arm? Wouldn't that geometry be very similar to riding with an increased seatpost layback?

Let's go with the scientific level of discussion, rather than how it feels to push on mid-foot cleats. Are you suggesting that there's a power transfer advantage associated with crank length?

n crowley

Why do you mention a 210 mm crank length, you will still be using a 170 mm crank and you will be using the same power generating muscles minus your ankle and calf muscles. While out walking today I saw a child using this arch cleat position with a fast cadence and it appeared very choppy and far from a smooth style of pedalling. As I understand it, the problem with using this arch cleat set-up is that you are restricted to only one style of pedalling when in reality there are four possible other effective ways to power the pedals with ideal times and places for all four. The fatal error made by all pedalling researchers is in underestimating the capabilities of the bodies muscles when applying power to the cranks from a seated position and so instead they concentrate on changing equipment or its set-up instead of trying to improving pedalling technique. Contrary to what you and all cycling experts believe, there does not have to be a dead zone around 12 o'c, it can be replaced with the same power input as that at 3 o'c and the ankle and calf muscles are a vital part of this operation. Sorry if I put a damper on your idea.

biomac

Although its well past midnight on our side of the ocean, I hope I will still be able to catch what you are aiming at.
So my answer is Yes and No, frenchyge.
Yes, because when you have a longer lever, the peak power necessary to do the same work will diminish due to the length of the lever. In our case this length gets kind of modified by the circumference, say the tip of the shoe describes when on its p o s i t i v e section of the circle around the bottom bracket (for the sake of acceptable simplification, let's assume only in this section a rider's force can be used economically to pull the chain to move the bike in a forward direction). Now when you move the foot foward on the pedal, automatically it will spend more time in this section, so the same load gets a longer processing which results in less peak power per cm circumference, right?
Now here you go and say "Right, so let's put on longer cranks and forget about these expensive shoes." (in fact, for what they offer, they are cheap)
No, because putting on a longer crank will have similar effect on the downstroke, i.e. a prolonged length within the positive sector, but - as the n e g a t i v e sector of the spinnig circle, the dead or 'pulling' zone, is bigger than the positive one, automatically this sector will increase disproportionately more than the positve one. Better leverage bought on the expense of even more dead zone, not a good deal. This is why most pro-teams have moved back on 172.5mm/175mm cranks because it simply doesn't pay unless, yes, unless the rider has long feet. But that's a different field.
Seatpost layback and ankle play in former days ('70s and '80s) was the one and only soluton for those who wanted to diminish the initial pressure at 5 past 12, so to create a more tangential transfer of power rather than 'crush the crank' and at the same time increase the length of the positive section. Steve Bauer and others have spent years of their career and reputaion explaining what in those days was still due to come, i.e. decent torque measuring. Of course his attempt was a rather practical one and had so many shortcomings it wasn't funny, but Steve was one of the first modern biomacs, I'd say.
See at http://62.75.177.102/biomac-p6h5s6-bta_soft.htm a graph which highlights what I am aiming at above. In this graph, the
blue circle shows the UCI-allowed circle of the pedal axle around the bottom bracket
the red one shows the traditional shoe and cleat circulating and the
green circle shows the biomechanical advanced orbit of the shoe due to bio-mxc².
Clear? Oh yes: By clicking on the British or US-flag on the left side you can change the language from German to English, sorry, my version of English.

Ergoman

What you have provided is a list of the individuals' webpages. Once again, no photos, no race results, no mention of arch cleats or your products on any of these pages. If you have photos or results from any of these athletes using arch cleats in competition, please post them here.

frenchyge

I'm not sure if the language difference got in the way, but in english that statement is just not correct. Hopefully I've missed what you were trying to say here. If you replaced the word 'power' with the word 'force', then I'd agree with what you said.

Actually, just shifting to a lower gear (bigger cog) would accomplish the same thing as putting on longer cranks and would save even more money. In both cases my pedal force is lower and I have to make my feet move faster in order to propel the bike at the same speed as before. Cranks, gears, levers, etc. all serve to change the mechanical advantage between the pedals and the wheel, but none of them affect the power or work that is done in moving the bike. As force goes up, distance (and therefore velocity) goes down.

The colored circles show the paths traced by the toes, but that part of the foot doesn't really have a role in the torque or force application to the pedals, does it? Are those circles what you're using to say that you've increased the positive portion of the pedal stroke?

