it's pretty funny that you say that anyone else's posts are tiring...

I'll have that beer with him if we meet some day, but I'm certainly not going to go up that mountain in a few months, I don't want to die frozen.

Anyway, what would that prove? I'm not saying that joaquin can't hold 360w for 30m, that would be very good, but nothing unbelievable, his time in that climb is really good, better than mine, but certainly not unbelievable. I just chime in whenever I read someone say something that I know is wrong, as I live in Madrid and have climbed that mountain a few times.

All I know is:

Morcuera is 9.2km long, 6,9% steep, sheltered form the wind but for the last km that usually has a headwind, the summit is almost at 1800m.

It takes 309 PT watts with a total mass of 75kg (rider+bike+extras), a front 404 tubular with a vittoria crono and a rear open pro clincher with a veloflex record to climb it in 29m16s (tha's my PB if you haven't guessed it).

If anyone posts any data that contradicts what I know, I will say so, that's all, I have no reason not to believe joaquin, and I don't care if he is fast or not, in fact I just find it amazing that he can ride up that mountain using your funny cranks, even if it took him an hour

" As I said, two people can look at the same data and get two different answers, depending on what they are trying to "prove""

I haven't tried to prove anything, other than the fact that you have no idea WHY you have gotten faster, even though you want to pin it on PC's. You don't KNOW that, in any sense of the word.

"I, and others, believe PC's help"

I, and others, aren't convinced.

"I will continue to use how I think they help me, which is not the 100% what Franks recommends"

As I said, knock yourself out. BUT, until they are proven to me that they work, I won't be dropping $1k on them.

"Now, if they loan me a SRM/PC setup, I might have to change that statement"

Why would they do that? Your irrational devotion to PC's leaves Frank zero reason to give you something. He gets more than enough mention on ST about your PC's. Now, if I were Frank, I'd be asking for to pipe down about your PC's. Your slower bike splits and only slightly faster run times after DOUBLING your volume isn't exactly the PR I'd be wanting for my product.

"And, I totally believe the PC's, with my data, show I am running faster"

Dave, I said that I don't doubt that. BUT DO YOU THINK THERE IS AN OUTSIDE CHANCE YOU ARE RUNNING FASTER BECAUSE OF YOUR DOUBLED TRAINING VOLUME? Probably not, because that doesn't support your use of PC's.

"It might all be in my head"

It's good to know something is in there ;-)

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Lemond is cycling's version of Rev Jessie Jackson." -johnnyperu 5/18/07
"Just because I suck doesn't mean my bike has to" -rickn 9/2/08

Your "heads up" said I was being "snookered". You analyzed a corrupted file and then attributed nefarious intent and deliberate manipulation to it. Perhaps, but the data is the data. I will accept that and deal with it. I don't run and hide under a rock just because someone might have done something untowards in supporting my product. His improvements are right in line with what many have reported. His is the first to give us numbers. Unless you have evidence that his doctor's testing has also been manipulated or that he didn't really do that climb in the time reported (even though there was a witness there who believes he did) this "manipulation" of this one particular set of data says nothing about PowerCranks and their potential nor does it mean there could not be other explanations for the data.

It will be interesting to see what the data in the unit still says. Would you agree it would be impossible to manipulate the data in the unit? What if it is downloaded and comes out corrupted again (with the same or, even, different values). How would you interpret that? What if the data comes out uncorrupted but confirms what Joaquin originally claimed?

I just think it premature to assign nefarious intent. While it may be true that when a woman is murdered the first person the police usually suspect is the spouse, they usually don't charge on that data alone. They usually would like some corroborating evidence to confirm their suspicion. I think it would have been better to say the data was inconsistent. What bothers me about assigning nefarious intent and deliberate manipulation are two things. First the speed data. The speed data is high by about 16%. Putting that speed into analyticcycling.com for the same climb would have required about 424 watts. Why on earth would someone manipulate this data to this result then not claim the result? And, why would they also manipulate the HR data to have a repeating pattern? Where is the purpose there? There is some stuff here, on close analysis, that makes no sense? I am not quite ready to jump on the "joaquin is an untrustworth con artist band wagon" in view of the fact that he waited until there was an observer there as someone requested and the observer thinks his climb is about as advertised which would have required the power numbers found in the file (according to analyticcycling.com). So, there is evidence to support his claim and the the file is definitely corrupted, possibly manipulated.

