Balanced pedaling
Comments
-
I dunno what the fuss is about - its easily fixed. See here for instructions
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rx9SIyFMfcY
Seriously though, get a mate to have a look at your peddling and unless you are noticeably wonky, I'd focus on just keeping it smooth and round.0 -
-
Why would you not try and strengthen the weaker leg to bring it a close to the dominant leg as possible?
Seems to me that if you have the info available then use it. It's smacks of 'free power' the more you can strengthen the weaker leg. Nothing to stop you having two good legs.
I discovered this week that my imbalance is closer to 40/60. My first thought was that I would never have allowed that in the gym so why allow it for pedaling?0 -
Eebijeebi wrote:Why would you not try and strengthen the weaker leg to bring it a close to the dominant leg as possible?
Seems to me that if you have the info available then use it. It's smacks of 'free power' the more you can strengthen the weaker leg. Nothing to stop you having two good legs.
I discovered this week that my imbalance is closer to 40/60. My first thought was that I would never have allowed that in the gym so why allow it for pedaling?
The physical strength of the leg is not the issue. In any case, by what means did you identify this imbalance?0 -
Imposter wrote:Eebijeebi wrote:Why would you not try and strengthen the weaker leg to bring it a close to the dominant leg as possible?
Seems to me that if you have the info available then use it. It's smacks of 'free power' the more you can strengthen the weaker leg. Nothing to stop you having two good legs.
I discovered this week that my imbalance is closer to 40/60. My first thought was that I would never have allowed that in the gym so why allow it for pedaling?
The physical strength of the leg is not the issue. In any case, by what means did you ideintify this imbalance?
How can physical strength not be an issue? I'm not saying that you can't increase power with an imbalance, I'm saying there's untapped potential by not working on the weaker leg which has the same potential as the stronger. If you know it, you can try and do something about it.
Imbalance identified with left/right power meter.0 -
Eebijeebi wrote:Imposter wrote:Eebijeebi wrote:Why would you not try and strengthen the weaker leg to bring it a close to the dominant leg as possible?
Seems to me that if you have the info available then use it. It's smacks of 'free power' the more you can strengthen the weaker leg. Nothing to stop you having two good legs.
I discovered this week that my imbalance is closer to 40/60. My first thought was that I would never have allowed that in the gym so why allow it for pedaling?
The physical strength of the leg is not the issue. In any case, by what means did you ideintify this imbalance?
How can physical strength not be an issue? I'm not saying that you can't increase power with an imbalance, I'm saying there's untapped potential by not working on the weaker leg which has the same potential as the stronger. If you know it, you can try and do something about it.
Imbalance identified with left/right power meter.
You don't favour one leg because it is stronger. If there is anything behind the imbalance issue, it is likely to be an activation issue, as ncr said previously. The only question on that is whether it actually matters, or not.
Relative leg strength really isn't an issue here. If it was useful to improve power by increasing the strength of one leg, then we'd all be in the gym doing it two...0 -
Because it's not. What constrains our sustainable power is aerobic metabolism, not force production.Eebijeebi wrote:Imposter wrote:Eebijeebi wrote:Why would you not try and strengthen the weaker leg to bring it a close to the dominant leg as possible?
Seems to me that if you have the info available then use it. It's smacks of 'free power' the more you can strengthen the weaker leg. Nothing to stop you having two good legs.
I discovered this week that my imbalance is closer to 40/60. My first thought was that I would never have allowed that in the gym so why allow it for pedaling?
The physical strength of the leg is not the issue. In any case, by what means did you ideintify this imbalance?
How can physical strength not be an issue? I'm not saying that you can't increase power with an imbalance, I'm saying there's untapped potential by not working on the weaker leg which has the same potential as the stronger. If you know it, you can try and do something about it.
Imbalance identified with left/right power meter.0 -
Are you saying that if my left leg was as strong as my right it would make no difference? Really?
So if I weakened my right leg to the level of my left leg that wouldn't make any difference either?0 -
Eebijeebi wrote:Are you saying that if my left leg was as strong as my right it would make no difference? Really?
So if I weakened my right leg to the level of my left leg that wouldn't make any difference either?
Help me out here because you wouldn't let anyone else get away with 'because it's not'.
It's worth doing a search and having a read of some of the 'leg strength' threads before you get too far into this. In any case, the 'Because it's not' comment was not the important bit. The next sentence was...0 -
Some thoughts on power balance information as it currently stands. There are some interesting metrics in the pipeline, but I'd probably only consider those from trusted sources of independent crank or pedal data. Pseudo balance meters can be misleading. e.g. it's entirely feasible for a pseudo-balance meter to report a dominant right side, when in fact the left is dominant.
http://alex-cycle.blogspot.com.au/2013/ ... lance.html
BTW - asymmetry in pedalling power is normal.0 -
Well I read plenty thanks, certainly enough to know that different 'experts' have different opinions on a whole raft of subjects. I hope you know that it's a little condescending to just tell people to 'go read' rather than engage in discussion with us 'know nothings'.
