What have you found to be "cycling myths"?
08-23-14, 06:39 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 431
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
What have you found to be "cycling myths"?
Pedaling in circles maybe?
Ran across this old post from RChung, very interesting and he is very wise.
What are your thoughts?
The question is simple. In fact, the answer is pretty simple, too: to go faster, longer, you need to increase the ratio of your power to the various sources of drag that're slowing you down. The reason why people can make a living at coaching shows that although the answer is simple, the path to attaining it isn't. And, as you can see from this thread, taking answers from random people on random internet fora is a crap shoot. Pedaling motion (i.e., the "smoothness" you referred to in your original subject heading) doesn't appear to be part of that path. Studies of elite cyclists show that they don't pedal any "smoother" or "rounder" than average cyclists. Pedaling circles in order to go faster is a red herring (the exception may be for MTBers, who appear to have the most even pedal force application, presumably because they ride on the sketchiest surfaces).
So, to get back to the simple answer, you need to improve your power/drag ratio. Good coaches (and sometimes good books and sometimes, though more rarely, random people on random internet fora who happen to be knowledgeable) know that cadence and pedal motion drills aren't a particularly good way to spend your time if what you're trying to do is increase your power.
[Edit:] Alex Simmons, a pretty good coach and a guy who posts to many internet fora (though perhaps not this one?), used to be a pretty fair racer, with lots of data on his own power and training. Then about 3 years ago he lost his lower left leg after an accident. Not only does he have more than a little L-R imbalance, there's no possible way for him to pedal "circles" or to "scrape mud off the bottom of his shoe" -- his prosthetic won't allow it. He'd yank his stump right out and leave the damn lower leg hanging on the pedal. All he can do is stomp, and stomp hard. Earlier this year he reported that he'd finally matched and exceeded his pre-accident FTP. I bring this up not just because it's an inspiring story, though it is. I bring it up because it's also consistent with the theory, data, and research on pedaling motion. Elite riders don't have smoother pedal motions than those of us who are non-elite. As riders improve their power, they freely choose to increase both their cadence and torque. There is no evidence that exogenously increasing either cadence or torque is a shortcut to improved power. There is no "lost" power to be found by smoothing out your pedal stroke. So the bottom line is, just focus on improving your power and reducing the various sources of drag that slow you down. Everything else is a red herring.
Ran across this old post from RChung, very interesting and he is very wise.
What are your thoughts?
The question is simple. In fact, the answer is pretty simple, too: to go faster, longer, you need to increase the ratio of your power to the various sources of drag that're slowing you down. The reason why people can make a living at coaching shows that although the answer is simple, the path to attaining it isn't. And, as you can see from this thread, taking answers from random people on random internet fora is a crap shoot. Pedaling motion (i.e., the "smoothness" you referred to in your original subject heading) doesn't appear to be part of that path. Studies of elite cyclists show that they don't pedal any "smoother" or "rounder" than average cyclists. Pedaling circles in order to go faster is a red herring (the exception may be for MTBers, who appear to have the most even pedal force application, presumably because they ride on the sketchiest surfaces).
So, to get back to the simple answer, you need to improve your power/drag ratio. Good coaches (and sometimes good books and sometimes, though more rarely, random people on random internet fora who happen to be knowledgeable) know that cadence and pedal motion drills aren't a particularly good way to spend your time if what you're trying to do is increase your power.
[Edit:] Alex Simmons, a pretty good coach and a guy who posts to many internet fora (though perhaps not this one?), used to be a pretty fair racer, with lots of data on his own power and training. Then about 3 years ago he lost his lower left leg after an accident. Not only does he have more than a little L-R imbalance, there's no possible way for him to pedal "circles" or to "scrape mud off the bottom of his shoe" -- his prosthetic won't allow it. He'd yank his stump right out and leave the damn lower leg hanging on the pedal. All he can do is stomp, and stomp hard. Earlier this year he reported that he'd finally matched and exceeded his pre-accident FTP. I bring this up not just because it's an inspiring story, though it is. I bring it up because it's also consistent with the theory, data, and research on pedaling motion. Elite riders don't have smoother pedal motions than those of us who are non-elite. As riders improve their power, they freely choose to increase both their cadence and torque. There is no evidence that exogenously increasing either cadence or torque is a shortcut to improved power. There is no "lost" power to be found by smoothing out your pedal stroke. So the bottom line is, just focus on improving your power and reducing the various sources of drag that slow you down. Everything else is a red herring.
