Completely agree my results counters any study. Had I been included in those studies I'd probably show the same results. For Me and My experience PC's wrecked me for the first few months. After I adjusted and adapted is when I saw the improvement. I didn't start running until I was 44. Cycling at 46. Improvement was slow if any at all.

I was working harder and more consistent before PC's. If I was going to train the muscles to push harder I'd expect results then. I moved did train as much since I don't race but maybe once a year. I honestly have to stick with PC's training the support group to explain to improvement. Not being educated in that stuff, that's the best way for myself to describe what I've experienced.

Some people confuse hard training with effective training.

Some people succeed in spite of the equipment, position, training, diet, recovery and coaching they use.

I hate those type of people!

When all else fails science gives a better answer than personal opinions.

---

Hamish Ferguson: Cycling Coach

Well, you could start with Tom Korff's paper on pedaling technique. If you don't like that one, you could also read Mornieux et al. 08 below. The paper I mentioned will be available in a few months on EJAP.
Let me restate my offer to have your pedaling technique analyzed. Tom Korff is at Brunel in London and Paul Barratt is at EIS/British Cycling in Manchester and I know either of them would be keen to see your biomechanics. Surely either of those locations are only a short train ride. Wouldn't it be great to show the world how you pedal? Fame, fortune, and consulting fees await! You could single-handedly (single-legedly?) change the face of cycling!
Cheers,
Jim


Int J Sports Med. 2008 Oct;29(10):817-22. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1038374. Epub 2008 Apr 17.
Effects of pedal type and pull-up action during cycling.
Mornieux G, Stapelfeldt B, Gollhofer A, Belli A.
Source
Institut für Sport und Sportwissenschaft, Universität Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. guillaume.mornieux@sport.uni-freiburg.de
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine the influence of different shoe-pedal interfaces and of an active pulling-up action during the upstroke phase on the pedalling technique. Eight elite cyclists (C) and seven non-cyclists (NC) performed three different bouts at 90 rev . min (-1) and 60 % of their maximal aerobic power. They pedalled with single pedals (PED), with clipless pedals (CLIP) and with a pedal force feedback (CLIPFBACK) where subjects were asked to pull up on the pedal during the upstroke. There was no significant difference for pedalling effectiveness, net mechanical efficiency (NE) and muscular activity between PED and CLIP. When compared to CLIP, CLIPFBACK resulted in a significant increase in pedalling effectiveness during upstroke (86 % for C and 57 % NC, respectively), as well as higher biceps femoris and tibialis anterior muscle activity (p < 0.001). However, NE was significantly reduced (p < 0.008) with 9 % and 3.3 % reduction for C and NC, respectively. Consequently, shoe-pedal interface (PED vs. CLIP) did not significantly influence cycling technique during submaximal exercise. However, an active pulling-up action on the pedal during upstroke increased the pedalling effectiveness, while reducing net mechanical efficiency.

Why are you so anti-power cranks? Some people say they improved their performance….cool. Why the need for NASA to be involved and a scientific study, and why the hate for PC's? Did you have a falling out with the company?

If the cost of the train fare is a problem for Noel, I'm ready to donate $20 US towards a trip to London or Manchester and bet there would be enough others to get you there and back. Let's fund that research!

Hugh

---

Genetics load the gun, lifestyle pulls the trigger.

Did you have anything to add to the debate?

Prove it.

This might be a good time to make a point about cycling biomechanics. People who pedal normally, emphasizing the leg extension action, produce very very little negative muscular power. The negative torque and power that is often observed/reported is due to gravity during the leg flexion phase. What people often seem to forget is that gravity also assists during the leg extension phase. The weight of the leg on the flexion and extension sides essentially balances. Consequently, the net effect of gravity is zero.
That's why there is little or no room for improvement.
Cheers,
Jim

And this is the essence of the discussion. One could legitimately say:

"I used <insert product of choice> and I improved my performance."

because both of those things can be readily demonstrated. It's anecdotal, and that's OK.


