Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Hashing out why I am not slammed.
Quote | Reply
I’m putting this here to flesh out my thoughts on my position and the journey I have taken to arrive to where I am. This is also to answer a few questions that some seem to always ask. Lastly, I'm writing this to present my counterpoint to a certain individual’s constant badgering of my position not being optimized because I am not as low as I can be.


Like a lot of guys that practice the sport/discipline, I tinker with stuff. Some years this is due to things going very bad, while other years it's merely a function of trying to find more speed. Also, some equipment changes necessitate a change in fit, which can then lead to a cascade effect of positional changes.


Both in terms of power production and position I’ve been up and i’ve been down. I have had sporadic success over the last few years regardless of my position. Prior to that I had plenty of success due to significant structured training that I don’t have the time, money, or commitment to partake in at this stage in my life in spite of my position (not that it was bad). It goes without saying that I aggregate a lot of data, both personal and those found on the interwebs. But I should clarify that it’s not all stuck in a spreadsheet that I constantly reference. It’s more like a bunch of crap bouncing about in my head that informs my feel/gut/perception (if that makes sense).


I am a big believer in being narrow to reduce FA, as the most important operator. I’ve done slammed and narrow and while this was fast it wasn’t the game changer one would think it to be. Power production in this “phase” was damn good (think ~255 watts for a 40K i.e ~4 watts/kg). I should elaborate that by narrow in this context I mean arms and elbows together. When my pad x has been within a “normal” range I find it very difficult to shrug even though I feel like I still turtle and hold my head in a favorable position. Therefore, while elbows and arms together is a narrow setup it’s not in the sense that my shoulders are not that close together or as close as they could be. Increasing pad x and elevating hands creates a natural shrug and helps in the effort to get as tight as possible. This effect is demonstrated by seeing my relaxed position with reach and then my shrugged position. You can also see how my “long” reach seems to normalize and I adopt a Slowman Approved position.








However, to increase pad x and be slammed is damn near impossible for me on most if not all production bikes. There is also the context of a cluster fuck of a front end even with the best bars in a slammed position. Throw into the equation that a greater than 6 cm separation of a riders arms from the bars has shown to be faster than some middling ground (or at least some of the time). Also, a lot of riders have data (me included) that after a certain point drop doesn’t help and can hurt. To expand on this, for a few there is a sweet spot that can span a couple centimeters. The last consideration I recently have put into the mix is road bike position. For most emulating their road bike position on their Time Trial bike would be a horrible exercise, but for me it’s actually not that bad of an experiment. Suffice it to say that this last point was not a driver for my latest and greatest, but curiously interesting that the positions are not so dissimilar and they were both arrived at without that being the goal.








So, where does this leave me? Greater pad y to facilitate greater pad x (due to equipment limitations). Then the next step I took, after I introduced more pad y and pad x, was to increase that pad stack to the point that there would be good separation between my arms and the base bar. Now, higher hands are also in play in this setup as it makes supporting that extra pad reach possible and helps facilitate a better shrug. But I would be doing you a disservice if I didn’t reinforce the fact that I raised my hands for no reason other than to help me shrug and support my reach. This makes for a very narrow position, as the wind sees it, and somewhat mimics my road position. Also, one last monkey wrench. I have gone away from short cranks as the whole reason I moved to them was to allow me to be as low as I could get. I’m a low RPM type (e.g. 87rpm avg at my last 40K) and FEEL that the extra bit of lever is a benefit.


Am I faster now than when I was at my lowest? The answer to that is an emphatic no. Not due to position, however, but to the fact that I do not make the power I once did. I feel/believe I am now slipperier than I was when I was low, low, low, but without comparing the two positions back to back it is merely conjecture from either side of the argument.





vs





ETA: had watts per kilo wrong.







My YouTubes

Last edited by: LAI: May 6, 19 11:46
Quote Reply
Re: Hashing out why I am not slammed. [LAI] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Jesus Christ. There’s been pages, threads, videos, and everything else on your position. Ride however you want and move on. Get over yourself and the need for attention.
Quote Reply
Re: Hashing out why I am not slammed. [Alwaysrunning99] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
These threads have started some of the best fit philosophy discussions though
Quote Reply
Re: Hashing out why I am not slammed. [imswimmer328] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'll start:

1. Seat is too high.
2. Beard is giving away more watts than position issues.

***
Quote Reply
Re: Hashing out why I am not slammed. [LAI] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If I've said it once I've said it a billion times, "low" has nothing to do with saddle to pad drop.

My Blog - http://leegoocrap.blogspot.com
Quote Reply
Re: Hashing out why I am not slammed. [Morelock] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Would you mind expanding on that? That is, what do you believe low is? I think you and I are on the same page, but it would be good to add your perspective to what I am saying (i.e. say it in a clearer or better way).


Morelock wrote:
If I've said it once I've said it a billion times, "low" has nothing to do with saddle to pad drop.

My YouTubes

Quote Reply
Re: Hashing out why I am not slammed. [LAI] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
They can be the same, as in having massive drop can lead to being low, and there are certainly plenty of positions that are "low" that have huge drop numbers. But there are plenty of examples of guys (and a LOT of fast gals) that have little to no drop from their saddle to pads. There are plenty of extreme examples, but in recent years you can look to the UKTT to see many very "high" positions. Maybe Levi Leipheimer is the most "famous" example, although Campenaerts and Dennis both ride pretty small amounts of drop. Of course all depends on what you consider "small/large" amounts of drop.


I use this picture a lot. I think he's pretty "low" but he certainly doesn't have much drop


My Blog - http://leegoocrap.blogspot.com
Quote Reply
Re: Hashing out why I am not slammed. [Morelock] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Morelock wrote:
I use this picture a lot. I think he's pretty "low" but he certainly doesn't have much drop



So, I thought about this some more. Also, I could have swore there was a reply to your post saying something along the lines "put a pin in his COG and rotate to level (as he looks to be going down hill) and he won't look very low." This is what I recalled about Levi. He was never low, although he is lower to the ground than most larger athletes due to being small.

A couple photos, with one being not realistic but still demonstrative.




Admittedly the last photo makes Levi look to have a low position.

Anyhow, the Levi photo(s) got me thinking and I want to say that low, for me, is having one’s hip to shoulder plane being parallel, or close to, with the riding surface. Now, you don’t need a lot of drop to achieve this, but you will need some short humeri and or lots of reach. However, it’s infinitely more achievable if you can have lots of pad drop.


I wouldn't call Levi a low position and Rohan, Campenaerts, et al fall in this camp too. I think the shape of Victor’s back makes him appear lower in the front than he really is and that is why we don’t see a lot of drop on his rigs. And if we draw a line that bisects his hip and shoulder we see that it’s not a low position if we define it that way.







Now this fruitcake is another story (I think he may be running a touch too much drop).








But you’re right, low is a matter of reference and drop is not necessarily the reference we should be using. In the end, my point was/is that you don't have to be slammed in the front, carry lots of drop, or however else you want to define it to be in a fast position.

My YouTubes

Last edited by: LAI: May 7, 19 13:19
Quote Reply