Originally Posted by
Stucky
Yes, but you know what?
Any "up power" you're generating on the upstroke is likely be neutralized by taking that same amount of power away from the downstroke on the other side. In other words, it's a ero net-sum "gain". In fact, you might even be losing something in the mix, because I've seen studies (probably posted on this forum- where else?
) which say that pulling on the upstroke is very power-inefficient.
But I do agree about the platforms-- in that being able to "pull around" is a more natural motion, than just merely unloading- especially at moderate to high RPMs. That is where foot retention offers a benefit; I just don't think it helps us to create any additional power- it just feels good and is more ergonomically efficient.efficient.
I would actually say the opposite. Your downstroke has to push against something. When out of the saddle on platforms, the maximum downforce you can apply is pretty much your body weight, and maybe some leverage off the bars. With foot retention you can add the upward power of your leg-lift to the downward pressure of your body weight, so 20-40lbs of pressure (pure guess) going upwards, plus the 185lbs of pressure going down, = great instantaneous power output.
No, this is not an efficient way of climbing a long steady slope. If I was on a 6% gradient for 5 miles, I would stay seated and spin, and most of my progress would be through the downstroke. But if that same climb occasionally ramps up to 12% for short 100m sections, I would more than likely get up out of the saddle and power through those sections. Using my upstroke as leverage against the downstroke.