New thougthts on Triathlon setup

I have to say that I've spent considerable amount of time mulling over the triathlon setup for cycling. I continue to be function driven. Triathletes are required to follow the same laws of physics as any other cyclist yet, it seems that they do this with some animosity. Here's my point.

Is forward faster...? I guess it all depends on how you interpret the question. If I took an athlete(without previous cycling experience) from a running background and placed him/her on a bike. We would have to assume that they would be faster in the advanced position compared to the traditional neutral road position. Most likely, this would be due to the fact that they would be using muscles groups that they use prodominately in running. (i.e.: they would be faster by running on the bike vs. pedaling the bike). However, there are several other considerations to be made. Would their running position on the bike be their fastest position once they were given a change to become effective as a cyclist? Now this is an entirely different question. It gets into the area of sport specialization, skill and muscle memory. Secondly, if we consider position in a purely aerodynamic sense, forward would be faster. But, even Kim Blair, PhD from MIT states that riders can't necessarily assume the fastest aerodynamic position. Why not? Becuase riders have to pay attention to all laws of physics, not just those related to fluid aerodynamics.

Have you ever considered that the average time of for the biking leg in IM Hawaii hasn't significantly changed. In fact, it's tipped downward a bit. There's also some indication that running times have decreased a bit as well. This is over a course of the history of IM. During this time, we have had a huge influx of technology which are designed specifically to increase our speed. During the same course of time, TdF overall times and TT times have increased.

I think it's impotant to deconstruct the forward position. How did it evolve? Here are my postulations. Greg Lemond was the first to introduce aerobars. As I understand it, they were developed by Profile. I could be wrong. They were placed on a typical road bike frame and the forearm pads were placed over the top of the handlebar. With this setup, a typical rider will be in too much shoulder flexion with their arms on the pads. In this position, the shoulders will fatigue rapidly. If you are a fan of core stabilization, you should be aware of an exercise called the Plank. Do this little exercise. Get into a typical plank position and now, move your elbows forward 4-6 inches. See how long you can maintain the position compared to elbows under your shoulders. Good, how did it go? With the elbows forward, you have to rely on muscular isometrics for stabilization vs. joint approximation and ligamentous support. This puts tremendous stress on the body and the muscles fatigue rapidly.

On the bike, it's the same thing. If your shoulders are being stabilized by muscular means, you will adjust your position so that it is less stressful. Otherwise, you will violate rule one of cycling. Rule 1: The rider must be able to control the bike. So, the rider will adjust their position on the saddle so they are able to maintain the least stressful shoulder position.

Based on typical geomety setup, this causes the rider to move forward to the tip of the saddle so that the elbows are basically in line with the shoulder. Let's take note that resting the perineum ( otherwise known as the "taint") on the tip of a saddle is less stressful than shoulder fatigue. It should also be stated that the rider/runner would unload themselves by appling more peak forces on the downstroke so they would take the pressure off the saddle. This is a significant loss of power and tends to cause the rider to change direction due to a change in center of gravity. Changing direction causes the rider to ride a longer distance between point A and B.

Now we come to the second component in the evolution of the advanced position. The "forward seat post". To the best of my recollection, these were also manufactured by Profile. This moved the saddle under the rider. Mind you, the rider moved forward as a result of "pathodynamics". This was quickly followed by the advanced frame design with steaper seat tubes. And there you have an entire industry that has been created around this phenomenon.

Why aren't triathletes getting faster?

I know this is getting long. I'm having a hard time keeping everything straight as well.

Am I opposed to the advanced set-up? No. Not as long as the rider can do everything that is expected of them as cyclists and do these things in the forward position. It's my contention that most riders who are in the forward position can't. I like what Christopher Kautz of PKRacing said. "Giving a new rider a bike with a forward setup is like giving a 15 year-old a formula one race car". From a steering and control perspective, the formula one car is too responsive for a new driver. For sure, they would loose control. For the new bike rider, the advanced position is the same thing. Now, once a rider develops the skills of a cyclist, they can trasfer these skills over to a bike that is more responsive and potentially more aerodynamic.

Shoulder position is the key. Weight distribution is critical especially if you are going to be forward with more weight on your upper body.

If you continually move forward to the front of your saddle, you have a problem. Your problem can be corrected.

