Mr. Winkle,
Luttrells study had to start somewhere. Perhaps they thought there wold be no improvement so didn't think it would be necessary to find elite cyclists in the middle of Kansas just to disprove the concept. They tried to get reasonably serious cyclist by requiring each particpant to have particpated in 3 races in the last 6 months. that seemed reasaonble. And, to me, cycling efficiency is a form of performance. you may disagree but I thought it was a reasonable approach.
My criticism of the study was they only had the people ride the cranks 1 hour 3 times a week and allowed regular cycling in between. I would have never predcited the degree of difference they saw with that little use. If they had seen no difference that would have been my criticism of it. Fortunately for me, even with that little use, a statistically significaant result occurred.
Anyhow, perhaps this is like cold fusion to you, but even in this case, respected scientists tried to repeat the study to see if the effect was real or not, even though they disbelieved the results. That is the scientific method, not bashing results simply because you don't like the results.
--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks
Luttrells study had to start somewhere. Perhaps they thought there wold be no improvement so didn't think it would be necessary to find elite cyclists in the middle of Kansas just to disprove the concept. They tried to get reasonably serious cyclist by requiring each particpant to have particpated in 3 races in the last 6 months. that seemed reasaonble. And, to me, cycling efficiency is a form of performance. you may disagree but I thought it was a reasonable approach.
My criticism of the study was they only had the people ride the cranks 1 hour 3 times a week and allowed regular cycling in between. I would have never predcited the degree of difference they saw with that little use. If they had seen no difference that would have been my criticism of it. Fortunately for me, even with that little use, a statistically significaant result occurred.
Anyhow, perhaps this is like cold fusion to you, but even in this case, respected scientists tried to repeat the study to see if the effect was real or not, even though they disbelieved the results. That is the scientific method, not bashing results simply because you don't like the results.
--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks