tom you are a brave man. mr day may have to send a team of black ops dudes on zip lines to get you out of this one. :)

When you have adapted to the PCs such that you can ride the PCs for extended periods at a low cadence, but not a high cadence, clearly the low cadence is more effecient.

Prior to adapting to the PCs, a slower cadence is not necessarily more effecient. PrePC you are still going to let your front leg push your back leg up, regardless of the cadence.

When you start using PCs, the low cadence is easier because your HFs are weak. The effect is much like when you try to bench press a large amount of weight. You might get through the motion but it is very slow. As your HFs get stronger, you are able to complete the pedal stroke quicker.

Clearly the result of low oxygen to the brain because you have come to the same conclusion I have. Part of the high cadence conundrum is this difficulty also shows exactly how much energy it takes to just make the legs go round. I figure those losses increase with the cube of the cadence. It takes a lot of energy to make those feet go round fast and your new muscles just aren't up to the task.

I see learning to pedal at high cadences as valuable as one is getting a better HF workout in a shorter period of time but for racing purposes, one will want to drop back to the most powerful cadence (and that will vary some between people and, I suspect, will be somewhat higher for those generating the big watts) and use those HF's for generating pedal force over pedal speed.

Regarding aero postition, at least with PC's one realizes how much they lose in power when they come to the aero position. Those who have never ridden them will make all sorts of comments about these things but they just don't have a clue what you are talking about. At least now, there is a fairly large group here who do understand and can give you good feedback.

Your biggest risk soon is to be considered a PC shill by those who are tired of all the PC "hype". I will put you in touch with ttn. He has developed a defense for that attack I think. If someone yells that at you while you are on your bike at least you will be oblivious to it because you won't be able to hear it for all the wind noise in your ears. :-)

Frank

---

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

Right now, I don't really care about cadence anymore.
I do what feels right and what generates the highest
watts.
Olaf does the same. Not sure though if he is ready for 7h
planned on saturday (did 6h20' last saturday).

PC cadence and regular crank cadence aren't really the same thing. Think about it. One reason for riding at a high cadence is that force output is lower for the same power output. One benefit to that occurence is that you keep from recruiting fast twitch fibers by keeping the force output low. Fast twitch fibers produce lactic acid which causes fatigue. More force = more fast twitchfiber recruitment. Now...with PCs you are spreading the load around to more muscle groups. The HFs and other muscles (like hamstrings) are now taking up some of the load. As a result, your primary movers, quads, are producing less force at the same power output. It is kind of like riding at a higher cadence on regular cranks. Both result in less force (at least from your quads) for the same power output. So....a cadence of 60 with PCs may be more like a cadence of say...90 on regular cranks. At least from the perspective of fast twitch fiber recruitment. Just a thought. I don't worry too much about the reduced cadence on PCs. My legs still feel fresher after a ride than with regular cranks.

Mike P.

---

Simplify, Train, Live

Mike,

What people forget when looking at cadence is the same muscles that apply force to the pedal also are responsible for accelerating the feet and legs up to pedal speed and no force can be applied until the foot is going at least as fast as the pedal. So, while pedal forces may be lower at higher cadences, the muscle forces are actually higher as they are doing all this acceleration AND applying the force. If you just look at the pedal forces you miss a lot of what is going on.

After one is well trained I think we will do what Francois is doing now, ignoring cadence and riding what feels good and what we find makes us go fastest. My explanations are simply trying to explain what we are observing.

Frank

---

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

want in to this.

I got a set in late Oct / early Nov, was still very depressed post IM, lost job, lost gf and no money.

Rode them 4-5 times in early Nov then got back in a funk and did nothing from mid / late Nov until three weeks ago.

Now I have been riding 4-5 days a week for the past three week in prep for CDA.

I have not ridden less than 170 mile, including that first week. Seven days after I rode them for the first time I rode 70 miles with between 5-6000 feet of climbing.

Three weeks later, I can ride them and have been able to since the first week for hours, when the legs are waxed I simply roll until I pick it up again.

Now some observations given that I have put a little over 500 miles on them in three weeks.