You have not manipulated the data. The data file is what it is. The only question is how did it get that way? Many have made their determination of that. I don't think there is enough evidence for that to be "proven". It is my opinion. You are welcome to yours also.

I am not digging a hole as I have not made a judgment here. What are earth are you (or the other accusers) going to do if it is discovered that the data is corrupted in the unit?

Why don't you just encourage Alvaro to go ride the climb with him?

---

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

This thread just keeps on giving! After the dog finally threw up the homework, it morphed into Slowtwitch's very own version of the Schon case. (Indeed the protagonist(s) are showing the classic pyschosis found in scientific fraud in their conviction of being correct even when the data itself has been proven to be doctored or fraudulent.) And now we've got this new Spanish soap opera/mafiosi angle - superb.

The question is, who is "the professor"? Or should that be: quién es "catedrático"?

[reply]
[reply]
Why don't you just encourage Alvaro to go ride the climb with him? [/reply]


what would that prove?

Frank, I usually cut down the extraneous stuff from messages I reply to, but in this case I am going to leave your entire loopy message as it is.

1. Find the message where I said you were being "snookered." You can't. You're lying. That's unethical for a Naval Academy graduate, and a physician. Admit your error and apologize.

2. Find the message where I attributed "nefarious intent." You can't. You're lying. That's unethical for a Naval Academy graduate, and a physician. Admit your error and apologize.

3. You've accused me of bias without support and, although you demand the answer from others you have twice evaded answering the same question yourself. Of the two of us, who has greater motivation to "manipulate" the interpretation?

Well, Joaquin for one. He has submitted 3 tests showing such an improvement over one year, increasing his FTP 40%. Now people have a lot of heartburn with the methodology used by his doctor, but his doctor, who did the test, is experienced in this area and it just happens to be the methodology he uses.

I would also use the example of Phil Holman. He did not train with a power meter but his documented speed improvements (increasing his top speed on the track from 35 to 38 mph) in 7 months calculate to about a 30% increase in power and got him to a world class level. It isn't 40% but it is about 40% and he probably started at a higher level than our average new user.

And, Joe Skufka, an experienced triathlete, who reported improving his monthly 12 mile TT loop in 6 months from an average speed of 20 mph to over 25 mph. Even though he again did not have a power meter I defy anyone to get that kind of speed improvement without seeing at least a 40% increase in power! And, the next year he was up to 27 mph. And the next year 28 mph.

Or, Tom Evans. Again no power meter but he improved his best IM bike split from over 5 hours to about 4:30, although it took him a little more than a year to do so.

Anyhow, lots of these examples exist. Just go listen to the cycling improvements testimonials video on the web page. I have put a link to in in this thread already so I won't repeat it here.[/reply]
You're amazing Frank, I don't use the site much but when i do i can't get enough of your innate ability to ignore every single opinion offered to you that differs to yours, and anytime it looks like you're losing you start veering off subject and brush the damage under the carpet.

You're saying the cranks haven't been proven to give the marketed claim. Is that not illegal in the States? It is in Ireland. And then you say that the claim hasn't been disproved so your satisfied with it. Of course you're satisfied with saying it, it is supposed to help people to buy your product and give you money. Why not change your promotion of the PC's to "Can increase performance by up to or over 40%. Well no one can say it can't. Actually, I am sure it can. Honest folks, we just decided to make a claim with no proof and expect you to believe it cause we think its true"

And since you like the smoking analogy, you using the above examples as proof or evidence of the 40% increase is like smoking companies, before being proven otherwise, saying "hey smoke up guys, an 8 year old girl just broke the world most cigerettes in a day record and she's still healthy" or "some random spanish guy smoked for years and he lived longer than loads of other people". Of course certain people will get quicker, people train more, they gain from years of other training, they focus more, they improve racing, pacing, nutrition, health, just because there are a few scant random and containing no direct relation to PCs exceptions, doesn't prove anything.