08-23-14, 06:44 PM
#3
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Ffld Cnty Connecticut
Posts: 21,843
Bikes: Old Steelies I made, Old Cannondales
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1173 Post(s)
Liked 927 Times
in
612 Posts
Myth: Carbon asplodes
__________________
Bikes: Old steel race bikes, old Cannondale race bikes, less old Cannondale race bike, crappy old mtn bike.
FYI: https://www.bikeforums.net/forum-sugg...ad-please.html
Bikes: Old steel race bikes, old Cannondale race bikes, less old Cannondale race bike, crappy old mtn bike.
FYI: https://www.bikeforums.net/forum-sugg...ad-please.html
08-23-14, 07:02 PM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
08-23-14, 07:15 PM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
08-23-14, 07:21 PM
#7
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: take your time, enjoy the scenery, it will be there when you get to it
Posts: 7,281
Bikes: 07 IRO BFGB fixed-gear, 07 Pedal Force RS
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Heavier riders descend faster
08-23-14, 07:28 PM
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Above ground, Walnut Creek, Ca
Posts: 6,681
Bikes: 8 ss bikes, 1 5-speed touring bike
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
4 Posts
i would modify Greg Lemond's "It never gets easier, you just go faster", to (for the rest of us) "it can get easier AND faster, if you allow it to".
Last edited by hueyhoolihan; 08-23-14 at 07:31 PM.
08-23-14, 07:48 PM
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2934 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
228 Posts
Half of what I read about cycling is some sort of myth. I'd start with fit: knee over pedal spindle is the optimal position.
08-23-14, 08:40 PM
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
I feel like this advice has matured and changed to be that KOPS is the best starting point from which to fine tune saddle position. After all, if not KOPS as a starting point, then what? That is hard to argue with. You don't hear too many folks saying KOPS is IT anymore.
08-24-14, 03:33 AM
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Minas Ithil
Posts: 9,173
Mentioned: 66 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2432 Post(s)
Liked 638 Times
in
395 Posts
Myth: High internet forum post counts and multiple replies in every single thread make you more knowledgeable than others.
08-24-14, 04:24 AM
#18
Voice of the Industry
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,572
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1188 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
8 Posts
Pedaling in circles maybe?
Ran across this old post from RChung, very interesting and he is very wise.
What are your thoughts?
The question is simple. In fact, the answer is pretty simple, too: to go faster, longer, you need to increase the ratio of your power to the various sources of drag that're slowing you down. The reason why people can make a living at coaching shows that although the answer is simple, the path to attaining it isn't. And, as you can see from this thread, taking answers from random people on random internet fora is a crap shoot. Pedaling motion (i.e., the "smoothness" you referred to in your original subject heading) doesn't appear to be part of that path. Studies of elite cyclists show that they don't pedal any "smoother" or "rounder" than average cyclists. Pedaling circles in order to go faster is a red herring (the exception may be for MTBers, who appear to have the most even pedal force application, presumably because they ride on the sketchiest surfaces).
So, to get back to the simple answer, you need to improve your power/drag ratio. Good coaches (and sometimes good books and sometimes, though more rarely, random people on random internet fora who happen to be knowledgeable) know that cadence and pedal motion drills aren't a particularly good way to spend your time if what you're trying to do is increase your power.
