My Hill Climbing Technique

[BarHugger]

Did u really need to add that last bit?

 

Your comments above sound a lot like him and you should know that the sheriff does not miss this pathetic forum (his words not mine)

Yes I did....,..what are you implying......the report button is a finger away.......or you could contribute to the topic????

[BarHugger]

Did u really need to add that last bit?

 

Your comments above sound a lot like him and you should know that the sheriff does not miss this pathetic forum (his words not mine)

And on another note, wy do you ask.....a question should have a purpose? Otherwise you are just making an indirect statement about your own perception regarding the individual.

 

If I sound like him, sorry for the confusion. Might sound like him according to you, but definitely don't have his capabilities, experience and knowledge regarding the topic. My comments are made by observation, listening and reading peer reviewed material that can be validated. Still the input from an "old hand" can sometimes be of more value.

 

Apologies if the post confused you and rattled the cages a bit....we all have our Achilles heels.....seems the Sheriff was for most.

 

PS: Sheriff says howzit....not his circus anymore!

[Monark]

Sitting or standing I say go as hard as you can until you explode....

[SwissVan]

Yes I did....,..what are you implying......the report button is a finger away.......or you could contribute to the topic

 

I'm saying what you said and the way you wrote it sounds just like the sheriff, is that a problem for you? 

 

I did contribute, yesterday already. Talking of contributions, that's why i asked the question as I fail to see how the  "where is the sheriff when we really need him"  contributes to the thread. All it is does is stir up emotions, some might say intentionaly.

 

And on another note, wy do you ask.....a question should have a purpose? Otherwise you are just making an indirect statement about your own perception regarding the individual.

 

If I sound like him, sorry for the confusion. Might sound like him according to you, but definitely don't have his capabilities, experience and knowledge regarding the topic. My comments are made by observation, listening and reading peer reviewed material that can be validated. Still the input from an "old hand" can sometimes be of more value.

 

Apologies if the post confused you and rattled the cages a bit....we all have our Achilles heels.....seems the Sheriff was for most.

 

PS: Sheriff says howzit....not his circus anymore!

 

Don't be sorry, we are what we are.

Like the sheriff i'm also an old hand and the majority of your post was easy to understand.

Good to see the sheriff staying in touch, tell him: grüsse aus schweiz 

[Henley 1]

I asked politely for “meaningful comments”. Yes, a third disappointment is that people who are intellectually inferior when it comes to technical/academic interpretations, feel obliged to also say something – for the sake of saying something: usually arrogant and derogative in nature. Wouldn’t it be nice if they would stop spoiling the potentially constructive contents of a thread like this? Please go away.

The video above is interesting, though is done at the same cadence seated/standing, and not applying my rabbit bobbing technique. The Joe Friel contribution is valued – thanx.

BTW BarHugger: torque  (nm) X rotational speed = power (watts). Cadence times watts does not equate to watts :-( 

[Henley 1]

OK, I made an experiment in the gym this morning on an IDT (with cleat-like footstraps): 20 min warmup, 20 min seated at higher cadence, 20 minutes standing at lower cadence. Kept power output constant and compared afterwards with HR and calories burnt. In the face of small sample size (one only!), and hunting effects of IDT readings, and machine limitations on lower cadence reach, conclusions are not yet statistically significant, but already quite interesting . Coming week I shall do a specific 1.5 km climb (100m elevation) nearby. The plan is to keep HR constant and compare climbing times and calories burnt at high rpm seated and low rpm standing. Repeat test on different days. Maybe get friends to assist in raising numbers.

Those who would like to be kept informed of my humble efforts to determine what should be common knowledge in the cycling world by now, could PM me for feedback.

Thanx and take care

[SwissVan]

OK, I made an experiment in the gym this morning on an IDT (with cleat-like footstraps): 20 min warmup, 20 min seated at higher cadence, 20 minutes standing at lower cadence. Kept power output constant and compared afterwards with HR and calories burnt. In the face of small sample size (one only!), and hunting effects of IDT readings, and machine limitations on lower cadence reach, conclusions are not yet statistically significant, but already quite interesting . Coming week I shall do a specific 1.5 km climb (100m elevation) nearby. The plan is to keep HR constant and compare climbing times and calories burnt at high rpm seated and low rpm standing. Repeat test on different days. Maybe get friends to assist in raising numbers.

Those who would like to be kept informed of my humble efforts to determine what should be common knowledge in the cycling world by now, could PM me for feedback.

Thanx and take care

 

I apologize for my contributions to the side show.

 

I'm going to ride my IDT in a few minutes and will try a shorter (standing time) comparison for the hell of it, not sure if i will get your bobbing technique right tho so probably irrelevant

 

What HR trends did u notice in your gym test?

 

Would be better to make the results public for all to see instead of via pm, yes it will attract comments from all angles, but that's part of raising controversial topics in public.

 

Perhaps go easy on the comments about other peoples intellect etc...never ends well when WE go down that road.

[porqui]

I asked politely for “meaningful comments”.  .........

 

 

You're a presumptuous buggar !

[BarHugger]

I asked politely for “meaningful comments”. Yes, a third disappointment is that people who are intellectually inferior when it comes to technical/academic interpretations, feel obliged to also say something – for the sake of saying something: usually arrogant and derogative in nature. Wouldn’t it be nice if they would stop spoiling the potentially constructive contents of a thread like this? Please go away.