Didn't answer the lessening the other leg power question though, but don't worry.0 -
Well no one can say anything for certain, since we don't know the reasons for your strength imbalance - it might also be linked to other functional or bio-mechanical issues that are holding you back. So keep in mind that we can only ever talk in general here. And in general it's completely correct to say that strength and sustainable aerobic power are unrelated since we are not force limited (the forces in cycling are very low).Eebijeebi wrote:Are you saying that if my left leg was as strong as my right it would make no difference? Really?
So if I weakened my right leg to the level of my left leg that wouldn't make any difference either?
Help me out here because you wouldn't let anyone else get away with 'because it's not'. (Misread - thought I was reading Imposter).
So forgive me for the anecdote to give an example of significant leg strength imbalance and its (lack of) impact on sustainable aerobic power. Nearly 8 years ago I had a trans-tibial left leg amputation (resulting from cycling accident out training one day). I eventually returned to cycling and racing and ultimately generated the same (in some cases more) sustainable power than I had beforehand, and attained similar racing results. It wasn't like I was unfit before my amputation, with state and national level podium results, and a national record in team pursuit. Feats I replicated post amputation. Yet my amputated leg was far far weaker, and smaller by some margin with thigh circumference 10cm less than my right. That didn't really matter, as neither force nor the significant leg strength imbalance were limiters.
Strength just isn't the issue in general. It's an aerobic sport.0 -
Eebijeebi wrote:Didn't answer the lessening the other leg power question though, but don't worry.
I assumed you weren't being serious. In any case, the same issue (ie strength not being a consideration) also works in reverse.0 -
Here's an opposing view -
Putting aside the increased risk of injury, a significant imbalance in force production between your left and right legs is a recipe for premature fatigue; having one leg working harder to compensate for the other is always going to be a less efficient way of producing sustainable power than if both legs work equally hard. Given these results, it could be a good investment of time to check your pedalling biomechanics and take steps to reduce any asymmetry.
Read more at http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/fitness/ ... DCXEMCK.99
There are plenty around like that so you may see why I don't automatically take what you say as gospel.0 -
Another from Livestrong.
Right Versus Left
Because you have a dominant leg, you’ll tend to apply more pedaling power on one side than the other. By increasing the pedaling strength of your nondominant leg, you can correct this imbalance, achieve a more efficient stroke, and prevent injury. Perform single-leg drills on a stationary cycle in which you pedal with only one foot in 20- to 30-second intervals. If you do these drills on a regular bike, you risk crashing due to the imbalance created by the exercise. Aim to complete several reps of a single-leg drill before and after a cycling session. Gradually increase the duration of the interval to one minute. As you boost your ability to apply power equally with both legs, you can eliminate dead spots at the peak and bottom of your stroke.0 -
Views are fine but they need something more substantial than opinion for them to be valid.Eebijeebi wrote:Here's an opposing view -
Putting aside the increased risk of injury, a significant imbalance in force production between your left and right legs is a recipe for premature fatigue; having one leg working harder to compensate for the other is always going to be a less efficient way of producing sustainable power than if both legs work equally hard
Can this statement be backed up with some supporting evidence, or is it simply a belief based statement?
The injury risk claim is unfounded.
Asymmetry in pedalling normal.0 -
Works both ways though and us ordinary people are caught in the middle.0
-
If you read the item I posted, I provide half a dozen links to studies on pedalling asymmetry. I wasn't posting opinion as much as I was summarising actual research into the topic.Eebijeebi wrote:Works both ways though and us ordinary people are caught in the middle.
The forces involved in cycling are well known and are not related to strength. We've been down that road plenty of times on here, just search for any strength and cycling thread.
Forces at the pedals in cycling have been measured by instrumented pedals well for over a century, with the first published work providing such data back in the 19th Century. This isn't exactly novel information.0 -
I think there are two sides to this. Personally if you have a weaker leg, then yes I would take steps to build it up. Its not going to take much effort as few people will have any major differences. That said, pedal imbalance may not have anything to do with leg strength. I'll go out on a limb (
get it) and say its probably due to left/right dominant side. For example, I'm left eyed, left handed and right legged. I marginally favour my right leg (pedaling). I spent quite a bit of effort a few months back building up my left leg (and right arm) by doing individual isolation exercises, but it hasn't changed my balance much. I actually think its sessions on the watt bike which have improved my stroke shape and balance. Personally I don't think this has anything to do with strength. That said, if you have a few cm more muscle on one side than the other then why not even it out? 0 -
I have never understood this strength or force argument, i dont know the science but if Magnus Beckstedt/BC and several well known coaches say force is important and worth working on, then i ll take their views.
fwiw, this winter i ve done a regime of very light leg strength training, maybe no more than an hour or 2 a week at home, so no gym, it is the only thing i ve changed this winter and i ve seen my power go up, my time to fatigue has increased, i can climb faster in a higher gear and i ve not put on any weight, obviously anecdotal and everyone is different but for me its free speed.
also, if we all used the search function, this forum would soon die, almost everything has been discussed at least once 0 -
This is the type of thread that can derail the continued support of extremely well qualified coaches for the forum.
