"so if i got a set and went 30sec's faster would it just be down to the cranks"

Their guarantee isn't to make you 30 sec faster, you just came up with that. Now, if you kept EVERYTHING consistent other than PC's, trained on them for 9 months, then raised your cycling power 40% then I would say they worked for you.

"or could it be that maybe a did a bit more training, changed my position a bit, did less training so was better rested, faster day, better diet, the list goes on"

That's the crux of it, now isn't it? So if I were to offer you coaching services and a "magical pill", where my pill gives you a 40% increase in power, but you have to increase your training load by 100%, would that mean my "pill" was working? Of course not. So if you train more, change your position, were more rested, had a better diet, etc, you can't attribute the increased speed to PC's.

"Impossible to pin down just the one thing that made the difference, BUT if you think that PCs are the reason then they are, simple"

So now if we think something, it's true? That's good to know....hmmm....I "think" I have $1m in my checking account....let's see what Chase has to say about that.

"If you ride your bike more because youve spent the money on them and what to make sure you get your moneys worth and you go faster then its still the cranks that have done it because they gave you the reason to train"

I'm fine with that excuse. I spend money on stuff all the time for the placebo effect. But, if that's the case let's be honest and say that PC's make you faster because you train more, not because they work.

"Just like all the aero kit you buy"

I don't have an aero kit.

"how much of it is the fact its areo and how much it is your head telling you that you will be quicker now."

Don't know, I don't have one. But I think questions are supposed to end with a question mark.

"Amazing how putting a new set of wheels or a new pair of bars on your bike enables you to put out a few more watts the first time out with them"

If I spend $1k I want put out 40% more watts ALL the time after the training period, not just the FIRST TIME OUT WITH THEM.

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------
"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

Here is the way to look at it. What we say is most of our users are seeing about 2-3 mph speed increases. Now the slower you are the "easier" it is to improve, the better you are the harder, I think everyone would agree with this. So, our slower people frequently are on the 3-4 mph improvement range of that scale, while our elites are rarely above 2 mph. What does that mean power wise?

Power at the various speed below according to analyticcycling.com

speed, power
12, 39.4
14, 56
16, 77.1
18, 103.6
20, 135.8
22, 174.5
24, 220.9
26, 274.6
28, 337.6
30, 408.2
32, 491.2
34, 582.9
36, 685.7
38, 800.2

Increasing speed from 12 to 16 mph requires a power increase from 39 to 77, a 96% increase, almost a doubling, well over our 40% "claim". Of course, this is pretty easy to do even without powercranks if one puts enough time in the saddle.
Increasing speed from 20 to 23 mph requires a power increase from 136 to 197, a 45% increase, still over our 40% claim and not quite so easy to do.
Increasing speed from 36 to 38 mph requires a power increase from 686 to 800, a huge absolute increase but only a 17% increase and very difficult to do. The size of the percentage increase in power does not represent how hard it is to obtain. The percentage increase claim only applies, on average, for the vast majority of the non-pros riding and racing who get our product, those currently with an FTP between 150 and 220. If you are currently below or above that range what you can expect can be more or less than that percentage change. If you want to misconstrue the claim to mean we think we can give the best pros a 40% increase in power on average you misrepresent what we say.

---

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

[reply]ok, just a thought.
you say that there isnt any evidence to prove that they work so to you that means they dont. i cant think of any single thing that is proved to make you faster can you, does that mean nothing is gonna help you?
at the opposite end of it can you think of anything that proves they dont work?
impossible to put improvment or lack of it down to one thing. Training with PCs is just as likley to make you 2 or 20mph quicker than training with anything else[/reply]




It depends on what you expect them to do. They are ideal, the best equipment ever invented for teaching the circular pedaling style but that is all they are capable of doing for cycling. After a year on PC's when a rider returns to normal cranks, how will his circular pedaling differ from a natural circular pedaler, where in the pedaling circle will the PC'er be able to inject more pedal power. Maybe if Frank could compare these two types of rider on independent crank torque measuring equipment, he would soon get an answer. But if this same PC user set about perfecting the mashing technique, he would find that he would be able to apply even more power with the mashing style than with the circular way of doing it. I can think of one single thing that is likely to make you faster, it is the ability to apply max power through 12 o'c as nobody else can do it. The proof lies in the fact that Anquetil is still recognised as the world's greatest ever TT rider, he used that technique, the evidence can be found in his pedaling footage on video.

"If you want to misconstrue the claim to mean we think we can give the best pros a 40% increase in power on average you misrepresent what we say"

Whoa, where did I say that the best pros would gain 40%? I made a joke about a team winning the TdF, but I'm pretty sure I put a little winky-guy following saying that. I quoted "most increase cycling speed 2-3 mph (that is about 40% in increased cycling power)" directly from your site.