[Edit:] Alex Simmons, a pretty good coach and a guy who posts to many internet fora (though perhaps not this one?), used to be a pretty fair racer, with lots of data on his own power and training. Then about 3 years ago he lost his lower left leg after an accident. Not only does he have more than a little L-R imbalance, there's no possible way for him to pedal "circles" or to "scrape mud off the bottom of his shoe" -- his prosthetic won't allow it. He'd yank his stump right out and leave the damn lower leg hanging on the pedal. All he can do is stomp, and stomp hard. Earlier this year he reported that he'd finally matched and exceeded his pre-accident FTP. I bring this up not just because it's an inspiring story, though it is. I bring it up because it's also consistent with the theory, data, and research on pedaling motion. Elite riders don't have smoother pedal motions than those of us who are non-elite. As riders improve their power, they freely choose to increase both their cadence and torque. There is no evidence that exogenously increasing either cadence or torque is a shortcut to improved power. There is no "lost" power to be found by smoothing out your pedal stroke. So the bottom line is, just focus on improving your power and reducing the various sources of drag that slow you down. Everything else is a red herring.
Ran across this old post from RChung, very interesting and he is very wise.
What are your thoughts?
The question is simple. In fact, the answer is pretty simple, too: to go faster, longer, you need to increase the ratio of your power to the various sources of drag that're slowing you down. The reason why people can make a living at coaching shows that although the answer is simple, the path to attaining it isn't. And, as you can see from this thread, taking answers from random people on random internet fora is a crap shoot. Pedaling motion (i.e., the "smoothness" you referred to in your original subject heading) doesn't appear to be part of that path. Studies of elite cyclists show that they don't pedal any "smoother" or "rounder" than average cyclists. Pedaling circles in order to go faster is a red herring (the exception may be for MTBers, who appear to have the most even pedal force application, presumably because they ride on the sketchiest surfaces).
So, to get back to the simple answer, you need to improve your power/drag ratio. Good coaches (and sometimes good books and sometimes, though more rarely, random people on random internet fora who happen to be knowledgeable) know that cadence and pedal motion drills aren't a particularly good way to spend your time if what you're trying to do is increase your power.
[Edit:] Alex Simmons, a pretty good coach and a guy who posts to many internet fora (though perhaps not this one?), used to be a pretty fair racer, with lots of data on his own power and training. Then about 3 years ago he lost his lower left leg after an accident. Not only does he have more than a little L-R imbalance, there's no possible way for him to pedal "circles" or to "scrape mud off the bottom of his shoe" -- his prosthetic won't allow it. He'd yank his stump right out and leave the damn lower leg hanging on the pedal. All he can do is stomp, and stomp hard. Earlier this year he reported that he'd finally matched and exceeded his pre-accident FTP. I bring this up not just because it's an inspiring story, though it is. I bring it up because it's also consistent with the theory, data, and research on pedaling motion. Elite riders don't have smoother pedal motions than those of us who are non-elite. As riders improve their power, they freely choose to increase both their cadence and torque. There is no evidence that exogenously increasing either cadence or torque is a shortcut to improved power. There is no "lost" power to be found by smoothing out your pedal stroke. So the bottom line is, just focus on improving your power and reducing the various sources of drag that slow you down. Everything else is a red herring.
Other notable cycling myths since you asked include:
- Aero bikes are faster
- You can buy game
- PCad is brilliant
- That guy doesn't exist
- Riding behind a hot girl isn't fun
- Many on the 41 know anything about bike tech, especially bottom brackets.
- Many who posted in the that guy thread aren't that guy.
Last edited by Campag4life; 08-24-14 at 04:27 AM.
08-24-14, 06:02 AM
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 156
Bikes: 2014 Giant Defy Advanced SL 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Having done a little research, I assume your contention is based on the fact that acceleration due to gravity is constant irrespective of mass, yes?
While that's true, it doesn't take into account the two things that make heavier riders faster on descents.
1) Inertia is proportional to mass, while air resistance is proportional to surface area. As heavier riders have significantly more mass, but only comparatively little more surface area, this means they will be slowed less by drag than lighter riders as the air resistance will be acting against greater inertia.