I hope it doesnt. People should be aware of that. A few distinguished contributors in the past dont make the effort on here anymore - and sometimes who can blame them?
The vast majority on here just quote anecdotes which are not and never will be evidence.
So, to underline my own use anecdote and join in the fun... my Vector S (one legged power system) shows that I have sufficient power in my under performing left leg to maintain reasonable results in my age class for road racing and time trialling - so I'm happy with that.
You do everything else because you like to do it not because it is some kind of magic bullet.
Minor rant over.0 -
If respected coaches leave because people who are trying to understand, like to use their brain and are not scared to ask why and not just accepting 'because it is' (not withstanding references to studies etc) then that's very sad. I had too much of that in my school days and it wasn't helpful.
So, I appear to be the naughty boy who won't be quiet, but I doubt that I've been rude or disrespectful in any form.
I'll say no more after and will go in search of scientific data, but please answer this one question first -
I clone myself x 2. Everything except leg strength is the same.
Me A is my imbalanced left right strength.
Me B is both equal to my weaker left.
Me C is both equal to my stronger right.
Is it the case that performance will be exactly the same in all three cases? And that would include accelerating, sprinting, powering up a short steep hill?0 -
mamba80 wrote:I have never understood this strength or force argument, i dont know the science but if Magnus Beckstedt/BC and several well known coaches say force is important and worth working on, then i ll take their views.
Force is a component of power, so obviously it's important. But what science indicates is that force itself is not a limiter for endurance cycling.
It would be interesting to have some specifics of what BC and or others are suggesting - otherwise it is just another 'appeal to authority'.
Anyway, I can't believe this argument is kicking off yet again.0 -
Imposter wrote:mamba80 wrote:I have never understood this strength or force argument, i dont know the science but if Magnus Beckstedt/BC and several well known coaches say force is important and worth working on, then i ll take their views.
Force is a component of power, so obviously it's important. But what science indicates is that force itself is not a limiter for endurance cycling.
It would be interesting to have some specifics of what BC and or others are suggesting - otherwise it is just another 'appeal to authority'.
Anyway, I can't believe this argument is kicking off yet again.
Why see it as an argument? Let it be a discussion, which I thought forum were all about.0 -
Eebijeebi wrote:
I'll say no more after and will go in search of scientific data, but please answer this one question first -
I clone myself x 2. Everything except leg strength is the same.
Me A is my imbalanced left right strength.
Me B is both equal to my weaker left.
Me C is both equal to my stronger right.
Is it the case that performance will be exactly the same in all three cases? And that would include accelerating, sprinting, powering up a short steep hill?
Performance is dependent on overall power, or (uphill) w/kg. How the power is generated (ie 55% left leg, 45% right leg) is incidental.0 -
Eebijeebi wrote:Why see it as an argument? Let it be a discussion, which I thought forum were all about.
Because we are already on belief-based statements and appeals to authority - and it's only page 3.0 -
Is the answer to my question yes or no?0
-
Eebijeebi wrote:Is the answer to my question yes or no?
Did you not understand the answer? Performance will be dependent on power, not leg strength. Assuming all of your 'clones' are pushing out the same power with the same w/kg, then there will be no difference.
Hypothetical absurdities like this do not really move the discussion on, unfortunately.0 -
Imposter wrote:Eebijeebi wrote:
I'll say no more after and will go in search of scientific data, but please answer this one question first -
I clone myself x 2. Everything except leg strength is the same.
Me A is my imbalanced left right strength.
Me B is both equal to my weaker left.
Me C is both equal to my stronger right.
Is it the case that performance will be exactly the same in all three cases? And that would include accelerating, sprinting, powering up a short steep hill?
Performance is dependent on overall power, or (uphill) w/kg. How the power is generated (ie 55% left leg, 45% right leg) is incidental.
I understand what you said but didn't see it as an answer to whether they'd be the same, or if not, which would be better.0 -
Eebijeebi wrote:I understand what you said but didn't see it as an answer to whether they'd be the same, or if not, which would be better.
You've already said the so-called 'clones' aren't the same, because of the imbalances (so they can't be clones then). My point is that in terms of performance, the imbalance is incidental.0