Please point me to the post that I said "PC's would give the best pros a 40% increase in power on average." If I said that, my apologies. If I did not, I will remind you, for I think the 5th time in this thread, to stop putting words in my mouth.

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------
"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

No, I wasn't referring to you specifically. However, there are many here who have made that leap. I bunched them into my reply to you. They read what they want to read so they can try to dismiss what we really do say. Hey, it is the internet.

---

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

Hmmm. Well, first, let's all agree that whether you could or couldn't do such a thing is not dispositive about this particular case. Second, as I've said, I didn't show all of the things I looked at or analyses I did. Just 'cuz you can't think of a way to detect alterations or manipulations doesn't mean no one can.

Here is my thought. Someone send me a PT file of a climb (it could be done on anything but if it is on the flat it is harder to do do and make it undetectable if there is substantial variation and we are dealing with a climb in this particular instance). I will then make 9 variations of the file showing 9 different average powers varying as much as 20% and see if the experts can detect which one is the original out of the 10. If randomized properly I say they will get it right about 10% of the time. If they get it right substantially more than that then they know a lot more of the nuances of this stuff than I do (they probably do anyhow, but I don't see how what I would do to "manipulate the file" could be detected)

---

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

No no, it has to be called "La Morcuera Incidente" :-)

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------
"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

As I've already said, it makes no difference in the case of this file--all it will show is that Frank is better at, um, doctoring files than Joaquin.

That said, I'm game. I can provide a file to Frank of a ride up Casitas Pass (sign to the water tower) if you have the profile available (I don't).

edit: um--and no, it's not 30 minutes.....

Hey...I just did that climb today! And I've got 2 power files I could contribute...one from the PT and one from the Ergomo :-)

But if I contributed a file, that would prevent me from the pleasure of showing Frank to be wrong...again.

Someone needs to toss him a file from climbing up Gibraltar Rd. ;-)

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

Excelente! Muy bueno.

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

Well, this is an interesting challenge and from a purely egotistical point of view I'm very tempted -- but, really, what would we learn? You could, after all, be quite clever and deceitful, or you could just be bad at fakery. In either event, it tells us nothing about the current case. More importantly, I might have to reveal some of the other analytical approaches I've used and I'm not too keen on doing that at the moment.

I have one from a rest day ride! I can send it to him--Frank, what's your e-mail address?

Personally, I have the same concerns as Robert. You would have to be satisfied with people identifying which files have been "physicianed" without an exact explanation of how it was determined.

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

We need a stop and start point. Typically the start is from the "mailboxes" (where Gibraltar Rd. crosses El Cielito.) Is the "top" at the intersection of Camino Cielo, or all the way up to La Cumbre Peak (In keeping with the spanish theme, yes...I realize that name is redundant :-)

If you do that, I'll even contribute a "map my ride" link so that more can "play along".

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

If he (and others) could reliably identify which files are which I would accept that they understand this stuff way beyond my own abilities without an explanation as to how, even though I would like to know how. If we only have one case he would have a 10% chance of getting it right even with random guessing so if he gets it right we might want to do 2 or 3 others. Soon the odds would "prove" his assertion right.

What we would learn is that the claim that it is easy to find a manipulated file is true or not or we might find that I don't know how to manipulate a file very well. It won't say much about the current issue.

---

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

Umm...so what's the point??? Sheesh...you're SOO predictable.

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

??? I intend to manipulate the file substantially differently than was "apparently" done by Joaquin. What would my manipulation say about the current issue. People here claimed it was "easy". I just want to test that.

---

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

Hmmm....I started at the driveway and went up to 'the top'. Sorry...I'm only a local 2 weeks a year! (and I know, you'd like it to stay that way ; )....)


I could send you the file and you could probably figure it out--but at that point, I'm sure we'd just colluding to prove Frank wrong......

Naah...if you can afford to move here, have at it! It's a free country ;-)

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

Well, the claim isn't that it's easy to find a manipulated file -- sometimes it's a lot of work. The claim is that it's hard to manipulate a file so that the manipulation is not detectable. Your claim was that you could do this in less than 30 minutes.

As I said above, at the moment I'm a little reluctant to reveal all the ways to detect a file whose integrity has been breached, and since it won't say much about the current issue I don't really see the point of doing this simply to satisfy your curiosity about whether anyone understands "this stuff" way beyond your own abilities. A shorter path to answering that question is actually to ask another question: "Frank, how much riding with a Power Tap, and how much analysis of Power Tap files, have you done?"