You amaze me, honest, amaze me

---

__________________________________________________

Fail to Prepare, Prepare to Fail

Your treatment of RChung on this thread is distasteful, and says quite a bit about your character. He's done nothing but state the facts, and he's been extremely even-handed and fair in doing so. Don't attack him just because his accurate analysis didn't say what you hoped it would.

You are right. It was someone else who emailed me to warn me. the words were "you have been had. . ." I apologize for mis-attributing that.

I see no evidence you have attributed nefarious intent to this file. Certainly others have. If I mistakenly put you in this group, I apologize.

No, I have not accused you specifically of bias, at least that I know of. Your analysis of the file is correct in that the file is considerably flawed with substantial inconsistencies. I checked and I can't find that you have made any statement as to how this occurred. I apologize if I implied or said otherwise.

All I can say is we are going to try to take some steps to answer the question as to whether the file was changed after it came out of the unit or whether the data is flawed from the get-go. Joaquin has noticed some other problems with the data, in that a lot is missing after the ride. We are going to be sending the unit to Cycle-ops and let them download the file and see what they get, since it is still there. Hopefully, with Murphy's law and all, it will not get lost in the mail. :-) Anyhow, we will see what we will see, won't we?

---

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

You're amazing Frank, I don't use the site much but when i do i can't get enough of your innate ability to ignore every single opinion offered to you that differs to yours, and anytime it looks like you're losing you start veering off subject and brush the damage under the carpet.

You're saying the cranks haven't been proven to give the marketed claim. Is that not illegal in the States? It is in Ireland. And then you say that the claim hasn't been disproved so your satisfied with it. Of course you're satisfied with saying it, it is supposed to help people to buy your product and give you money. Why not change your promotion of the PC's to "Can increase performance by up to or over 40%. Well no one can say it can't. Actually, I am sure it can. Honest folks, we just decided to make a claim with no proof and expect you to believe it cause we think its true"

And since you like the smoking analogy, you using the above examples as proof or evidence of the 40% increase is like smoking companies, before being proven otherwise, saying "hey smoke up guys, an 8 year old girl just broke the world most cigerettes in a day record and she's still healthy" or "some random spanish guy smoked for years and he lived longer than loads of other people". Of course certain people will get quicker, people train more, they gain from years of other training, they focus more, they improve racing, pacing, nutrition, health, just because there are a few scant random and containing no direct relation to PCs exceptions, doesn't prove anything.

You amaze me, honest, amaze me[/reply] I am sorry. There are degrees of proven. There is "proven" enough to satisfy me that the claim is probably pretty good and there is "proven" to a scientific certainty. There is enough data for the first, there is not for the second. If there is ever any data to suggest the claim is inflated (not simply opinions that it is inflated) I will change it.

Continuing to amaze is my goal. :-)

---

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

So, in essence, unless someone comissions a controlled study of powercrank effectiveness, and the study shows that improvement is less than 40%, you wouldn't consider rescinding the claim? Even then you might stand behind your claim, though, citing the fact that the study merely "failed to support" your hypothesis, and that technically a scientific study never "disproves" anything.

Whatever happened to "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof"? You don't even have one well-documented case that suggests the 40% number is accurate. How can a guy who went to medical school stand behind that claim?

As this thread continues it's becoming ever clearer that you'll believe whatever portrays your invention in a positive light, and whatever makes you a buck.