The video above is interesting, though is done at the same cadence seated/standing, and not applying my rabbit bobbing technique. The Joe Friel contribution is valued – thanx.

BTW BarHugger: torque (nm) X rotational speed = power (watts). Cadence times watts does not equate to watts :-(

Aaaaand then politely told the hubbers how dumb they were...........

Not at all what I said.......but watts X cadence equals x-amount of watts.......common logic .

 

Edit: your reference to calculating power is correct for an angular system. If you really want to calculate power for cycling however, you need to use the formula for linear motion (amount of force applied to an object over a specific distance and the time in which it is done). But hey, liked stated, my maths grade is dubious.

 

Your experiment is also flawed in a few ways.....but anything is better than nothing. At the end of the day it is about the specificity of training and economy of movement......because if there is no energy you won't be able to do enough work in a specific time to generate power.

[porqui]

But then again your thread heading is a statement so my apologies.

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

I asked politely for “meaningful comments”. Yes, a third disappointment is that people who are intellectually inferior when it comes to technical/academic interpretations, feel obliged to also say something – for the sake of saying something: usually arrogant and derogative in nature. Wouldn’t it be nice if they would stop spoiling the potentially constructive contents of a thread like this? Please go away.

The video above is interesting, though is done at the same cadence seated/standing, and not applying my rabbit bobbing technique. The Joe Friel contribution is valued – thanx.

BTW BarHugger: torque (nm) X rotational speed = power (watts). Cadence times watts does not equate to watts :-(

Just a tip, Henley. You'll be far more likely to receive a friendly response to your question if you cease, or at least reduce, the level of condescension in your posts.

 

For what it's worth, numerous studies have shown that you're able to achieve a far higher peak output whilst out of the saddle (using more muscle groups to pull up on the bars and sway them side to side) but the efficiency of that "stance", for lack of a better word, is inferior to sitting and spinning.

 

As a simplistic comparison - see how many times you can lift / squat a low weight to exhaustion vs something double the weight.

 

Yes, I realise that this doesn't account for the difference in stance between seated and standing "bobbing" on the pedals, but it would work for a comparison between seated grinding vs spinning.

 

Standing grinding activates still more muscle groups than seated grinding, but you are able to put out more power as a result of this. The hypothesis that you're able to push down with your full bodyweight is a flawed one, imo, as you still need to account for the energy expenditure of keeping your body elevated (vs sitting and not expending energy to keep your body "up") as well as the side to side movement of your body or bike.

 

In addition to that, most of the time in a standing position you're either lifting your body at every revolution (in your scenario of using your body weight to "push down") or using your arms, shoulders and back to pull up on the bars in order to gat as much power into the pedals as possible. The former would be a zero sum game in many respects - you're lifting your body only to then use gravity to drive it back down, whilst the latter you're engaging more muscles. Yes, you're able to put out more peak power, but you tire more quickly as a result of it.

 

Now, whilst I know that this is by no means a fully qualified statement and / or viewpoint that I've put above, riders coaches would not repeatedly try to get their riders to sit and spin whilst climbing, unless there was a marked benefit to doing so.

 

In closing - yes, more power output when standing (ultimately resulting at a higher speed at the same cadence as a seated grind due to being able to push a bigger gear) but it's less efficient overall than seated and spinning a lower gear at higher cadence.

 

A final word. In this case, gravity is not working as you think it is. You're also using more muscle groups which aren't as efficient.

 

A final final word. Don't be a dick. People here don't play well with sanctimonious a-holes.

[BarHugger]

Just a tip, Henley. 

 

Henley on Tip 

[Mr X]

Don`t over complicate this. Typical good climbers stand a lot and they won`t do this if its less efficient. Rider weight might also play a role - typical good climbers are lightweights and might have less power than a bigger climber and therefor need to stand to up the power output. Pantani was more out of the saddle than in it.

[BrandonF_]

I asked politely for “meaningful comments”. Yes, a third disappointment is that people who are intellectually inferior when it comes to technical/academic interpretations, feel obliged to also say something – for the sake of saying something: usually arrogant and derogative in nature. Wouldn’t it be nice if they would stop spoiling the potentially constructive contents of a thread like this? Please go away.

The video above is interesting, though is done at the same cadence seated/standing, and not applying my rabbit bobbing technique. The Joe Friel contribution is valued – thanx.

BTW BarHugger: torque (nm) X rotational speed = power (watts). Cadence times watts does not equate to watts :-(

...Do you study...oh oh sorry,.Are you studying...?(or is it do you study???)...BTW, I'm a dumb hubber...but anywayz, is you studying 'higher class' inglish at Herfart?...cos you am quiet ohfencive......#just#fedup#with#your#ARROGANCE

[BarHugger]

...Do you study...oh oh sorry,.Are you studying...?(or is it do you study???)...BTW, I'm a dumb hubber...but anywayz, is you studying 'higher class' inglish at Herfart?...cos you am quiet ohfencive......#just#fedup#with#your#ARROGANCE

Are you qualified to make such a statement......we all know you are intellectually challenged due to all your hill climbing and lack of oxygen.......oh, me is konfoesed now.

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

Don`t over complicate this. Typical good climbers stand a lot and they won`t do this if its less efficient. Rider weight might also play a role - typical good climbers are lightweights and might have less power than a bigger climber and therefor need to stand to up the power output. Pantani was more out of the saddle than in it.

Probably because his muscles had been conditioned like that. But yeah. He also may have been unable to keep himself seated with the amount of power he put out!