Where it goes off the rails is then insisting that anecdotal observational correlation also implies a causation, such as:

"I used <insert product of choice> and that is the reason my performance improved."

when of course one cannot really make that assertion without proper controls and means to remove various forms of bias (e.g. confirmation bias).

One could have improved performance for a range of reasons, perhaps they trained more, or had the benefit of an extra year under their belt, or had better diet and recovery, and so on. Or perhaps their performance may have been even better and it was an opportunity lost.

Which is why many such claims dissipate into thin air when tested with proper controls.

Don't bother

Their minds are made up no matter what you say.

How amusing. Jim, a noted sport scientist, has steered me in the right direction on many areas as have many of his colleagues. But I am actually very open to real data showing anything that will help the riders I coach improve. Uncoupled cranks fail to do this time and time again. Be interesting to see if any believers can offer up any real data showing that uncoupled crank use actually improved their performance because several studies using running (1) and cycling (7+) have failed to do so so far. Anecdotes are less than impressive compared to that.

---

Hamish Ferguson: Cycling Coach

I have no doubt you have good advise based on their studies. Don't question that at all. Having used them for an expanded period of time I would say any study shorter than 4-6 months are missing the benefits of training with PC's.

I don't race on them and personalty would advise against it.

I've enjoyed our conversation and completely understand your skepticism.

I'll also add when I ride with solid cranks I don't try to simulate the PC's and apply power throughout the spin. Just pedal normal.

This is where the real tragedy lies. By training with powercracks you are forced to produce relatively more power in the flexion action and, consequently, less power in the extension action. When you return to normal cranks and normal pedaling action you may actually be less trained in the extension action. So by working really hard with this expensive training device you might actually be less fit for normal cycling.
I agree that they will train the hip flexion action. I'm not aware of any research showing that would be helpful for running. Peter Weyand's work indicates that hip flexion (repositioning the limb segments during the flight phase) does not limit maximum running speed. That's for sprinting but it's the closest work I know of.
Of course we're really all in this hobby to have fun and stay healthy. If you like your training gizmo, feel free to use it.
Cheers,
Jim

Thanks for describing that better than I could have. I'd just say groin area. It's even harder for me to describe what I feel when riding. Kinda like levers. Speed and climbing has improved, just near impossible to prove to anyone else.

I ride solid cranks once a week for what you mentioned, but haven't seen any changes. You still have to come around and "mash". It's just I have a better support system now to come around and get there. If that makes any sense.


I would recommend them for running. Low impact and has really helped me stay consistent when I stop running for any length of time. Much, much better running form.

I like them all around. I'd ride them even if I never raced again.

Regards ,
Jim

Actually, NASA was involved, kind of. Or at least I was (I work for NASA and I was involved with a year-long "study" started here on slowtwitch by that dude whose name should not be spoken - http://james-p-smith.blogspot.com/...s-final-verdict.html

Poor extrapolation...
Have you ever tried or considered them or are you a pure textbook coach? Sometimes it helps to be openminded and to accept that some approaches work for some people. Studies in this fields are not setup to demonstrate that something can not work in not a single circumstance - they usually test a simple hypothesis with often very limited and poor samples and never provide a 'this tool can never provide any result' answer. All this negation kills a lot of opportunities!
Sam
Samgyde.com
3 times AG champion in Kona - fastest amateur bike split ever in Kona despite training on powercranks (of course it is purely my imagination that training on powercranks has in any way contributed to these results since there is no literature to back this up :-) )

Your personal experience is counter to several well performed studies that measured cycling and running after a period of training using a uncoupled crank.

Do I have to try smoking to know it's bad for me or should I look at the research?


My money is on your imagination.

---

Hamish Ferguson: Cycling Coach

Thanks for clearing things out for me :-)
I wish I had a coach like you that doesn't let me do all those useless workouts... But I am glad that my imagination is strong enough to overcome all this :-)
Sam
Samgyde.com

As I said above, some people succeed in spite of what they are doing.

