to ttn
Stomping is best for track sprinting, circular pedaling
is best for riding in the bunch during road races but
Anquetil’s is invincible in time trials or track pursuits.
to Gary:
Rotor cranks are a good invention but have one
disadvantage, the compensation for the dead spot area has to be done between 1 and 3 o’clock while
a rider’s maximum power application area is the
2 to 4 o’clock area.
Now if rotor cranks were combined with Anquetil’s
technique you would have a super time trial pedaling
set-up because Anquetil’s maximum power application area is between 1 and 3 o’clock and his
style also enables you to combine arm resistance
and hip/leg power when riding at speed in the saddle
and this not only increases the ability to produce
extra power but also prolongs it.
I hope to reveal Anquetil’s secrets at a back pain/
Anquetil research weekend very soon if I can get
the worst victims of this pain to volunteer. His style
of pedaling is demonstrated on the video " the
mysterious cycling champion " but as the title suggests no secrets are revealed, nobody knew how
he did it. If anyone would be interested in testing
rotor with this technique, he/she would be welcome.
It eliminates the dead spot. Not possible with traditional cranks, no matter your pedalling style. With RCK there is always power going to the drive, at no time is there a pause in the pedal stroke. This pause in the pedal rotation stroke causes a riders HR to raise. With the RCK a rider’s HR is lowered. My HR is 10 beats lower with RCK than at the same speed with Dura Ace, really. This allows me to increase speed on the bike by raising the cadence or gearing and getting my HR back up to race levels. The tradeoff here is that as I apply more power to the pedals my legs fatigue quicker. In time my strength will increase as I get accustomed to the RCK, I will be there in a few weeks. Also, studies (see www.rotorbike.com) show that the RCK reduces knee pain and injuries.
perfection. do you mean to say that after all this time you still have NOT ACTUALLY told us just whatinthehell you are talking about? man, that is a relief- i thought it was just me!! likely i will not be able to attend this upcoming weekend seminar, brother - maybe you can post the powerpoint slides, or something. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
To me, eliminating the dead area 11 to 1 o’clock
means applying almost maximum chain drive power
to the chainwheel when the pedal is at the 12 o’clock
position, anything else is compensating for the fact
that you cannot do this. By being able to apply almost maximum power throughout the entire 360
degrees of the chainwheel gives the smoothest
pedaling that is possible and Anquetil’s style does
just this. I cannot understand how rotor helps the
knees, you area still using the same basic round
pedaling style, a style that can cause knee injury
and back pain when the higher gears are used.
Simple, great minds think alike. Anquetil’s style
is a mental, physical and mechanical technique.
The pedaling circle is divided into two semi-circles,
using a special technique the power is directed through the diameter of the circle (the linear line),
the rotaing pedal and crank convert this line back to
a semi-circle and you instantly have 360 degrees
of pedal power application.
This is where the problems begin because I spent
endless hours trying to get it across. In brief, power is applied to the pedal in almost the identical same way as an indoor tug o’war competitor applies the power from sole of shoe to mat as he advances from
one foot to the other. Imagine what power this
technique is generating between hips and floor mat.
He is using the pulling on the rope to assist in generating this power, Anquetil’s style also enables
one to use the resistance of the arms because the
line of power to the pedal is almost parallel to the
arm pulling line. this is because direct downward
pressure is never used. It has to be seen to be
believed and understood.
Perfection: It sounds like you are describing the way powercranks makes you pedel. Or at least the way powercrank says it makes you pedel. by pulling up on the 6 to 12 part of the stroke therfore adding power to that part of the stroke and needing less power on the 12 to 6 part. Is this what you are saying, and if so would it not make sense to work on that pedel circle first?
… it seems your simply describing (in a very strange way - or maybe I just don’t get it) pulling and pushing technique of generating forces in a linear fashion. Unfortunately, with biking linear motion is being created from a circular reference point. So, how do you equate a walking like force in your rope pulling example to be easily translated into rotational motion that is represented by cycling.
If I’m incorrect, then you must be complicating what PC’s seems to advocate as a training method for improving cycling technique. If I am correct (that is, your describing a push-pull method of generating linear motion), then it seems you are describing something that just simply doesn’t compute from a practical standpoint (or else, I’m really missing some really important point).
Perfection: It sounds like you are describing the way powercranks makes you pedel. Or at least the way powercrank says it makes you pedel. by pulling up on the 6 to 12 part of the stroke therfore adding power to that part of the stroke and needing less power on the 12 to 6 part. Is this what you are saying, and if so would it not make sense to work on that pedel circle first?
No power is only applied with one foot at all times
and in the same direction, there is no pulling up.
As soon as one leg finishes power application, the
pedal is unweighted and that leg is ready for instant takeover
of power application at 11 o’clock (approx). Mentally
you are doing what the rotor system does mechanically. The fact that power is always applied
in one direction means that as cadence increases
there is much less reduction in power application than
with any other style, the ability to make use of
arm resistance is partly responsible for this.