Well, we have "commissioned" such a study, or perhaps you missed that. Such a study, that lasts for that long is exceedingly hard to do but we are going to try. Anyhow, there could be other data I suppose but as long as we keep getting reports from the field (there are well known relationships between power and speed such that power improvements can be inferred from speed improvements, all else being the same, in case you didn't know) that support the claim and no scientific study exists to refute it, I suspect it will remain.

I guess in our case the "extraordinary proof" we offer is an extraordinary money-back guarantee. Not many products offer what we do, in fact, I don't know another one. Whether we give 40% or not to each person, they can feel certain that whatever improvement they see from using the product the cost of the cranks is worth it to them to see it.

---

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

"there are well known relationships between power and speed such that power improvements can be inferred from speed improvements, all else being the same"

There's the crux of it. You have no idea if all else was the same. You have no idea if the improvements in speed these people report was due to equipment changes, differences in wind or course conditions, or changes in training that have nothing to do with power cranks.

"Whether we give 40% or not to each person, they can feel certain that whatever improvement they see from using the product the cost of the cranks is worth it to them to see it."

So it doesn't matter if there is any substance to the 40% claim, as long as customers like their power cranks? Great (and convenient) logic, Frank!

"Not many products offer what we do, in fact, I don't know another one"

Costco. Sure, Costco isn't a product, but they offer money back on the products they sell....without a time limit (other tha mp3 players, tv's, etc which are 90 days)

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Lemond is cycling's version of Rev Jessie Jackson." -johnnyperu 5/18/07
"Just because I suck doesn't mean my bike has to" -rickn 9/2/08

Then I suggest you buy all your triathlon or cycling related needs at Costco. I bought my current bike there and I am quite happy with it.

But, if you don't find that Costco meets all your cycling or triathlon needs, give me another instance that might relate to this group. wheels, bikes, frames, coaching services, pedals, cranks, tires, energy bars, etc.

I can think of one that has a "similar" guarantee, but you got to jump through a lot of hoops to qualify for the refund. No hoops at PowerCranks. You are either happy with the purchase or you return it for your money back

---

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

OK Mr. Donm, I was out for a ride and thinking about this. Here are a few reasons I continue to make my 40% power improvement claim even though many like yourself think it is completely off the wall for me to do so.

1. Almost every critic of this claim has never trained with the product. Many of them have never even seen it. What do they know what it can do or what it can not?

2. I cannot think of a single instance where a customer has come back to us and said they felt our claim was outrageous or that it mislead them. Occasionally customers do send their cranks back for refund but, when asked for a reason, it is usually something like "I could never learn to do it" or "they take the fun out of riding for me", things like that. Never, you mislead me with your outrageous claim.

3. Customers who do report substantial improvement in the 40% range do, occasionally, tell us it is the only change they made. The customers, many of whom are not neophytes to cycling, attribute the improvement to the PowerCranks. Isn't their opinion worth something? Isn't their opinion worth more than the opinion of people who have never trained with the product?

4. There are a lot of PowerCrankers here at slowtwitch. How many of them are bashing the claims?

5. People seem to think I am posting here to make sales. while some of these threads undoubtably lead to a few sales, it cannot be a huge number as the number of people who see these threads is very limited. The biggest factor in our increasing sales is word of mouth. Something has to account for this. One explanation might be that the product just might do what we claim, or close thereto.

I know pretty much all the data that has ever been accumulated on this product. I believe it supports our claim. If future data suggests the claim should be modified, I will do so.

---

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

"But, if you don't find that Costco meets all your cycling or triathlon needs, give me another instance that might relate to this group. wheels, bikes, frames, coaching services, pedals, cranks, tires, energy bars, etc"

Performance Bicycle. http://www.performancebike.com/index.cfm

No coaching services, but you can get wheels, bikes, frames, pedals, cranks, tires, energy bars, etc.

