Couple of problems while climbing out of the saddle...

Bhima

Always preferred to climb while seated but in the past couple of months i've decided to start doing long 15-20 minute climbs completely stood up, as it's a weak area for me...

Just noticed the other day though - my left foot, at the bottom of the pedal stroke, points upwards and the heel drops below the pedalling circle. This is not true for my right foot, which does the exact opposite. Now that I think about it, i'm doing this while seated only very very very slightly but it's made more obvious when off the saddle.

What is making me do that? It doesn't seem like a bike-fit issue... :? I'm pretty sure i'm central on the saddle and that the saddle is parallel with the top-tube...

When the climbs get really steep for my lowest gear and i'm forced to stand up and go around 40-60 RPM (21+% gradients), after about 30 seconds, I do notice that my left thigh (near the knee and slightly to the left) gets really fatigued compared to my right. Sometimes there's a weird pain towards the top of my right calf muscle too...?

I've also noticed that when 16-19 minutes in (i've timed it) to an off-the-saddle climb, my lower back starts to get a bit painful. I think the handlebars start to feel a little lower than i'd like, so i'm probably reaching down too far, but it could just be the effect of the gradient... I'm not sure weather to raise them or not, because they feel fine when i'm seated and on the flat...

When I got the bike, the bike shop adjusted everything on the bike to suit my size, and even calculated the angles of my legs round the pedal stroke etc so they really knew what they were doing (it took 45 minutes to get it set up right). They didn't do any measurements with me off the saddle though and i've only just noticed that this could be a problem, as i'm rarely off the saddle at all!

Just to clarify - I think the bike is set up fine when i'm seated, but it's when I'm not seated that the problems begin.


:?:

redddraggon

What are your cleat positions like?

Bhima

They are in exactly the same position on both shoes - i'll post a photo of exactly where they are if that'll help with your analysis...?

I doubt it's the cleats anyway - I went out for a 5 minute ride before with "normal" shoes and I found myself doing the same thing when I got off the saddle to power away from some traffic lights.

It could just be a weird habit that i've got. I don't know how to get rid of it though - i've been trying, but with no luck!

fuzzynavel

Bhima wrote:

They are in exactly the same position on both shoes - i'll post a photo of exactly where they are if that'll help with your analysis...?

I doubt it's the cleats anyway - I went out for a 5 minute ride before with "normal" shoes and I found myself doing the same thing when I got off the saddle to power away from some traffic lights.

It could just be a weird habit that i've got. I don't know how to get rid of it though - i've been trying, but with no luck!

Why is your heel pointing down on your left side at the bottom of the stroke!! Do you have a weakness in your left calf?

shockedsoshocked

Bhima wrote:

They are in exactly the same position on both shoes - i'll post a photo of exactly where they are if that'll help with your analysis...?

I doubt it's the cleats anyway

It's very rare that someone has an asymmetrical pedal stroke, there's always tiny differences between either side of your body. Cleat position is more a natural thing. Don't just lock both of the in the same and expect not to have issues.

eh

20 minutes is a mad amount of time to cycle out of the saddle, so no wonder your back hurts.

Nothing wrong with dropping your heel below the pedal axel ocassionaly to get a bit of extra power/use different muscles. But I wouldn't do it for long periods, and it should be roughly the same both sides.

Bhima

eh wrote:

20 minutes is a mad amount of time to cycle out of the saddle, so no wonder your back hurts.