---

Hamish Ferguson: Cycling Coach

Hamish, the problem with these threads is everything is treated as black and white. Specificity is required for some athletes, while for other athletes, neurally engaging different patterns can be additive to their performance. If it is all in their head and if something happened through powercrank pedaling to help their running coordination that might be a big gain. And maybe because they are more fluid/coordinated at running they are now able to enter other sport sessions less trashed. We don't know exactly how different athletes adapt to different sports/activities and then return to their own sport. For example, I have not done much swimming at all lately but have XC skied more and suddenly I am going faster in my swim kick sets because I can't get as good conditioning out of my body through swimming only. Theory would say I should do swim kick sets to get faster at that, but how many studies are there that have been done on reducing swimming and then doing big volume classic skiing and measuring the outcome on swim kick speed. I'm just using that as an example.

Seriously have you used the powercranks because your analogy that you don't have to smoke to know that smoking is bad is not quite the same. The sample size that they have derived data off relative to smoking is massive and constitutes a big part of humanity over time. Not so for powercranks. Even if it is placebo, and they helped Steve Larsen win Ironman Lake Placid and Wildflower, then perhaps that placebo is not such a bad thing. There are enough athletes who have used them seriously and gotten a bump in performance that its not worth dismissing their summation of n=1 anecdotal observations. Sometimes the practitioners in the field stumble upon some good protocols that the studies are unable to replicate at least in the near term. Sam claims that he gained 40W. I am assuming that is more than 10% on his topline.

In theory, we are limited by what our cardio can deliver to our muscles, but we consistently see that in a weight bearing sport like XC skiing that is full body, the top Nordic skiers have the highest VO2's. Now is this because there is a better gene pool in that sport than cycling or is it because the sport can load the cardio more than cycling and thereby create athletes with a bigger "top line". What if Powercranks have a similar affect, allowing the athlete to engage more muscles than totally conventional pedaling that thereby lifting their cardio output over time. That's the only way Sam Gyde is going to gain 40Watts. I just can't see him gaining 40W any other way than his heart being able to deliver more oxygen rich blood to more working muscles that are actively helping his forward propulsion.

If any of that happened it would be measurable and maybe one or more of the several studies would have showed a different result.




Well actually we do. Pretty well established base of information on biomechanics and motor learning. Slowtwitch is very lucky that someone like Jim Martin and others post regularly here.



Not a good one, there are a variety of factors at play. Maybe you were overtrained for swimming and the break did you good, maybe there was on injury about to happen in swimming muscles that was given a chance to heal, maybe you were stale in the water the list is endless.



Seriously, are you really asking that?



They measurably helped or he thinks they helped. Bit of a difference.




Don't waste my time with BS claims, show us something measurable. Sam should ask for a refund, he who shall not be named claims that exclusive use will lead to an average 40% improvement in power.



If it can be shown that uncoupled cranks were the only reason for the alleged gain in power.

The VO2max argument is flawed. A cross country skier will have a lower VO2max if tested on a bike. None of their trained muscle for the skis will contribute to the performance when testing on the bike, or swimming, or using a rowing erg.

---

Hamish Ferguson: Cycling Coach

Are those cross-country skiers really being tested for VO2Max while cross-country skiing? Seems difficult to replicate in a laboratory (with gaz exchange)? Or are they more likely being tested on the run treadmill?

They use roller skis on a special treadmill for at least some of the testing.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-eivRWTGcs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqTHhNVnYC4

Hugh

---

Genetics load the gun, lifestyle pulls the trigger.

This is my experience with using powercranks for more than 4 years. I am a medical doctor. I am 53 years old; 5'8"; lifted heavy weights for 20 years and my weight often was around 220. I stopped lifting heavy about 5 years ago. I still weight train a little and run and swim. My goal is to do a 1/2 ironman this summer and possibly a full ironman in the fall. I intend to get my weight down to 175 or less but I am getting fairly lean at 193.