1 I am certainly no faster today than I was when I started.

2 I am far far stronger.

3 I think I might be faster on regular cranks but I have not ridden them and will not until at the earliest mid may so who's to know?

4 I feel stronger on the run, running hills, trails etc etc, again I dont feel faster but I've not tried to run faster I simply feel stronger.

5 I can push a huge gear now, sitting up and faster than I ever recall on reg cranks.

6 I dont think that I am applying forward pressure with my lifting leg, I simply dont think that I can exert enough force to contribute to the downstroke BUT I do think that if on reg cranks I can effectively make the up stroke weightless then I have essentially accomplished the same thing as the PC's. I really doubt whether I could ever get to the point where I can lift my leg as fast and with as much force as I push down with but again I dont know.

7 I believe that I am spreading the load of peddling over a larger group of muscles thereby depleting a greater range of glcogen stores at a slower rate therefore delaying the onset of fatigue. (I got this from someone who may have done a little research for Frank at CU Boulder, rode with him saturday, he also said as a by the by that Polar Power meters are affected by cadence and the power taps are more accurate than either the SRM's)

8 I am not entirely sure that cadence now is as important as it may have been in the past, again this is purely speculation having ridden on them for little less than a month but if I can ride a 100-105 miles at 70 at 20 mph lets say and then increase the cadence simply to ease in to the run and this is really comfortable and my run is stronger than ever then I think that this is the route that I am going. That said it is early in the game and I have not made a decision other than I am not taking them off the bike.

Question, what would happen if you rode them exclusively but never in the aero position and then 2 weeks out from IM switched to an aero position with reg cranks. Would you see any benefit?

I've heard described here and on other forums. I didn't fall off my bike with aching hip flexor muscles. The only thing sore was my crotch. Since I'm pulling my legs up rather than giving them a free ride, The pedals bear less weight and my saddle bears more. Additionally, I spent more time sitting up straight (no hands) so that I would have a more open angle for lifting my legs. This of course meant no weight on the handlebars. All my weight is wiggling around on two square inches of taint. If this aspect of adjusting to PCs has been discussed, I missed it.

I've always been a masher of very big gears at very low cadences, and I've always suspected that I pedal in squares. So for me I found it easier to go to a slightly smaller gear than normal and spin a little faster so that the momentum helped bring my foot back over the top. So my normal cadence actually sped up.

For my first ride I did my normal 13 mile CT Coors course. I drafted a pacer at 420 Watts just to get through it more quickly and easily. Whereas, it was easier for me when I pedaled at a faster than normal rate while pushing gears, I found that I spun out more quickly at the top end. My biggest gear was only 52x12 (on my race bike I've got a 55x11 with 700s) so when the pacer was going down hills at 35+ mph I felt pretty choppy. I guess at high RPMs the issue is just lifting your legs so many times so quickly. I'm just not very smooth. There's practically no resistance drafting downhills, which seems to make it harder (I know that doesn't really make sense.)

So for me, both low and high RPMs were more difficult.

Now let's talk about out of the saddle riding. I definitely did not look like "Andrew" from the CT site. I needed to be in a very big gear with lots of resistance to come close to applying continuous pressure. Otherwise, my feet would actually rock back slightly just after passing 6 o'clock. Anyone experience this? What's the learning curve for this like? I can't even imagine riding outdoors on these things right now.

Question, what would happen if you rode them exclusively but never in the aero position and then 2 weeks out from IM switched to an aero position with reg cranks. Would you see any benefit?

My guess is you would see some benefit but it would not last long as your legs just couldn't do it in the aero position long and soon you would be slowing down, way down. If you try that we will all await your report :-)

Frank

---

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

goes to show that when I say "typical" I do not mean everyone although i think everyone has complained about the saddle, it is just so low on everyones exasperation meter in the beginning that it hardly gets mentioned.

Sounds like you are closer to the ttn adaptation curve than the "typical" curve. Congratulations.