As a mechanical engineer looking at those circles, I would actually expect that the toe cleat position would allow a rider to start the downstroke earlier (and have a longer downstroke) because of the more tangential angle of the connecting line between the ankle and the pedal at the top and bottom of the stroke. The green shoe makes that force vector more vertical, which is great for stomping from 2-4 o'clock, but not so good for driving the pedal forward at 5 minutes past 12 o'clock. I could be wrong, but that's my quick take. Thanks for the link.

frenchyge

Here's a picture of a woman in rainbow stripes who appears to be using mid-foot cleats:

http://62.75.177.102/biomac-p10h5s6-.htm

Alex Simmons

But no power meter?

__________________
http://alex-cycle.blogspot.com/
http://www.cyclecoach.com/

biomac

Crowley, there is some misunderstanding which I will be happy to clearify.
First, I am not a "pedal researcher", in fact, as a shoe-maker, I have to put up with so many various pedal systems industry claims to be necessary although all a pedal has to do using my position is provide a stable basis to the shoe that engages to it.
The area around Dublin is pretty flat, I know. However from my time as a pro, racing the Tour of Ireland I remember some beautiful spot South of Dublin called 'Cill Mhantain', better known as Glendalough in the Wicklow Mountains. Although there are no steep gradients, I trust they will give you some idea what bio-mxc² is all about when you go up and down there on the bike a couple of times. You see, watching kids on the bike as a pedestrian can be tricky, so better go on the bike yourself and practice what you are talking about.
For it appears to me that what you have been looking at is something which insiders labelled 'System Herbert'. Dieter Herbert, a German I never had the pleasure to meet in person nor hear about his ideas before I had applied for my 1st patent, ived or still lives in Sweden applied for Patent's Grant, claiming the heel would be the best point for cleat attachment as this very heel is a direct extension of the knee. Therefore, he claimed, there was no need to use the calves to stabilise the foot as a lever during downstroke any more (see: DE19956413A1 of November 24th, 1999). Read well, an 'A1', an application, not a patent! He would have had the chance to convert his application into a patent on May 31st 2001, instead he refrained from doing so, so in fact doesn't have a valid patent in this field altogether
http://publikationen.dpma.de/DPMApublikationen/lst_pat_beg.do;jsessionid=c23b66e930df7efb56a65de94bfd85e2de43e5f12af7
Why? Because in the meantime he learned from another German, me, that he had obviously chosen the wrong area on the shoe for his claims. Of course the heel is the direct extension of the knee and calf muscles would not need to stabilise the foot acting as an extra lever during downstroke any more, therefore use up less oxygen necessary for muscle contraction. But, and this is decisive, anything above 40, 50 rpm would make it impossible to keep the bike under reasonable control due to rocking up and down on the saddle. You need not be an expert to imagine what would happen when a rider gets moving on the flat, sprints or just gets out of the saddle with his setup, do you?
Like a dino of ancient times he would slowly stagger rather than dance on his pedals. This is where kids, usually equipped with one single gear but natural experts of biomechanics altogether, overdo at times. Some would put their heels onto the pedals in their initial attempt to have no fatigue at all in the perigenual region so to fire all their still unrestricted hip power onto the pedals. Once they accellerated speed, they start bouncing because the movement can't be balanced with the help of the calve's subtle but firm counterbalance action. What has been exaggerated with the cleats under the ball-of-the-foot, thus leaving a huge lever to be controlled by comparatively tiny calf muscles, with 'system Herbert' found its antipode and riders like Susanne Ljungskog, her boy-friend Klaus Johansson or Madeleine Lindberg proved their own coach Dieter Herbert wrong when they would simply refuse to move their feet to where he thought it might be ideal.
Like the wheel, cycling has not been developed on the drawing board but in practise and most improvements came from the sports within, not from smart engineers who thought they could violate rules of applied biomechanics. But be careful, also the other way round is not always the Golden Gate to truth. In their attempt to add as much force to their stroke, riders have deliberately shifted their cleats further front. While this feels very dynamic, the costs in terms of oxygen supply, muscle fatigue and bad leverage are just too high I claim. Keep in mind that in old days no accurate powermeter had hit the market and cycling was still in the hands of witty soigneurs and doctors in their quest to claim their thesis, so-called 'Golden Rules', which nowadays would just melt like chocolate in the riders' jersey pockets on a hot summer day.
It is a personal tragedy that Mr. Herbert still seems to believe I had stolen his ida and eventually received Patent's Grant instead of him. When I got in touch with Susanne and Klaus, I found them close to where power transmission a n d counterbalance was perfect, so a few modifications only and the scene was set for a tremendously successful career, leading to two consecutive Worlds and many other good results. I won't blame an athlete who doesn't want to reveal his secrets which he knows make him superior to his opponents, do you? So after her first attempts to verbally highlight a major reason for her success on Swedish TV, Susanne kept quiet. The fact that until this very day, even self-declared experts did not even recognise why she has been enjoying riding her bike so much is because she is not rocking forth and back on her bike, not puffing and panting, not showing signs of fatigue pumping with her torso, doing push-ups with her arms or crawl in an attempt to get pain off her thighs, I'd say. Or do you think it is the buying power of the shoe industrys' adds in the cylcing magazines?
There was an ad on the American Triathlete when triathlon-heroine Paula Newby-Fraser would become close runner-up to leading World Champion Natscha Badmann at IRONMAN CALIFORNIA'01, showing her riding flat-out but all smiles in midfoot-position. In those days, the cheering triathlon community didn't get the message, instead her husband and coach Paul did and would write me a message, thanking me for the "simple but effective changes" that had improved his wife's performance from scratch. In fact, my solution was a simple but effective way to immitate what she had been using years before when she established a superb record on the bike split in Kona. Back in those days, Paula had been taking advantage of some sort of a heavy but effective self-extending crank setup which would help her to apply all her positive forces without afterwards getting off the bike and not being able to run. In opposite to what she had been taking advantage of in those days, now with our shoe there was no more detrimental weight gain involved, in fact, a shoe well below 200 grams each! This is why when explaining the juxta-position of the foot during down-stroke, due to my poor knowledge of the English language I speak of a 'virtually extended crank arm' or '210mms'. I know as well as you do that while the crank remains perfectly at its spot and doesn't change its length in our setup, its the shoe and the bio-mxc²position of the foot on the pedal which makes the (different) music altogether.
Sorry Crowley, apart from some toe-overlap with short frames when cruising on the parking, I can't find the fatal damper for my idea, so say hello for me to the 'Sky on Earth' when you go past this beautiful spot on your bike in arch position one day, will you?