… hmmm… When I was a child I use to have a pedal car that did precisely what you describe. “Mentally” I was doing what my bike did only slower. And, instead of arm resistence I used butt resistence (simular to that of a recumbent bike)
" No power is only applied with one foot at all times
and in the same direction, there is no pulling up.
As soon as one leg finishes power application, the
pedal is unweighted and that leg is ready for instant takeover
of power application at 11 o’clock (approx). Mentally
you are doing what the rotor system does mechanically. The fact that power is always applied
in one direction means that as cadence increases
there is much less reduction in power application than
with any other style, the ability to make use of
arm resistance is partly responsible for this. "
This is incorrect. You mis-state the function of the Rotor Cranks. With the pedalling motion you describe, the non-drive leg must take over duties at the 11 o’clock position, pulling itself through the dead spot. When the pedals are at 6 and 12 o’clock you are in the dead spot.
With Rotor, your pedals will never be at 6 and 12 o’clock. Your drive side leg will not start to apply power until it is in the 1 o’clock position and will continue to deliver power until it is in the 6 o’clock position, at which time the other leg takes over - at the 1 o’clock position. You never have to pedal through the dead spot with your drive side leg because you always start propulsion at the 1 o’clock position and finish it at the 6 o’clock position. Of course, you will unweight your non-drive leg when pedalling, which IS NOTHING LIKE PowerCranks, eh? No pulling up required, just smooth pedalling.
… hmmm… When I was a child I use to have a pedal car that did precisely what you describe. “Mentally” I was doing what my bike did only slower. And, instead of arm resistence I used butt resistence (simular to that of a recumbent bike)
Joe
Yes, you would have been using the same mental technique but of course as your equipment was very
different ( no cleats, toe-clips, toe straps, meybe
even no pedals) and you were probably seated much lower, your transfer of power to whatever
pedal type you were using would have been very
different. But the other important similarity is that
the power came from the butt/hip area and while
you used the back of car to increase power,anquetil
used arm resistance (impossible with circular pedaling) and as this resistance passed from arm
to butt, it had a massaging relaxing effect on the
lower back while the working arm also supported all
the upper body weight. With circular pedaling, the
lower back is forced to bear all the strains, resulting
in serious back pain for many riders.
" No power is only applied with one foot at all times
and in the same direction, there is no pulling up.
As soon as one leg finishes power application, the
pedal is unweighted and that leg is ready for instant takeover
of power application at 11 o’clock (approx). Mentally
you are doing what the rotor system does mechanically. The fact that power is always applied
in one direction means that as cadence increases
there is much less reduction in power application than
with any other style, the ability to make use of
arm resistance is partly responsible for this. "
This is incorrect. You mis-state the function of the Rotor Cranks. With the pedalling motion you describe, the non-drive leg must take over duties at the 11 o’clock position, pulling itself through the dead spot. When the pedals are at 6 and 12 o’clock you are in the dead spot.
With Rotor, your pedals will never be at 6 and 12 o’clock. Your drive side leg will not start to apply power until it is in the 1 o’clock position and will continue to deliver power until it is in the 6 o’clock position, at which time the other leg takes over - at the 1 o’clock position. You never have to pedal through the dead spot with your drive side leg because you always start propulsion at the 1 o’clock position and finish it at the 6 o’clock position. Of course, you will unweight your non-drive leg when pedalling, which IS NOTHING LIKE PowerCranks, eh? No pulling up required, just smooth pedalling.
Rotors are not a mechanical means of Aquetil.
With the pedaling that I use, MAXIMUM power
application can start at 11 o’clock and continue right
through to 5 o’clock. There is no dead spot area.
You have just confirmed what I had stated in my first report on rotor cranks. What they do is attempt
to compensate for power or time lost in half of the
dead spot area. You say you continue to deliver power down to 6 o’clock. No you don’t, that half of
the dead area remains with thr rotor system. It’s
mainly gravity and inertia that is applying the power
between 5 and 6 o’clock.
My only reason for the comparison between Anquetil
and rotor was to convey the fact that mentally you
are preparing the muscles in advance to be ready
for instant takeover of power application at 11 o’clock
instead of wasting time scraping the mud off the shoe
and pulling up as is recommended with circular
pedaling.
As for rating in value for money and performance
I would give PC’s half a jersey, ROTOR one and a half
jerseys and Anquetil’s five out of five jerseys.
gary. so, shall we put you down on the list for attending perfection’s upcoming antequil weekend seminar?? be sure to bring several pencils, i think the notes are going to be quite interesting!
i hear that garzelli, bettini, vandevelde, and nardello were saddened by the “half jersey” rating perfection gave their PC’s, and will be attending. that team of spaniards who had a good experience on the RC’s were a little better - but likewise disheartened by their own 1.5 jersey ranking and will also be sending a representative.
