How is this of any practical value?

No significant benefit was found with PC's vs normal cranks in VO2max, anaerobic threshold, or respiratory exchange ratio (i.e. no evidence of Frank's claim that the hip flexors become more "oxidative" in nature with PC training).

The observed reduction in HR and oxygen consumption and increased efficiency could possibly be just as easily demonstrated at the sub max intensities used during the study by dropping cadence from 80 to 65 rpm while holding the same power output. Does the use of PC's simply trade lower HR and O2 consumption (at intensities where O2 availability and cardiac output are not limiting factors) for increased neuromuscular fatigue similar to choosing an artificially low cadence?

JC writes: How is this of any practical value?

Of what "practical value" are any scientific studies other than their interpretation may lead to new knowledge.

JC writes: No significant benefit was found with PC's vs normal cranks in VO2max, anaerobic threshold, or respiratory exchange ratio (i.e. no evidence of Frank's claim that the hip flexors become more "oxidative" in nature with PC training).

That seems not too unusual as they did not look at these things. It seems to me that fir a "first" study of a new device or training method one would like to know that there is a benefit before going to a lot of effort to study deeper as to the entirety of the benefit. Seems to me that was the "practical value" of this study.

JC writes: The observed reduction in HR and oxygen consumption and increased efficiency could possibly be just as easily demonstrated at the sub max intensities used during the study by dropping cadence from 80 to 65 rpm while holding the same power output. Does the use of PC's simply trade lower HR and O2 consumption (at intensities where O2 availability and cardiac output are not limiting factors) for increased neuromuscular fatigue similar to choosing an artificially low cadence?

While a cadence change could be an explanation for the findings (although that is a pretty big change for a simple cadence slowing), the same would have been true for both groups but, more importantly, the researchers controlled for cadence, so this can't be the explanation. Perhaps you forgot that as this has been mentioned before when discussing this study here. Of course, it will mean more when another researcher repeats the study to see if it is reproducible (remember cold fusion) and other different studies need to be done to look at those other aspects of my claims. I look forward to them as much as you do.

Another "practical value" of such a study from a PowerCranks point of view of course is such a study might be enough to cause some to try them while others may still want to wait for other, more definitive, studies to be completed.

If you have any substantial problems with the methodology of this study please let us know (once you have read it - clearly you haven't) so i can try to make sure the deficiencies are corrected in future studies. I think we went through this before and there really weren't any huge deficiencies, if I remember right. As these types of studies go I thought it was pretty well done.

Frank

---

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks

That's kind how they did it actually.

Since they weren't 100% sure the Nighthawk would even fly, they were going to get the radar sig with it mounted it up on a big pylon. The AF tech calibrated his radar using the pylon w/o the mock-up. They put the F-117 on it and said "Go again" The tech switched on his equipment.

"OK, put the plane on now."

"It is on."

"No it's not. I just see the pylon."

"No it's up there."

"Are you sure? I still just see the pylon."

"Um, you wanna look out here for a second, son."

History was made.

---

"What's your claim?" - Ben Gravy
"Your best work is the work you're excited about" - Rick Rubin

Frank, this was not a published study, nor did it make any claims. Your criticisms are misplaced.

---

_______________________________________________

Between AC's article and "I got this email from a guy...", we know which does Frank prefer...

---

-
"Yeah, no one likes a smartass, but we all like stars" - Thom Yorke


smartasscoach.tri-oeiras.com

You do all know that Andrew Coggan is a Ph.D in Exercise Physiology

Not just some hack.

Bikedude…

"You do all know that Andrew Coggan is a Ph.D in Exercise Physiology "


He's also a very fast master's TT'er.

"It's not how fast you are, it's how fast you look "

Yeah baby!! Like Will Smith said in MIB "I make this stuff look GOOD!"

---

Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...