Here's the end statement. There's one bit of research that is in the works that seems to support forward position. There have been a couple studies but I don't think the jury has reached a verdict. It's about the whole issue of forward position decreasing hip angle and this allows for better "post-cycling run events". I'm still waiting for all of the information to come in. It's hard to do these types of studies because there are so many variables to control.

As an anecdote: Jeff Lockwood of Chandler, AZ has been working with cyclists for 15-20 years. Many of his clients are triathletes. In fact, he married one. He demands that his clients work on becoming effective cyclists 1st. Most of his triathletes are set up in a biomechanical neutral position. His clients have shown increased TT and Cycling split times over the course of this time. In addition, his triatlete clients have shown inproved run times as well. What gives?

Velonews article - Symposium Summary

Thanks to Mike Busbin for telling me about this article. Leonard Zinn's article is here . Enjoy.

Serotta Symposium Day 2

If one day of PhD level research presentations wasn't enough, here we go again for day two.

Dan Heil, PhD did a review of literature that related to optimal cycling position. Dan reviewed some of his own research as well as other works. Here's the pearl for the weekend. Dan did a study of shoulder position and it's effect on HR, VO2 max and Ventilation. His research confirmed for me that riders search for a shoulder position that requires the least amount of isometric contraction to provide stabilization. This is why riders move forward to the nose of their saddles. Riders don't move forward to gain a pedaling advantage. Basically the results showed heart rate increases of 20-40 bpm simply due to overloading the shoulder musculature. Who can afford that?

Rick Neptune reviewed his research on computer models that predict work load and joint load with cycling effort. I'm hoping to participate in a project with him in the future. I'm interested in forces that cause frontal plan moments. These forces cause the rider to adjust his/her riding path to keep the bike upright. Rick has four kids. He rides a tripple. He's the pilot, his wife it the stoker, the oldest daughter is in the third position. Next oldest is in a child seat on the back. The younder two ride in a trailer behind the bike. Now that's living.

Christopher Kautz gave the most reasonable presentation on triathlon position that I've ever heard. For once, here's a guy who's not screaming "FORWARD, FORWARD, LOWER, LOWER, STEAPER, STEAPER, STEAPER!". His premise was very simple. As a cyclist, we have to be able to maintain balance, stability, power, biomechanical efficiency, comfort and digestion/breathing. For the triathlete, we add aerodynamics. Notice, we add to the existing requirements. We don't throw them out the window. He reported that most triathletes probably belong in a fairly conservative position so that they can get the most out of the bike. I was very impressed. I'm committed to help triathletes become better cyclists.

Andy Pruitt discussed the medical aspects of bicycle fit. He reviewed specific overuse injuries associated with poor fit or poor technique. I liked one of his initial statements. "It's our job to help the bike look like the rider(paraphrase)". It doesn't do any good to make the rider look like the bike. Just because the bike looks fast with the handlebars 6" below the saddle, it doesn't mean that Joe rider is going to be able to tolerate it.

I'm still trying to digest all of the information. It was a huge honor to be able to attend this sympsium. I really came away with a more detailed understanding of bicycle fit and the physics of cycling performance.

Serotta Symposium Day 1

The reception last evening was very nice. Good food and lots of conversation. It was nice to meet Ben Serotta. He's done a good job of surrounding himself with great minds and people who are passionate about the sport of cycling.

Day one was packed. This is not one of those seminars where you have 3-4 hours of classes in the morning and ski all afternoon. In fact, other that going outside to take a few photos, I've been inside for classes during daylight hours.

Yesterday's presentations focused on pedaling dynamics and the role of muscular and non-muscular forces that affect the pedal stroke. It was very intersesting to see the differences between single leg readings and bilateral leg readings. The computrainer looks at both legs combined. Dr. Brooker's research uses a pair of $10,000 pedals that isolate one leg from another.

We covered Aerodynamics with Dr. Blair of MIT. He's incharge of the Wright Brothers Wind Tunnel. It was very interesting to gain an understanding of how a wind tunnel works. Overall however, his aerodynamic research is done in isolation. He doesn't take bike control, pedaling technique or comfort into consideration. On the flip side, when you are doing research at this level, you have to eliminate as many variables as possible to arrive at definatives for aerodynamics. If your interested, it costs $1000/hour. Pleaese let them know ahead of time because the power company needs a heads up before they start the moving wind in the tunnel. It pulls 2 megawatts of power.

