Fitting a very successful older athlete with an extremely high profile coach. First things first, I am explaining posture, anterior pelvic tilt, etc, when the athlete tells me her coach wants her to ride with her hips rotated rearward because he wants her to use her glutes, because "your glutes won't fatigue but your quads will."
Post fit, her 'other bike fitter' convinces her that her perceptions were wrong and she should stay on her 167.5 cranks, instead of the 155s that clearly felt better to her, and looked better to me, both times we tried them. His reasoning was that a SpinScan analysis did not indicate a need for shorter cranks?!?
Did I miss some relevant science at some point? Can anyone inject any reality into either of these assertions? Are we just making shit up as we go now?
Post fit, her 'other bike fitter' convinces her that her perceptions were wrong and she should stay on her 167.5 cranks, instead of the 155s that clearly felt better to her, and looked better to me, both times we tried them. His reasoning was that a SpinScan analysis did not indicate a need for shorter cranks?!?
Did I miss some relevant science at some point? Can anyone inject any reality into either of these assertions? Are we just making shit up as we go now?