Just replaced my cassette with a 11-23 by accident - my old one was 11-25, so on some hills, i'm forced to cycle out of the saddle. Good thing too, I think, as I really need to work on that area of my cycling. On the hills I can do seated, I find that, if I do them standing, i'm hitting the same times as seated, which isn't right, as you're supposed to do anything quicker when out of the saddle (more power). Strangely though, it takes a good 20 minutes for me to start getting tired, even when pushing a ridiculously gigantic gear, as I tend to run out of breath first.

holmeboy

Would'nt fancy cyling for too long out the saddle with them gears going up! I tend to get out for a few minutes then back down, then back up if it's that long a pull. Cycled yesterday in the Borders and there was a long not to steep hill, stayed in the saddle for it and felt ok, save out the saddle for keeping the pace going. like been's said before must be some hill to take 20 mins. Are you in France near the Alps? :oops: :roll: :twisted:

Bhima

Nope, the Peak District. There are short downhills where you can sit down and recover, but only for 5/6/7 seconds. The route I do it quite relentless and almost always has a headwind too.

Poulsy

Go and see an Osteopath and let them have a look at your alignment and give your body an MOT (ask them to massage your Iliotibial Bands if you want some real pain!). Will be £35 well spent - trust me.

Pokerface

Well - I live in the Peak District and have ridden most, if not all, of the hills around here. I am the crappiest of climbers (not helped by the fact I have an artificial leg) - and I can honestly say there are not many hills that you absolutely need to stand to climb.

There are some (like Winnet's Pass at 25%) that you have to stand most of the way up - but only the steepest of hills and for short periods of time.

Most of the hills - you stand to get a bit of a boost and then can sit to keep going.


And for a spinner who can easily maintain 150 RPM - ALL the hills around here should be no problem at all.

You won't even see the pros doing 20 minutes of standing climbing without sitting. I would think you could actually do more harm than good to your pedalling action by doing that as it's not natural and takes you out of your normal comfort zone...

shockedsoshocked

Bhima wrote:

Just replaced my cassette with a 11-23 by accident - my old one was 11-25, so on some hills, i'm forced to cycle out of the saddle. Good thing too, I think, as I really need to work on that area of my cycling.

11-23 is not an accident. You're young and fit (i assume) and have plenty of time to train, you should get up everything with that.

However, thinking you need to work on your technique out of the saddle is a bet well, pointless? How often do you ride along out of the saddle, realistically, and for how long? Out of my usual 3 hour ride i'm probably out of the saddle for a maximum of 10 minutes.

And in my personal opinion it sounds like you're doing way too much climbing. It makes you good and strong on the hills, to the detriment of your speed on the flats. And if you want to race and TT, speed on the flat is usually quite important

eh

I can't think of a many (if any) hills in the Peaks that take 20 minutes to climb, except Cat & Fiddle which has an average gradient of 4% (max 7%) so thats hardly a climb necessary for standing on. Edale to Mam Tor isn't nice but you wouldn't want to climb it all the way standing up.

Pokerface

eh wrote:

I can't think of a many (if any) hills in the Peaks that take 20 minutes to climb, except Cat & Fiddle which has an average gradient of 4% (max 7%) so thats hardly a climb necessary for standing on. Edale to Mam Tor isn't nice but you wouldn't want to climb it all the way standing up.

Long hill can easily take 20 minutes from Whalley to the top. That and the Cat are the two longest climbs in the area. But I certainly couldn't be arsed to climb a shallow gradient standing for 20 minutes! It would be like riding home if your seat fell off!

Bhima

Pokerface wrote:

Most of the hills - you stand to get a bit of a boost and then can sit to keep going.


And for a spinner who can easily maintain 150 RPM - ALL the hills around here should be no problem at all.

Well then, maybe you're just fitter than me.

On the new gears I have, they're too high to go beyond 59RPM on the hills I do in the peaks at my current level, so i'm forced to stand, unless I want to absolutely destroy my legs and have to go home early. :? Spinning above 130 RPM is a different skill to grinding massive gears - above 130, I dont feel my legs getting tired at all, unless you do it for more than 10 minutes, so I don't see how that will help me on steep hills, unless my small chainring goes down to something silly, like 10t.

Pokerface wrote:

You won't even see the pros doing 20 minutes of standing climbing without sitting. I would think you could actually do more harm than good to your pedalling action by doing that as it's not natural and takes you out of your normal comfort zone...