Frank

---

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

It has always seemed to me that you pedal a more "perfect" pedal stroke at lower cadences if your technique is excellent and you're concentrating. This seems to be substantiated by my PC expereince. At 90 rpm I was a mess. At 74 rpm I was looking good. The cadence is creeping up though....

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

Does PC pedaling and ankling have anything in common?

Knowing what PC's force you to do, to me it appears
that pedaling styles should be about the same and
for that reason, just as in ankling, trying to complete
the overall objective becomes more difficult and
eventually impossible as cadence continues to rise.

Perfection wrote: Does PC pedaling and ankling have anything in common?

Perceptive question!

I think they do...and my anterior tibialis muscles would agree. They sometimes get more tired than my hip flexors, when that happens, I know I'm subconciously trying to find some way to get that pedal over the top in spite of failing hip flexors. I find many muscle groups trying to pitch in to lift the leg...my hamstrings, anterior tibialis, even my lower abdominal muscles...not that I think that is necessarily correct form, but on my only 2+ hour ride, the next day my lower abs were slightly sore.

The point is, you MUST at least lift that pedal and get it over the top, and ankling helps to do that. So, you start doing it just as a survival mechanism, even if you weren't planning on doing it, or even knew what ankling is. Do it long enough, and hopefully, it becomes your new style of pedalling.

That's one reason I think it is important to spend time on the PC's...I think I'd revert to old pedalling style very quickly on regular cranks at this point. I think I could "call up" a PC stroke from my memory for a while...but, that would take a lot of concentration. Which brings up another point.

When you first learn a task, you tend to use your cerebellum (in the front of your skull) to think about the things you are doing. Remember how complicated it seemed when you first began to drive? It took a while to get your car moving because of all the things you had to think to do, and once moving, your driving is very mechanical and awkward...you're having to think about everything you do. Now, you just hop in, put in the key, etc., and are moving in no time...heck, you can even drive to work and realize you don't remember most of the drive...you're now on automatic pilot...because most of these tasks are now done in the cerebrum...at the rear of your head. I think something like this happens with PC's. In addition to the muscular development that must occur, the new pedal stroke must be ingrained to the point that you no longer have to think about it...it becomes natural, like your walking stride...you no longer think about it, you just do it.

The problem is, PC pedalling takes more muscle groups, more timing issues, etc., than just stomping...and the human body tends to be lazy...trying to get by with less effort. So, without PC's on the bike most of the time, compounded by many thousands of Non-PC pedal strokes, I doubt you could keep up PC pedalling as well as you'd like, unless they are on there to point out EVERY TIME you screw up. They NEVER let you cheat without pointing it out to you. You can scream "@#$%&* GIMMEABREAK you stupid PC'S!" and they don't flinch, they just keep on making sure every pedal stroke lifts that off-side pedal and gets it over the top before you can push down.

And yeah, I thought I used to "ankle" fairly well. Apparently, I was incorrect. I do it much better now, just as a survival tool!

---

Quid quid latine dictum sit altum videtur
(That which is said in Latin sounds profound)

well why not jump in with a few points for the crew?

i do not ankle with PC's. actually i do, if i have slipped out of phase and it gets me back in phase for some unknown reason. i actually CAN ankle, having actually practiced it back in the day. i bother anymore, and PC's don't require it.

like andrew i was not faster with PC's in the first months i had them. mr day predicted this. i WAS equally fast with a pulse rate around 15 BPM lower tho, with a perceived effort proportionally less too. this on regular cranks riding PC style. mostly i am interested in IM, so riding as fast as used to be balls out at 15 BPM lower over 112 mi has an obvious appeal - particularly for the run afterwords. i fully expect my speed to start to rise once spring hits. loosely i interpret this all to the fact that to me speed is ruled by power, and effort by efficiency. Pc's made me more efficient pretty fast, but power is only built the old fashioned way and takes time. i think PC's raised my "ceiling" and time will tell. in the meantime i am very happy to stay as fast as i was with a HR a zone or two lower. as an aside this was not the case mt biking, where wind is not a factor. i was notably faster mt biking, dropping guys i used to be neck and neck with (for years and year) with ease by pedalling PC style. this is due to efficiency being more important off road, where you do not need to overpower the wind, i think - dunno, ask my buddies behind me.

as for the aero/position/cadence issue. i am going to follow francois lead on cadence. whatever gets me there PC style is fine. the position issue is very good. i am revamping how i ride - the PC's have caused me to make a move toward tri-positioning as i try to maintain power and an open hip and be low at the same time. to me PC's make a very good and painful case for the benefits of being rotated forward as a unit on the bike. whodathunk it. i am still experimenting here, and it is very fun to do so.

