RIP, you put words in my mouth, in a sense.

I simply say that the secondary effects of reaching the capacity of the skeletal muscle to take up further oxygen (which when exceeded results in anaerobic metabolism and lactate acid production) interferes with the heart (in fact, interferes with the capacity of all the muscles in the body, including those at the limit) in being able to continue to contract optimally. It is this condition that limits the ability of the heart to further increase CO and sets the VO2 max limit in any individual. The ability of the body to increase CO and VO2 max by simply increasing plasma volume, while decreasing the concentration of hemoglobin is proof enough of that thesis for me.

If you say this improvement doesn't exist in the trained individual then give me an explanation as to what is different in the trained person and how trained to they have to be for this "effect" to disappear. A reference to that data would be nice also.

---

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

easy big fella. let us review: you read data - you process data in your mind - you relate it to the world around you. the process at large is also referred to as interpreting. thus, when you attempt to browbeat somebody over your point with data, you are in fact attempting to browbeat people with your interpretation of data.

now then. nobody here other than you or mr day know anything about what you two are talking about on all that technical jargon. so, who is right we might ask ourselves. well, in my case i look back at your OTHER interpretations of OTHER matters in this thread. most recently the testa thing. we had a very simple statement made by a figure of immense accomplishment in the field - and you tiied it up and down, added bizarre motivations to it, and so on. your final - interpretation - of that straightforward little sentence did not resemble the sentence itself whatsoever. you have done similar on a couple other occasions in this lengthy thread, over equally straightforward items of - interpretation.

given that, why would i not deduce that you do the same on the obscure bits of minutia of detail which you and mr day are going back and forth on?

Anyone else think it is wierd that Frank continually asks for people to explain, or provide references, yet he has failed provide even *one* citation that has anything to do with his ideas of physiology re: VO2 max, etcetera.

I vote we END the debate until he is able to do so. Quit responding to his baiting tactics.

TABLE 6. Biomechanical parameters of the pedaling technique for the cyclists as the right pedal........

Column headings are Subject / Watts / Peak Torque / Peak Force / ..........

In case you were reading the wrong table, this is the one I was refering to. The point remains and still holds.

Once again ball in your court.......

Mr. Winkle (you will have to be demoted a bit for this one it is so inane) writes: "then alkalosis induced via bicarbonate or citrate ingestion would increase VO2max - but it does not. "

Simply compare the amount of bicarbonate that exists in the body normally, available for buffer, to the amount someone can ingest before they kill their stomach lining. It is an infinitessimal amount and any "benefit" would be unmeasurable. If one were to try to slowly injest enough to become alkalotic at the start of an event, then their capacity would be reduced because of the resulting alkalosis, so the start of the race would be affected. The muscles (in fact, everything) works optimally within a very small range. Go outside that range and nothing is optimal.

---

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

RIP, At least we are now looking the same thing. Thanks.

My point is that these guys are wasting power. They are pushing pedals when they shouldn't be. They are pushing down when the pedal is at 12:00, and they are psuhing forward when the pedals are at 3:00. As shown in the related force graphs. This is what is causing them to have a lower (mechanical) efficiency. The peak forces as compared to the watts show some of the wasted power being generated. Look at subjects E & K. E produced 125 Watts using a peak force of 495 N, while K produced 127 watts with a peak force of 320 N. So we have one rider able to produce the same power (at the rear wheel) with mush less power being applied (at the pedals).

If, and I wil be the first to admit it is THE "IF", if PC's can help to improve this efficiency then you could see rear wheel power improvements with "no" additional power (being produced to the pedals) required.

Now only if someone would prove this...............

Dr. Winkle, that study does not prove your point nor did that study reference or state that untrained individuals were suboptimally hydrated compared to trained individuals. To me, all it says is that untrained individuals do not relax the heart as well so they require higher filling pressures to optimize athletic performance or VO2 max.

Your problem is you have stated explicitly that VO2 max IS CARDIAC limited (without limiting it to trained athletes) and here is a case where it clearly is not. So, if you are going to say that, then you have to put restrictions on the cohort who are cardiac limited and then you have to define exactly what degree of training does it take to convert them into your group from those who are not. And, it would be useful (at least to me as stupid as I am) to describe a mechanism by which training makes this change, a testable mechanism other than, "well, it just does, because of all the changes it makes as all well-trained exercise physiolgists know if you are too stupid not to see that."