But that's the point - as i've mentioned before, I may be good at spinning up hills if they're not too steep, but i've relied on that too much so my out-of-the-saddle stuff is really really weak. You must go out of your comfort zone to improve - no pain, no gain! I don't see how it will "harm" my normal pedalling, as I also practice that on the flats/downhills.

eh - Yes, I do the Cat & Fiddle stood up, on the big ring at the front, to simulate an even harsher gradient.

ShockedSoShocked wrote:

However, thinking you need to work on your technique out of the saddle is a bet well, pointless? How often do you ride along out of the saddle, realistically, and for how long?

As much as I agree with parts of this, i'm absolutely bollocks at cadences below 90 (i'm training to get better though) so on hills where I can't spin 90 on the lowest gear, it's more effective for me to get out of the saddle. It's just the way I ride. Trust me mate, when it comes to sprinting out of the saddle, (which i'll probably have to learn to do once I get into racing), my performance is a total shambles! In a race against my mate the other day, I actually beat him staying seated. If I were to have stood up, he would have surely won. I think it, again, is to do with my cadence habits. You can't hit 150 stood up so I feel I need to train myself to do it so that my technique is not unnaturally skewed towards one type of riding.

ShockedSoShocked wrote:

And in my personal opinion it sounds like you're doing way too much climbing. It makes you good and strong on the hills, to the detriment of your speed on the flats. And if you want to race and TT, speed on the flat is usually quite important

Again, I do not understand this logic (see above) of how one type of training can "harm" your speed on the flats. Hills are the same as flats, but you're just pushing a lower gear at the same cadence as you normally would at the same relative resistance level - you're just going slower, that's it. I don't see how doing too many hills is a problem. To get to the hills, I'm going 20 miles and going home another 20 miles, so after a session of 20 miles of hills, i've actually done more work on the flat. Again, I fail to see how there's a difference in flat/hill work anyway, if you use the gears properly.

redddraggon

Bhima wrote:

Hills are the same as flats

No they aren't. Hills are slower, pure power to weight ratio is most important, whereas on the flat it's a power/aerodynamics ratio.

To produce more power for hills you change position on the bike.

You are most definitely full of Bull, jeez even Willhub sounds sensible compared to you.

disgruntledgoat

redddraggon wrote:

Bhima wrote:

Hills are the same as flats

No they aren't. Hills are slower, pure power to weight ratio is most important, whereas on the flat it's a power/aerodynamics ratio.

To produce more power for hills you change position on the bike.

You are most definitely full of Bull, jeez even Willhub sounds sensible compared to you.

You're not wrong. It's all down to the source of resistance. On the flat, the major source of resistance is air. On a hill, it's gravity. One of these is harder to overcome than the other, hence you need a much lower gear to generate the same power and why you can't turn a 53 ring on a steep gradient.

You're not wrong about the other either.

shockedsoshocked

Bhima wrote:

ShockedSoShocked wrote:

And in my personal opinion it sounds like you're doing way too much climbing. It makes you good and strong on the hills, to the detriment of your speed on the flats. And if you want to race and TT, speed on the flat is usually quite important

Again, I do not understand this logic (see above) of how one type of training can "harm" your speed on the flats. Hills are the same as flats, but you're just pushing a lower gear at the same cadence as you normally would at the same relative resistance level - you're just going slower, that's it. I don't see how doing too many hills is a problem. To get to the hills, I'm going 20 miles and going home another 20 miles, so after a session of 20 miles of hills, i've actually done more work on the flat. Again, I fail to see how there's a difference in flat/hill work anyway, if you use the gears properly.

Honestly, I'm not lying you to, hills kill speed on the flats. When I first joined my cycling team, I'd spent two years leathering up hills every ride. Sure, I was fit, and was no slouch on the flats, but going out on a proper chain gang killed me. I couldn't ride in the wind and was constantly being half wheeled. Sure I could storm off up a hill but what use was it if you get turned over on the flats. Do enough riding and the climbing will come naturally. Look at the amount of brilliant climbers from the low countries. Hardly any huge mountains, but years of riding hard on the flat being battered by headwinds makes them exceptionally strong.