OK, so (if I have this correct) your describing a cycling technique that applies to recumbent bikes (and, even then I don’t see how it would be more effective). Application of this “anquetil” technique with a standard design road/tt bike wouldn’t be very practical. And, to assume that arms could provide the equivalent resistence of a seated position is equally impractical. Transfering force the way you describe it just doesn’t seem to make sense. Motion of the legs the way describe it also doesn’t makes sense (IMHO and according to the laws of physics, you can’t leave out parts of the propulsion cycle). The effectiveness and efficiency of such technique also doesn’t seem to be reasonable - specially when you consider that leveraging of forces on the bike are not simple nor constant with regards to body position or forces need relative to cycles per leg movement (commonly reffered to as cadence - in the case of “anquetil”, I don’t know what it would be reffered as - perhaps steps per minute).
Maybe you should technically draw this out on paper (with details)… post it on a sight and (may, just maybe) I (and others) can figure out what your trying to describe.
OK, so (if I have this correct) your describing a cycling technique that applies to recumbent bikes (and, even then I don’t see how it would be more effective). Application of this “anquetil” technique with a standard design road/tt bike wouldn’t be very practical. And, to assume that arms could provide the equivalent resistence of a seated position is equally impractical. Transfering force the way you describe it just doesn’t seem to make sense. Motion of the legs the way describe it also doesn’t makes sense (IMHO and according to the laws of physics, you can’t leave out parts of the propulsion cycle). The effectiveness and efficiency of such technique also doesn’t seem to be reasonable - specially when you consider that leveraging of forces on the bike are not simple nor constant with regards to body position or forces need relative to cycles per leg movement (commonly reffered to as cadence - in the case of “anquetil”, I don’t know what it would be reffered as - perhaps steps per minute).
Maybe you should technically draw this out on paper (with details)… post it on a sight and (may, just maybe) I (and others) can figure out what your trying to describe.
FWIW Joe Moya
It is obvious that nobody has seen the video of
Anquetil using this style and with a special section
devoted to his pedaling technique. Those describing
it said “they had never seen anyone pedal like that
before”, " with such thin canary type legs, where
did he get the strength to push such enormous
gears, " he is a genetic miracle".
All he did was make more sensible use of the same
muscles that everyone else has.
OK, so (if I have this correct) your describing a cycling technique that applies to recumbent bikes (and, even then I don’t see how it would be more effective). Application of this “anquetil” technique with a standard design road/tt bike wouldn’t be very practical. And, to assume that arms could provide the equivalent resistence of a seated position is equally impractical. Transfering force the way you describe it just doesn’t seem to make sense. Motion of the legs the way describe it also doesn’t makes sense (IMHO and according to the laws of physics, you can’t leave out parts of the propulsion cycle). The effectiveness and efficiency of such technique also doesn’t seem to be reasonable - specially when you consider that leveraging of forces on the bike are not simple nor constant with regards to body position or forces need relative to cycles per leg movement (commonly reffered to as cadence - in the case of “anquetil”, I don’t know what it would be reffered as - perhaps steps per minute).
Maybe you should technically draw this out on paper (with details)… post it on a sight and (may, just maybe) I (and others) can figure out what your trying to describe.
FWIW Joe Moya
It is obvious that nobody has seen the video of
Anquetil using this style and with a special section
devoted to his pedaling technique. Those describing
it said “they had never seen anyone pedal like that
before”, " with such thin canary type legs, where
did he get the strength to push such enormous
gears, " he is a genetic miracle".
All he did was make more sensible use of the same
muscles that everyone else has.
Look, unless you can tell us how his technique is so revolutionary and works so well, I dont know where you are going to go with this
You say it is great … well … who else uses this technique? I have seen the videos of him pedalling and heard the story about the technique, but my question is, if it is so great and so publicized, why do none of the top riders in the Tour (to my knowledge) ride like you describe? Hmmmm.
I know why none of them use Rotor Cranks (Campy, Shimano and FSA sponsorships), but ANY of them could use this Anquetil technique, and naturally they would - if it were legitimate.
Usenet FAQs | Search | Web FAQs | Documents | RFC Index ] 8h.8 Ankling, a pedaling style Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2000 14:04:39 PSTAnkling, a topic of much discussion, has been claimed to improvedperformance in bicycling, although not by racers and coaches. It hasbeen touted as one of the techniques for excellence that appeals tobicyclists mainly because it requires no additional effort. Thatthere are different ankle motions while pedaling is apparent, althoughmost of these are not by choice nor do they effect efficiency.Because so much attention was given the subject in the 1960’s, itprompted a study in Italy, in which some leading racers noted fortheir abilities as well as a distinct pedaling style were fit withinstrumentation to numerically capture the stroke. Among them wasJacques Anquetil who had a noticeably different ankle motion.The study determined that there was no consistency among those testedand that ankling, much like people’s walking gait, is caused byphysical individuality rather than any advantage. Typically, somewalking gaits are so pronounced that a person can be recognized by itat a distance. Some people raise their heel before stepping off onthe next stride while others “peel” the foot from the floor in acontinuous motion. To artificially emulate someone’s ankle motion orlack thereof, while pedaling, is as useless as emulating a walkinggait. The study laid ankling to rest for a while, but because urbanlegends have a life of their own, rising again at the slightestopportunity, ankling, with its lore, is assured a long life.