Subject: RE: Finding the rhythm on the bike Originally posted by NewDiz Hey each to his own. I personally find this works for me, regardless of what studies/science/whatever has shown. What works is what works. If it might benefit someone else, I'll throw it out there FWIW. Regardless of the science, the perceived level of exertion is less when using both quads and hammys in this deal. I have been focusing on smooth pedaling form with this technique and it works. Don't have the graphics and whatnot to prove it, but I know it works for me. YMMV. I find it interesting that there seems to be two schools of thought here. I have heard of others who claim that being clipped in isn't necessary for much the same reason, i.e. the power stroke is from 12 to 6. I have found being clipped in is a hug advantage, giving me more stroke from 6 to about 3 or so. Perhaps in a pure cycling race, this has merit, dunno. But for tri's it would seem to make sense to recruit more muscles to do the work, especially hammys, so your quads might be fresher for the run? Only one way to find out! Certainly one can ignore the scientific aspects of the sport to a point, but then, well no. The "science" has well proven the benefits of clipless pedals. Beginners and local sprint athletes with modest goals can successfully ride with running shoes on flat pedals. The serious competitors will always be wearing cycling shoes with clipless pedals. At an Ironman, even the "just finish" crowd will be wearing them. Same with pedaling in circles. The science proves it's mythical, and unweighting the pedals is all that's really necessary. Pro cyclists know this, serious amateurs know this, and even beginners can benefit from knowing what the science supports. There are many myths in this sport, and many self appointed and otherwise "experts", and the science is often cloudy. But a person who makes informed choices between opposing viewpoints is usually better off than the person who just ignores the science. |