Get yourself in a club, and any decent coach will tell you what i'm saying. This is advice i've recieved from a World Masters and British Track champion, a British senior and veteran champion, and the other numerous former pro's who are in my team. These guys know what they're talking about, and all the advice they have given me has came to fruition in front of my eyes.

Pokerface

Plus - when you ride hills, you are sat upright, hands probably on the tops of the bars - or worse yet - stood up.

On the flats for speed - you should be on the drop in an aero position - and this type of riding uses your muscles in a different way.


Climbers can't sprint and sprinters can't climb. (Pure generalization - but holds true most of the time.) It's not ALL down to weight.

There's no way I am fitter than you. Fatter, older - yes. I also couldn't go over 100RPM for more than a few seconds without falling off (if at all). I climb hills REALLY slowly - but I get up them. Seated most of the time. It was a lot easier before when I had a compact - now I've switched back to regular gearing and it's a LOT harder for me - but I still get up all the hills.

You have such great enthusiasm for cycling - it's great. But like some of the other guys have said - find yourself a club to ride with and you will learn SO much and improve to no end. There are lots of clubs to chose from in the area. I used to ride with the Buxton club - but couldn't keep up with then on all the hills (told you I was slow) - but learned a lot from them.

jibberjim

Bhima wrote:

On the new gears I have, they're too high to go beyond 59RPM on the hills I do in the peaks at my current level, so i'm forced to stand, unless I want to absolutely destroy my legs and have to go home early. :? Spinning above 130 RPM is a different skill to grinding massive gears - above 130

Change your cassette... you've said your speed is 37 or so MPH, you don't need more than 53x15 for that, so a 15-25 cassette will give you 39x25, which will let you comfortably still travel at over 7mph at 60rpm. Unless you weigh an awful lot, which is unlikely given your other posted times and the simple fact you can maintain extremely high cadences which people with a lot of fat in the way can't do, should be plenty to get you up anything less than 20% still spinning away.

You can spin massive cadences - I spin faster than most people too, but nothing like your numbers - but I'm virtually never going slow enough not to be able to keep spinning. On very steep hills (over 12% average for 1km) I need to work very hard to keep the speed up, but looking at the power required to do that, it's less than the power I use in a flat acceleration, and I'm not sure I can match your numbers in that, certainly even hitting 35mph without a wheel to come off is very tough, yet you have the power to do it.

Get sensible gears for your bike, and use your abilities - the fact you can spin.

Not being able to grind very slowly up a hill is not a limiter in any race, so don't bother working on it, just get the right gears.

Infamous

ShockedSoShocked wrote:

Honestly, I'm not lying you to, hills kill speed on the flats. When I first joined my cycling team, I'd spent two years leathering up hills every ride. Sure, I was fit, and was no slouch on the flats, but going out on a proper chain gang killed me. I couldn't ride in the wind and was constantly being half wheeled. Sure I could storm off up a hill but what use was it if you get turned over on the flats. Do enough riding and the climbing will come naturally. Look at the amount of brilliant climbers from the low countries. Hardly any huge mountains, but years of riding hard on the flat being battered by headwinds makes them exceptionally strong.

What a load of nonsense.

So riding hills a lot slows you on the flat, but riding on the flat speeds you up on the hills?

To an extent bhima is right when he said "hills are like flats", it doesn't matter where the resistance comes from, wind, gravity or turbo trainer, you still have to turn the pedals over. Obviously, the things that are different are position and pacing. If you climb out of the saddle a lot, it will make you better out of the saddle, but that is often useful on the flat too, no?

If you ride up a hill for 5 mins @ x power, or ride on the flat for 5 mins @ x power (in the same position, with the same cadence), there is no difference.