2) Heavier riders tend to develop larger leg muscles and higher burst power output capabilities compared to a similarly skilled lighter rider due to the much higher power output needed for climbing. On descents the weight of those muscles becomes an asset due to inertia, while the power output no longer has to act against the much higher rolling resistance it does when climbing.
My own practical experiences mirror this as well. At 270lbs, I tend to be in the bottom 25% on Strava segments with any positive grade while I tend to be in the top 25% on Strava segments with any negative grade, with the effects of climbing vs descending increased the greater the average positive/negative grade of the segment.
While that's true, it doesn't take into account the two things that make heavier riders faster on descents.
1) Inertia is proportional to mass, while air resistance is proportional to surface area. As heavier riders have significantly more mass, but only comparatively little more surface area, this means they will be slowed less by drag than lighter riders as the air resistance will be acting against greater inertia.
2) Heavier riders tend to develop larger leg muscles and higher burst power output capabilities compared to a similarly skilled lighter rider due to the much higher power output needed for climbing. On descents the weight of those muscles becomes an asset due to inertia, while the power output no longer has to act against the much higher rolling resistance it does when climbing.
My own practical experiences mirror this as well. At 270lbs, I tend to be in the bottom 25% on Strava segments with any positive grade while I tend to be in the top 25% on Strava segments with any negative grade, with the effects of climbing vs descending increased the greater the average positive/negative grade of the segment.
08-24-14, 06:52 AM
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
Having done a little research, I assume your contention is based on the fact that acceleration due to gravity is constant irrespective of mass, yes?
While that's true, it doesn't take into account the two things that make heavier riders faster on descents.
1) Inertia is proportional to mass, while air resistance is proportional to surface area. As heavier riders have significantly more mass, but only comparatively little more surface area, this means they will be slowed less by drag than lighter riders as the air resistance will be acting against greater inertia.
2) Heavier riders tend to develop larger leg muscles and higher burst power output capabilities compared to a similarly skilled lighter rider due to the much higher power output needed for climbing. On descents the weight of those muscles becomes an asset due to inertia, while the power output no longer has to act against the much higher rolling resistance it does when climbing.
My own practical experiences mirror this as well. At 270lbs, I tend to be in the bottom 25% on Strava segments with any positive grade while I tend to be in the top 25% on Strava segments with any negative grade, with the effects of climbing vs descending increased the greater the average positive/negative grade of the segment.
While that's true, it doesn't take into account the two things that make heavier riders faster on descents.
1) Inertia is proportional to mass, while air resistance is proportional to surface area. As heavier riders have significantly more mass, but only comparatively little more surface area, this means they will be slowed less by drag than lighter riders as the air resistance will be acting against greater inertia.
2) Heavier riders tend to develop larger leg muscles and higher burst power output capabilities compared to a similarly skilled lighter rider due to the much higher power output needed for climbing. On descents the weight of those muscles becomes an asset due to inertia, while the power output no longer has to act against the much higher rolling resistance it does when climbing.
My own practical experiences mirror this as well. At 270lbs, I tend to be in the bottom 25% on Strava segments with any positive grade while I tend to be in the top 25% on Strava segments with any negative grade, with the effects of climbing vs descending increased the greater the average positive/negative grade of the segment.
Despite all this the presumption of faster descents by massier folks could still be wrong. I would be interested in hearing more from BoSoxYacht about this rather than just his cryptic, "Do a little research and you'll see".
08-24-14, 07:42 AM
#24
I'm doing it wrong.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,875
Bikes: Rivendell Appaloosa, Rivendell Frank Jones Sr., Trek Fuel EX9, Kona Jake the Snake CR, Niner Sir9
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9742 Post(s)
Liked 2,812 Times
in
1,664 Posts
Myth. A faster ride is a better ride.
08-24-14, 07:45 AM
#25
Senior Member
Great idea for a thread. Too bad it went ad hominem so quickly.
I'm trying to think of advice I've received here that was just flat wrong.
I'm trying to think of advice I've received here that was just flat wrong.
__________________
Momento mori, amor fati.
Momento mori, amor fati.