I am usually riding 6 hours a week or less but for several months I might put in more time and mileage. I am usually "hammering" when I get on the road. A lot of my rides are 15-30 miles and I may put in several 50+ mile rides in a month. Some winters, I stop cycling for 1-3 months.

I went to power cranks in about May, five years ago. I did most of my training on them until about three months ago. Before using powercranks, I did one leg drills and thought I was "spinning" for 25 years. However, read a lot of reviews and was ready for some torture. My first day on powercranks, I almost didn't venture outside of the parking lot but road about 6 miles in 30+ minutes. After the first minute or two, I was limited to coasting between several strokes or alternating 5-10 slow strokes, one leg at a time. I felt muscles in the legs and pelvis and back that I never used before. I had muscles pain that I never had before. I was hooked!!! I committed to doing all of my training on power cranks. Unfortunately, training on these cranks were so difficult that I lost my cardio fitness that year. I could not physically or mentally train at the previous volume. I could not stand up on the pedals well. I lost strength in my quads. I could not maintain a decent cadence for more than a few seconds. I did a lot of riding alternating legs But, I'm stubborn.

I stopped cycling for most of the winter and in the spring I needed to relearn using the cranks. I built up my mileage pretty well the second year but still had extra muscles pain after a ride and became almost as fast as I was on regular cranks. The third spring after "resting" through the winter, the cranks felt natural after about the first day or two. I concentrated on standing on the pedals. I became strong again but did not make any breakthroughs in my speed. That Labor Day weekend, I had a heart attack -- while on the bike; lost a chunk of my heart and damaged a third of the heart muscle. I continued to ride powercranks and the fourth summer I was as strong as ever on a bike, but I as loosing my coordination on regular cranks. The same was true of the fifth summer and I started going back to regular cranks intermittently. I could finally ride at a cadence of 80-90 for an extended period.

The last few months, I am going back to regular cranks about 3/4 of my training (mostly inside through the winter). I believe that I will be faster this year.



Other issues: 1) The end caps can get stuck and I have one stuck and will send it back to powercranks to see if they can get it off. 2) The caps can loosen and fall off during a ride and leave the crank hanging from your foot (I carry a large hex wrench and an extra cap with me most of the time but you can ride carefully without the cap and get home). 3) The crank arms seem a little more likely to loosen from the bottome bracket than regular cranks. 4) The washers and mechanism that attach the pedals to the arms bend and get loose and I have had two sets chip where the pedals attach.

These aggravations can ruin days of training or potential training.


My opinion, as one who has read extensively about powercranks for 5 years and road them regularly: Don't expect a miracle. I think that working the extra muscles will help balance your pushing muscles and help with core strength. I expect they are especially beneficial for improving running and grinding out the hills in a higher gear. I had calf strains while running the year before I started using power cranks and have not had any since. I broke my back in 1993 and although I had some back pain with power cranks, I thought they helped with it.

Advice: Give them a try but keep a regular bike ready to ride if there is a mechanical issue or you do not have the will to ride them that day. Use them for maybe 1/4 to 1/2 of your training time until your body is adapting to them and you understand how they work with your body and style. Otherwise, you will likely loose strength in your quads and your training time will decrease and cardio will worsen. You might loose your coordination with regular cranks.

Disclaimer: This is the experience of an under-trained, over-muscled, overweight, old guy who is trying to go from a power athlete to an endurance athlete.

I think my heavy legs and thighs made powercranks particularly difficult, especially in regard to keeping a high cadence. This year, I plan to do most of my training on conventional cranks. However, I am buying a new set of entry level powercranks with several pedal positions and intend to experiment with shorter crank lengths to get in a better time trial position. The entry level cranks do not have the problematic adjustment system of most of the powercranks.