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Lemond is cycling's version of Rev Jessie Jackson." -johnnyperu 5/18/07
"Just because I suck doesn't mean my bike has to" -rickn 9/2/08

from the site:
Performance guarantees satisfaction with every product we sell. If an item does not meet your expectation, please follow these procedures to insure a prompt replacement, refund, or credit:

1. Using a good carton, return package via insured US Mail or other Parcel Carrier of your choice. (Performance will refund the actual ground shipping costs to return damaged merchandise or to return merchandise due to a mis-shipment).
2. Complete the returns form on the back of your packing slip. If you do not have your packing slip, please include a note stating purchaser's name, address and approximate date of purchase.
3. Send returns to: PBS Returns Dept., 144 Old Lystra Road, Chapel Hill, NC 27514-2741 (we do not accept CODs).
4. Keep a record of shipment until you have received credit or replacement merchandise.

For additional information on our return policies, please contact our Customer Service department at 800-727-2433, or e-mail us at customerservice@performanceinc.com."
I guess they might refund the full amount on a set of wheels after you have put on a couple of thousand miles on them in 90 days but it is not entirely clear since one might need some "additional information" to know for sure.
But, let us assume it is true, they are a retailer trying to get a competitive edge. Give me a manufacturers then. Such that it doesn't matter where you make your purchase.

---

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

"OK Mr. Donm, I was out for a ride and thinking about this. Here are a few reasons I continue to make my 40% power improvement claim even though many like yourself think it is completely off the wall for me to do so"

"1. Almost every critic of this claim has never trained with the product. Many of them have never even seen it. What do they know what it can do or what it can not?"

That doesn't back your claim of a 40% increase.

"2. I cannot think of a single instance where a customer has come back to us and said they felt our claim was outrageous or that it mislead them. Occasionally customers do send their cranks back for refund but, when asked for a reason, it is usually something like "I could never learn to do it" or "they take the fun out of riding for me", things like that. Never, you mislead me with your outrageous claim"

That doesn't back your claim of a 40% increase. What about all of the pairs for sale on eBay and the ST classifieds at any given time? I wonder why they don't want theirs. If they see the benefit, why would ANYONE want to sell their set?

"3. Customers who do report substantial improvement in the 40% range do, occasionally, tell us it is the only change they made. The customers, many of whom are not neophytes to cycling, attribute the improvement to the PowerCranks. Isn't their opinion worth something? Isn't their opinion worth more than the opinion of people who have never trained with the product?"

So occasionally it works, or so people say. Of course, this is opinion. And since they aren't beginners, they must know better than people with PhD's in exercise phys or guys who have been coaching endurance athletes for years...at least they and you think so; but then again, you can't prove it.

"4. There are a lot of PowerCrankers here at slowtwitch. How many of them are bashing the claims?"

A few don't speak highly of them. Then again, had I paid $1k for a training aid and decided I didn't think it worked well, I'd keep quiet about it as well. It'd be embarrassing to me to have all of these naysayers, go against them, then admit they were right. But that's just me.

"5. People seem to think I am posting here to make sales. while some of these threads undoubtably lead to a few sales, it cannot be a huge number as the number of people who see these threads is very limited. The biggest factor in our increasing sales is word of mouth. Something has to account for this. One explanation might be that the product just might do what we claim, or close thereto"

That doesn't back your claim of a 40% increase.

"I know pretty much all the data that has ever been accumulated on this product. I believe it supports our claim"

Believing something doesn't make it true.

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Lemond is cycling's version of Rev Jessie Jackson." -johnnyperu 5/18/07
"Just because I suck doesn't mean my bike has to" -rickn 9/2/08

Does that sound difficult to you? Put what you want to return into a box, and toss in a slip to let us know who you are. Drop in the mail with some type of delivery confirmation.

Wow, I can't believe all of those hoops you have to jump through! Frank, that's the basic procedure to mail ANYTHING. There is no possible way, that I can see, to make returning something via mail any easier.