Regarding the sore crotch problem: This phenomenon is definitely much worse on a trainer than on the road. In truth, I experience this problem only on the trainer. Also, if you haven't already done so, try angling your seat a little to one side (1/2 the width of top tube) as per Cobb's suggestion on how to sit on a bicycle. Also, a neoprene saddle cover helps.

First, I also do not ankle with PCs. If I do, I go out of phase.

Next, I also saw in the first few months that my speed did not increase significantly, but my PE and HR did decrease significantly. Then there was a very sudden increase in speed. In one month I went from TT 12 miles at about 20 MPH to doing the same course in similar conditions above 24 MPH. I don't think that I did anything different that month, it just kicked in.

During last summer I noted that I could easily ride even faster at higher cadences, but that my HFs failed quickly despite the fact that I was not pushing my HR. This is the reason that I have spent fall & winter working on alot of high cadence. I now am able to maintain cadences above 100 RPM for hours at a time and I have not really changed the gearing from when I was riding 80-85 RPM. I do think that this will equate to very big speed gains when I can get outside again.

Learning to ride high cadence and doing it on rollers has clearly made my lower cadence stroke even smoother also. I am guessing that I will likely race more around 90 RPM but will have to do some testing to determine what is best for me. For now, I am not working so much on high cadence any longer, but I do think it was an important part of my adaptation. I also do not think that I should have done the cadence work earlier than I did. Just riding the PCs for a year prepared me for the cadence work which has been very tough. It may have been too tough without that preparation.

As for the aero position, I have been working a ton on flexibility. I have been spending 20 minutes each day stretching since September. I was always undisciplined about that before, but it has helped get me back into an aero position pretty easily.

"When you first learn a task, you tend to use your cerebellum (in the front of your skull) to think about the things you are doing."

Sorry to get technical but you really meant the cerebrum. The cerebellum is in the back of the brain, down low, and is the area responsible for unconscious coordination.

You were right in concept though.

Frank

---

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

I've only been on PCs for five weeks and can only add a little to the above. My perspective is that of a relatively slow old guy that has only done this biking stuff for 3 years.

1. I find there is a sweet spot when I move forward: better on the cowhorns and best in my areobars. I can only stay in these positions a couple minutes at a time but, in spite of my lack of experience, I am pretty sure I am doing something right. When in the aero position you really notice the advantage of putting that downward arch in your lower back (opening up the hips).

2. I have yet to read or experience anything yet that tells me that lifting your rising leg with your descending leg is inherently negative. This does not mean I don't see or appreciate the virtues of learning how to lift each leg without any assistance from the other. It just seems that depending on a persons muscular development one might achieve higher efficiency by using the quads to assist the HFs. Since it will be months before I try my regular cranks again, I don't have any first hand data to go on.

So far I have only been inside on the CT. As best I can tell, my speed is up about 2 mph for every aspect of my workouts: warmup, warmdown, short ride (1 hr), and long ride (now 2.5 hr). BUT there are no penalties for a poor aero position.

I am a swimmer with very flexible ankles and find it very difficult to not ankle on the bike. And I second the above, my anterior tibialis are really getting a work out. Not sure this is a bad thing.

For me the real break through is the feeling that I am finally learning how to peddle correctly. I like that.
Bill

  
Sorry to get technical but you really meant the cerebrum. The cerebellum is in the back of the brain, down low, and is the area responsible for unconscious coordination.


OOPS! That's what I get for writing after I just woke up! Thanks for the correction!

---

Quid quid latine dictum sit altum videtur
(That which is said in Latin sounds profound)