When it gets down to it, a hill is an interval (as is a turn on a chaingang), and generally intervals make you faster.

nasahapley

I can sort of see what Bhima's saying here; if you're knocking out 300 watts at 90rpm then what difference does it make if youre doing that in 53-14 on the flat or in 39-19 up a hill? Sure you're overcoming different forces but your heart, lungs and legs don't 'know' that! Of course, get to any sort of decent gradient and your cadence will inevitably drop much lower, and if you did a lot of low-cadence climbing I suppose it could affect your speed on the flat.

I'm not sure the thing about there being loads of brilliant climbers from the low countries is really too instructive as I'm sure there's also loads of brilliant climbers from hilly countries. And on the flipside Cancellara/Cavendish, two blokes who are plenty quick enough on the level, are from Switzerland and the Isle of Man respectively, neither of which is particularly flat! Surely it just boils down to riding hard, wherever you may be, and by doing so developing the ability to produce more power? Contrary to SSS I ride hills all the time (not much choice!), and despite still not being that great at them, I can happily keep up with a tough-guy chain gang on the flat and scoff in the face of headwinds. It's just that I've got fairly high absolute power but also a fair bit of weight to go with it.

eh

if I do them standing, i'm hitting the same times as seated, which isn't right, as you're supposed to do anything quicker when out of the saddle (more power).

Who said that as its rubbish. Yes out of the saddle generates more peak power, but it just isn't sustainable, so over a hill of a decent length sitting will be faster.

if you're knocking out 300 watts at 90rpm then what difference does it make if youre doing that in 53-14 on the flat or in 39-19 up a hill?

As the hill gets steeper you tend to slow and hence gravity becomes the dominant resistive force over air resistance, thus power to weight becomes dominant over power & aero. Which explains why Jim Henderson didn't win the hill climb national champs the year it was held on the Cat and Fiddle.

oldwelshman

First of all, 400w on the flat will make you go a hell of a lot faster than 400w on a hill for sure.
Climbing out of the saddle is generally no faster than sitting as you usually use a bigger gear out of the saddle.
20 minutes is a silly amount of time to climb out of the saddle. When would you require to do that? Try that in the Alps and you will die, try it in a race you will blow. Short bursts yes but not 20 minutes.
Some one said out of the saddle is useful on the flat? Yes , again in short bursts to close a gap, make a break or sprint, but again would not ride out of saddle for 20mins on the flat either, silly really.
With respect to foot position, some people climb toe up some toe down when sitting but usually one or the other, not one of each
Out of the saddle sounds worse for you as it seems odd to have heel down as most people ride more forward when out of the saddle so naturally the toe is down.
Heel down will cause cramp as it stretches the calf.
Try leaning a bit more forward over bars when out of saddle as you will be further over the cranks instead of behind them which can cause heel down action.
Oh and give up the 20mins out of saddle, waste of time
I think you need to ride along in a group of experienced riders to get idea of realistic cadences and climbing techniques and training methods.
To be honest having read some of your posts, if I was in a race with you I would make sure I was never near your rear wheel

Bhima

redddraggon wrote:

Bhima wrote:

Hills are the same as flats

No they aren't. Hills are slower, pure power to weight ratio is most important, whereas on the flat it's a power/aerodynamics ratio.

To produce more power for hills you change position on the bike.

I mentioned that hills are slower, i'm not stupid. See here:

at the same relative resistance level - you're just going slower, that's it.

What I meant there was that, as long as the resistance/forces acting against you are the same, you'll go at the same speed. The hills I do usually mean that weight is an issue, but wind-resistance is not, so powering up a hill at 90 RPM is the same as sprinting at 90 RPM on the flat in the wind at the same resistance level because they balanace out. Obviously, you go slower on hills and in a headwind. My response to the previous statement from ShockedSoShocked was merely a theoretical argument - of course, it's rare that you'll encounter identcal resistance on hills than a headwind on the flat.