And just so you know, I bought a set of Mavic CrossMax SL's from performance this spring. I rode them in 4 races (3 XTERRA's and 1 XC MTB race), and through probably 200 training miles. I couldn't get a set of brake pads to work quietly for the life of me, so I sent them back. Dropped them in the same box they were shipped to me, and had my money back in my account in about 6 days from the day I took them to the UPS Store. I just dropped the receipt in the box that I received when I bought them, and BAM, no problem. I think I had those wheels from Feb-July, so about 5 months or so. No questions asked.

So no Frank, no additional information is needed. But nice try.

"But, let us assume it is true, they are a retailer trying to get a competitive edge. Give me a manufacturers then. Such that it doesn't matter where you make your purchase"

What do you want now? Another manufacturer that gives a 90 day return policy? How about you give me another manufacturer that makes such outrageous claims with no data to back them up. I've given you two examples already, you give me one.

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Lemond is cycling's version of Rev Jessie Jackson." -johnnyperu 5/18/07
"Just because I suck doesn't mean my bike has to" -rickn 9/2/08

"How about you give me another manufacturer that makes such outrageous claims with no data to back them up. I've given you two examples already, you give me one. "

Computrainer.

30 minutes off your IM bike split, Guaranteed.

---

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

I can't find that on their site, though I trust you (I do see where they say a 20-30% increase in power, so they are saying somewhere between 50-75% of the increase you are claiming). So, let's get the inventor of Computrainer on ST and ask him where his proof is. I won't discriminate, I'm happy to ask for proof from them as well as you.

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Lemond is cycling's version of Rev Jessie Jackson." -johnnyperu 5/18/07
"Just because I suck doesn't mean my bike has to" -rickn 9/2/08

Holy crap, are you kidding me? Yes, RacerMate has some hoops to jump through, but they give you 12 months!!! 365 days against your 90! And their stipulations just make you use it.

The original purchaser of a CompuTrainer may return it within 12 months of the purchase date for a refund of the purchase price if his/her cycling power (watts) and speed have not increased by 2 MPH or more after training on it for a minimum of 3 days/week, a minimum of one hour per day, for 5 consecutive months. The following conditions apply to this Guarantee.

1) The 5 month period begins as soon as the purchaser starts using the CompuTrainer. The date of first use must be within 6 months of the purchase date. The 5 month period ends 22 weeks from the date of first use.

2) The Racelog option within the 3D software “Options menu” must be activated and the actual racelog.csv (which lists the dates and actual training times for the 22 weeks use on the CompuTrainer) must be provided.

3) The beginning power and speed used as the basis for the determination of the percentage increases are to be determined within 3 days of the date of first use. Power and speed are defined as the average speed and average watts recorded on the standard CompuTrainer 10K Time Trial course which can be downloaded from the web site. The beginning 10k time trial performance must be saved in the CompuTrainer 3D software to substantiate the initial average power and average speed results.

4) At approximately one month intervals four additional 10K time trials are to be saved (recorded) using CompuTrainer 3D as evidence of the continuous 5 month training program with the last time trial recorded at the end of the 5 month period.

5) It is assumed that a CompuTrainer returned under this Guarantee will show signs of normal use. An adjustment in the refund amount of the original purchase price, excluding freight, will be made for damages which occur during return transportation, for missing parts, and for water damage.

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Lemond is cycling's version of Rev Jessie Jackson." -johnnyperu 5/18/07
"Just because I suck doesn't mean my bike has to" -rickn 9/2/08

Look on the right at the ads right here on ST. Look for the CT ad. That is where it is. Why hadn't you noticed it? Our ad makes no specific claim. Why is there no outrage here about that claim? They are guaranteeing race performance improvement and you can be sure no study exists to support it. Even I am not so bold to do that as lots of things can hurt race performance? While I suggest how much improvement one might see all I really guarantee is that one will be happy with what improvement they actually see for how much they spent, whatever their level. That doesn't seem to outrageous to me.

---

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