Originally Posted by
asgelle
First of all world class pros do not exert upward force on the rising pedal,
https://www.researchgate.net/publica...ng_performance
Second, such an obvious moving of the goalposts fools no one. The issue you raised was energy needed to raise the upward moving leg in the pedal stroke. Other than a slight imbalance between the two legs, whatever force is needed to raise one leg is provided by the weight of the other.
Seriously? Pretty sure the balanced weights of my legs are going to settle at the 9 and 3 position.
Didn't say they pulled up, it's that they don't let their leg sit on the pedal as dead weight as much as lower skilled riders. I could dig out references to this if I thought your argument was worth the time, but you're so far off the beam, it's not necessary.
You don't seem to understand that the descending leg is not falling, it's pushing down against resistance. Even if all of the energy needed to lift the ascending leg is eminating from the descending side, it isn't a matter of balance, the weight of the ascending leg is simply an additional source of resistance that must be overcome by the descending leg to move the pedal downwards. The weight of the legs are going to be constants throughout the ride whether you're spinning or mashing. All I've claimed is that moving that weight up 90 times a minute is going to take more energy than doing it 60 times. You got some fancy math proving that obviously true statement is false? Didn't think so.
TL/DR: It doesn't matter which leg is doing the lifting, doing it 90 times a minute is going to take more energy than doing it 60.