I accept that wind/gravity have different resistance levels, but that shouldn't come in to the argument because i'd already ruled that out with what I said.

By the way, If you really have an issue with me, just don't read/reply to my posts. I have no issues with anyone on here - I just ask questions and challenge (sometimes wrongly) what I think sounds strange. I have some quirks with the way I cycle/train which the average cyclist might be skeptical of, fair enough, but there's no need to get personal. :?

Bhima

nasahapley wrote:

I can sort of see what Bhima's saying here; if you're knocking out 300 watts at 90rpm then what difference does it make if youre doing that in 53-14 on the flat or in 39-19 up a hill? Sure you're overcoming different forces but your heart, lungs and legs don't 'know' that!

That's exactly what I meant.

Of course, bike position changes things slightly (but it's true that sometimes I ride on the flat on the tops of the bars and up hills on the drops).

redddraggon

Bhima wrote:

redddraggon wrote:

Bhima wrote:

Hills are the same as flats

No they aren't. Hills are slower, pure power to weight ratio is most important, whereas on the flat it's a power/aerodynamics ratio.

To produce more power for hills you change position on the bike.

I mentioned that hills are slower, i'm not stupid. See here:

at the same relative resistance level - you're just going slower, that's it.

So you are telling me you cycle the same way up hills as you cycle on the flat? Because if you do you are making a compromise either on the flat or on hills.

No one I know cycles on the flat the same as they cycle up hills.

People climb using the tops of the bars because they can maximise power with aerodynamics of less concern. Whereas on the flat's people are more likely to use a more aerodynamic position. The whole positional changes, alters the way you use muscle groups, so CLIMBING IS NOT THE SAME AS CYCLING ON THE FLAT. And if you do cycle the same way on the flat as you do on climbs, you're not going as fast as you can somewhere.

Just my read post and understand.

Bhima

I cycle the same up hills than on the flat.

BUT, of course I change my position. As mentioned above, sometimes, if the hill is short and not too steep, the drop bars give me more leverage. This is a rarity though. On the flat, i'm pretty much, exclusively on the drops, unless it's a nice ride down to the shops, where i'm going 15mph for 1 mile anyway.

redddraggon

Bhima wrote:

I cycle the same up hills than on the flat.

BUT, of course I change my position.

That is what you would call a contradictory statement

Infamous

redddraggon wrote:

No one I know cycles on the flat the same as they cycle up hills.

CLIMBING IS NOT THE SAME AS CYCLING ON THE FLAT.

Just my read post and understand.

WALOFS. So if you are riding up a 0.5% hill, you ride differently to on the flat? what about 1%, 2% etc at what point to you change to this completely different style of pedalling? You're still turning the pedals round, and assuming you're seated, there is very little difference between climbing and flat riding. OBVIOUSLY, standing is different and that's where the difference can be argued, but seated climbing is no different to seated flat riding.

And, standing has it's benefits anyway imo and needs to be trained. Maybe not for 20 mins.

now my read post and understand.

oldwelshman

I agree with reddragon, cycling uphill is totally different to cycling on the flat.
With respect to your 0.5% 1,2,3 etc that is bollocks really, it is instinct and feel and you know when it changes, no need to measure.
When your on the flat and on the hoods in aero position, or on the drops, , when you start to climb you feel the increase in gradient and try to lower the gears accordingly and maintain cadence.
As it gets steeper most people, maybe not you and OP, grip centre of bars and sit back (do you do this on the flat when you increase effort?), on the flat you would be in a forward aero position not back,then when really steep, probably have to get out of saddle, on hoods, leaning forward, lower cadence, pullin on bars, pushing on pedals, when do you do this on the flat? necer, only time out of saddle is to accelerate, even then on the flat it is not the same technique as out of the saddle on the hills.
There seems to be some strange cycling techniques by some in here, I wonder how they corner?