biomac

Ergoman, please understand that I am a shoe-maker, not a journalist or computer wizzard. Right now, I am having a couple of days off with my family, no data base except what is on my little laptop. Honestly, I don't even know how to paste pictures onto this forum .
Feel free to contact some of these athletes yourself, browse www.biomac.biz or better: hop on the bike yourself to experience what we claim and you are longing to find out. If you need any assistance, don't hesitate to contact experts on positioning who have experience in this field.

biomac

Force is correct, thanks for the hint.
Think of the entire stroke, not just one part of it and you will detect the difference between a longer lever and a longer downstroke w i t h o u t more peak power like when an oval chainring is mounted.
But you can imagine the foot travelling longer through the positive and shorter through the negative sector, therefore needing less tiring force max to produce equal speed, can't you?
Sorry, torque analysis tells exactly the opposite from what you presume. Think of the human being of a machine rather than a system with receptors finetuning and balancing the body's movements all the time. So provided you take equal speed and gaer ratio as a point of reference, the body adapts perfectly and in no time to the new position, thus gaining tremendous endurance due to less peak power/better leverage. Understand that not the one with the hardest stroke but the one with the most economic stroke will reach the line of an endurance effort first. Not to stirremotions, but that's a similar discussion like with aluminium vs. titanium. Brilliant transmission of forces in an aluminium tube - in both directions though. So the muscles tire tremendously fast once they hit bad, uneven surface or cobble stones. Seen a winner of Paris-Roubaix on an aluminium frame recently?
Again, keep in mind that bio-mxc² has been developed on the road, not in the lab. Best you modify an old pair of shoes and dig into the essentials yourself. I'd appreciate an expert of engineering to explain thoroughly what and why he feels what he feels. We have some clients from this field but they all seem to prefer endulging their biomac shoes rather than sitting at the table and calculate.

biomac

Alex, two riders, same weight and capacity riding the long climb of a circuit, one in the big chainring, the other on a small gear riding at equal Wattage/speed. Both riding at their individual anaerobic threshold. Who would you think from your experience as a cyclist will get dropped after a couple of laps although their powermeters stubbornly indicate equal Wattage?
In other words, its not the Wattage that makes a rider tire, its the way he delivers it. Now the same setup, a third (equal) rider added, riding in bio-mxc²position. Who would you think will remain on the circuit?
Here's the answer: The rider with the lowest metabolic waste produced during recent laps. And this is, believe it or not, the rider with the bio-mxc² setup.
So why should the lady on the picture possibly wear a powermeter? Noone there who could match her efficiency anyway as she is the only one in the female peloton taking advantage of her 'secret weapon'. So if she gets dropped, its because she made a tactical mistake or ran out of fuel. No need starting an argument with a powermeter in this situation, is it? ;-)
Keep improving, Götz

Ergoman

I'm calling shennanigans.