---

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

You don't have to provide references. I believe it.

Where on earth is the lactate coming from that these sprinters are generating and trying to compensate for, heat after heat. Don't tell me the heart please. If bicard does improve performance under these repeated VO2 max efforts then that is another strike against your VO2 max is cardiac limited argument and onother one for my it is limited by peripheral production of toxic substances occuring as a result of substantial anaerobic metabolism argument. The reason, I presume it can be helpful here is enough time can elapse between efforts to get help with the buffering effort and restore the normal homeostasis. When lactate is produced the bicarb is used up and converted into CO2 and exhaled, so some is lost to the body. If this lost amount were replaced, then optimal pH could be regained and effort improved.

---

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

Mr. Winkle, we agree the problem is one of O2 delivery, not in utilization. If you could get rid of your anger for just awhile and read what I am saying. Where we differ is in what is the limiting factor in O2 delivery. I say it is the diffusion component of the deliver between the capillary and the mitochondria. You say it is the hearts inability to increase output. That is where we disagree. Simple as that. All of those elements you alude to enhance the amount that can diffuse to the mitochondria, as does training because this increases the denisty of capillaries, reducing the diffusion distance. It at the same time reduces peripheral vasuclar resistance an, what do you know, cardiac output (and VO2 max) is greater in trained individuals than untrained. What a revelation.

Frank

---

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

Read what I say, not what you want me to say. I said it was impossible to change VO2 max taking supplemental bicarb, at least within our ability to measure same. What you pointed out was improvement in recovery between heats if utilized bicarb is replaced. I could believe that. It is one of the benefits I believe of PC's to the sprinter. If they can stay aerobic longer (or go less anaerobic) then recovery should be quicker and more complete between heats. Ok, just theory, not proven - don't hold my feet to the fire on that one.

---

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

Frank,

Is it possible that by stubbornly propping yourself as an exercise physiology expert in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that you're actually hurting your cause (i.e. promoting the use of PC's)?

Try this...

"Hey, I've got this new invention that some find to be an effective training tool. They seem to be an effective way to isolate and train the hip flexors and promote a more coordinated pedal stroke. I'm not saying I've invented a better or more effective way to pedal a bicycle. It's simply a tool. I'm not sure how or why they seem to work for many individuals, but some folks seem to have had great results. They may or may not work for you, but I'll do my best to see that you get your money's worth."

Try the latter, more humble approach and I'll bet you'll be surprised by the support you receive not only from your loyal followers, but the non-believers, too.

In case you didn't notice, I don't think he's angry. More like morbid amusement. Kind of like a little kid tearing the wings off of a fly.

But thank you for your determination. As a 'lay' person who's eager to learn, I've appreciated all of the references.

I referenced the first post fo this thread for neutrality's sake. I say:

Pistols at dawn, or sabers or .....spitballs!!!!!!!!!!!!!

---

_________________
Dick

Take everything I say with a grain of salt. I know nothing.

[reply]
"Hey, I've got this new invention that some find to be an effective training tool. They seem to be an effective way to isolate and train the hip flexors and promote a more coordinated pedal stroke. I'm not saying I've invented a better or more effective way to pedal a bicycle. It's simply a tool. I'm not sure how or why they seem to work for many individuals, but some folks seem to have had great results. They may or may not work for you, but I'll do my best to see that you get your money's worth."

Try the latter, more humble approach and I'll bet you'll be surprised by the support you receive not only from your loyal followers, but the non-believers, too.[/reply]

Seriously Dr. Day - you need to ditch TTN as your enforcer and get JustCurious on board as your spokesperson. He will make you a millionaire/recognized all over the world/whatever your heart desires. His spiel makes me want to buy the cranks and more for my friends, yours makes me want to buy them but not tell anyone because I'd feel awful about putting money in your pocket.

Nick

I used to have a dog named Skippy. He's dead now.

[reply]I used to have a dog named Skippy. He's dead now.[/reply]

the evidence of Skippy's existence is anecdotal. unless you provide a reference, how can we really be sure your dog existed?