I was at a conference last weekend regarding cycling science and got to meet Chris Boardman. What a nice guy. Very approachable and I spent a while talking about approached to TTing. Really useful. That means now I’ve met both Obree and Boardman. Now if I could just see Armstrong that would be my icons nicely covered…
Incidentally lots of great info came out of the conference with some of the best sports scientists happy to share their findings. Amazing enthusiasm.
if i remember reading correctly, c. boardmen has done a 40k TT in 42min and change. is this correct? if so, i quit. any interesting points to ponder about your encournter with him that you would like to share? thanks,
Yes. High cadences rule. I wanted to understand more about appropriate cadence and time trial pacing. Boardmans interpretation is that low cadences for him don’t work well and they don’t look good on others either. When tested he said most of the ‘greats’ came out at about 103rpm. Thats not difinitive but interesting nonetheless. We discussed that Ullrichs cadence had actually slowed over the years…
The thing i also liked is that i got to see Boonens test scores from this year from quicksteps sports science guy. The fact he can put out 1250 watts after 200km of riding is downright impressive and is apparently the storngest rider their lab has ever seen.
I picked up so much tech info i had 16 pages of notes to review. What was also interesting was Jim Martins work raising doubt to crank length showing that it didn’t matter what crank lengths you went with… I didn’t agree completely but the evidence looked promising.
REPLY -The thing i also liked is that i got to see Boonens test scores from this year from quicksteps sports science guy. The fact he can put out 1250 watts after 200km of riding is downright impressive and is apparently the storngest rider their lab has ever seen. -
unbelievable! even if this high wattage is momentarily its almost absurd… haven’t all the world records in cycling records been set with cadence’s of at least 95 or greater. g. tingley where are you?
Thats true but i’m still not convinced their is a holy grail. I’ll tell you why. Iwas TTing last week on my rotor rings and every time i changed gear and dropped my cadence from 97rpm to 88 my output speed went up. I’m a big guy so it stands to reason I have more muscle than most. That said i set 2 P.R.s in a week last year straight after a radical bike fit and span at 102-108rpm on the same course. Go figure…
probably no holy grail other than vitamin EPO. so many variables and its so individual, but i also seem to hit the best PR’s with higher cadences, but not as high as your post radical bike fit tests. thanks for all the boardman input bryce.
Thats true but i’m still not convinced their is a holy grail. I’ll tell you why. Iwas TTing last week on my rotor rings and every time i changed gear and dropped my cadence from 97rpm to 88 my output speed went up. I’m a big guy so it stands to reason I have more muscle than most. That said i set 2 P.R.s in a week last year straight after a radical bike fit and span at 102-108rpm on the same course. Go figure…
Was there any mention of the effects that powercranks, rotor cranks and q-rings are supposed to have on pedal power output ?
No but I’ve been using Q rings for 4 weeks now and like them. A bi product for me personally is that they seem to work better under lower cadences. Gary T seems to get on well with his as well but I’ll feedback a longer term review once I’ve got another 200 miles on them.
No but I’ve been using Q rings for 4 weeks now and like them. A bi product for me personally is that they seem to work better under lower cadences. Gary T seems to get on well with his as well but I’ll feedback a longer term review once I’ve got another 200 miles on them.
At what clock position on the pedalling circle, does your Q-ring give its highest gear effect ?
I did some tests for Andy who was one of the organisors as part of his research study, and he was really helpful with feedback on it and other things like by position. He said he was really keen to get lots of the top Cycling scientist together.
I am good mates with Ian who has just handed in his dissertation based around the testing, from the discussions we have had briefly there is no difference, well not major differences anyway, I will try and get some more info, he has exams most of this week
In Reply To if i remember reading correctly, c. boardmen has done a 40k TT in 42min and change. is this correct?
Sorry. Forgot to answer it. Yes he has apparently and done a large number of 45’s par the course as well.
According to www.ctt.org.uk his UK record is 45:57 in '93, he also did 47:19 in '92.
1993 C Boardman MBE North Wirral Velo 00:45:57
1992 C Boardman GS Strada 00:47:19
I recall that he did break 18:00 for a 10 mile but that it wasn’t official.
Are you refering to his 42:49 at 25 miles during his hour record? I’m not aware of any 42s or other 45s on the road.
The impression that was given in several studies was that pulling up in the stroke was a waste metabolically and showed no improvement. In other words, you’re wasting your time with single legs drills people. However, the catch is that I believe that the pulling up action is good for improving the running aspect in tri (just look at powercrankers for details). So in a cycling sense pulling up is not needed but form a tri standpoint we don’t know.
yep pity he hasn’t done much training , should be a painful experience at least it should slow him down for the run at Canada, if he avoids sinking from lack of swim time.