We reviewed advanced technologies for bike fitting. Many of these technologies involved various forms of video analysis. Very impressive stuff. Here's what I took away from this lecture. "Only use technology when it can give you something that you can't otherwise percieve".

Most interesting was the pedal shoe interface discussion. As far as applicability, this was one of the best. Dr. Vogel looked at pedaling dynamics related to foot position. The discussion also took other things into consideration such as orthotics and wedges. I can really see an application for this for my clients but I will probably insert it into my analysis after I have trained my clients in the neuromuscular control aspects of pedaling. Just putting a wedge under the shoe or using an orthotic will not correct neuromuscular problems. They have to be looked at hand in hand. In my case, my knee position has significantly changed over the last year. Not because of wedges or cleat position. It has changed because I have learned to pedal better through diligent practice.

Dr Testa presented on the use of power analysis. He used to be the team MD for Mapei and 7-11. He's a very impressive speaker. He talked about using power for periodic assessment of progress. He preferred assessing power at various levels of blood lactate. I have to review his information to determine the real world applicability for me and my clients.
We ended the day with a panel discussion that could have lasted all evening but we eventually had to go to dinner.

Great day with alot of information. I'm sure today will be more of the same.

It's been a long day already - Denver Bound

I was up at 3:50 so that I could make it to the 6:15 flight out of Gulfport. I cut it a little close but I made the flight.

The flight into Denver was amazing. The entire surface from Memphis to Denver is covered with snow. Our pilot should get a bonus. He landed the plane on a snow covered runway. In fact, I didn't see the ground until we were about 100' above the runway. All the roads were covered by snow. Yes, it was 28 degrees F. I'm glad I cancelled the rental car and opted for the shuttle.

Lunch was smoked salmon eggs benedict. It was awesome.

There's a reception this evening and the classes begin tomorrow. It looks like there's a huge turnout of coaches and bike professionals from all over the country.

I will be ready for sleep this evening.

Serotta Cycling Science Symposium

This is going to be huge. The most knowledgeable names in cycling biomechanics will be in Boulder early next week. I'm flying out early Sunday morning so that I can be there. This Serotta's first attempt at a Symposium format and it sold out.

This is going to be a huge boost for Gulf Coast Cycle Fit clients. I look forward to integrating the information into my operation. Here's the weblink to the brochure.

http://www.serotta.com/PDF/sym_program.pdf

Notable changes

Things are changing. I had a great session with a client last evening. We focused exclusively on the functional aspect of pedaling. As a result, she demonstrated a noted improvement in efficiency. This improvement also showed up in her tolerance to ride the rollers.

I'm convinced that these techniques make riders better. I continue to look forward to working with clients. It's refreshing to be able to give clients objective evidence of improved function. Who doesn't want to see objective improvement?!?

It's about function

I've been rattling things around in my head for a while.

Do you ever get to a point where you have a bunch of pieces or ideas in your mind? All of the ideas are good but nothing seems to fit together. And then, all of a sudden...piece by piece, it starts to take shape. I can't say that the concept has fully arrived. But, I have a clearer image than just a few days ago.

If you've notice my past posts, most have related to function. They haven't necessarily been about a specific training plan or program. They've been about function. More on that later.

Now, let me talk about Gulf Coast Cycle Fit for a moment. I went to a course on bike fitting and I've spent and extensive amount of time reading and studying about training for cycling performance. I've taken the time to get my coaching license and I intend to continue to advance it. You have to understand, working with clients provides me with the greatest satisfaction. There's nothing better than making a positive change in someone's (cycling) life. But something has been missing.

It's the functional component. In the past, I've spent time making fit changes. To my knowledge, everyone has been satisfied. (To those I've worked with, if you aren't pleased with everything, please take advantage of the guarantee that I offer on my website. ) But objective proof of functional performance has been missing for most. The improvements have been subjective. Subjective is good but objective is better.

Here's where the road turns. I'm making changes to the Gulf Coast Cycle Fit model. The primary goal will be function and functional improvement. Yes, I'll continue to provide fitting services. Yes, many clients will continue to receive bicycle fitting services. But, the determination for fit changes will be functional need! There will be objective pre- and post-tests and there will be follow up appointments. In the end, the riders will be better cyclists. We will have proof.

It's an exciting day. I look forward to working with you. You will be satisfied.