Cycling Weekly (cont)

[cycling weekly] Do these principles differ according to the rider's strengths/body shape/riding style/event?

[kraig] The most important principle, IMHO, is understanding that positioning is a process that relies on the experienced use of the best measurement tools. Folks are pretty different in the positions they wind up with, but a good process will guide them along to the best result. If one focuses on the process the results will come.

[cycling weekly] In the case of each of the following, is it possible to say which is best and what sort of rider should use it? (a very stretched out position like the Superman, but within UCI limits. a Tuck position a la Landis and Leipheimer. A wide arms position like the UK Track team.)

[kraig]I don’t think it’s really possible to say which is best without testing it out. I’ve seen the Superman “work”, I’ve seen the Leipheimer position “work”.

[cycling weekly] Why do the UK Track guys ride with their arms so wide, do you think? Similarly what was so good about the Landis/Leipheimer position?

[kraig] I’m not sure why – I know that those guys test at a wind tunnel under the guidance of Chris Boardman (who is fond of telling Anthony McCrossen of cycling.tv that arm position doesn’t matter), so I’m sure they’ve got some evidence that suggests it’s the way to go. Maybe the ex-2006 Tour de France winner (I'm not quite sure how to phrase that - maybe I'll have to consult Floyd's legal team on that one??) just liked the way it felt for his hip – or he simply thought it was “cool” – or he had documented the supply side (power with his power tap) and the demand side (using the data from the tunnel here in san diego), and found that to be the best combination. Levi also uses power and wind tunnel data to guide his positioning decisions – it’s got to work on the road, though!

[cycling weekly] How important is it to get 'narrow' in the hands/elbows/shoulders/knees?

[kraig] People pedal differently, and this can affect the optimal position. I like to do sweeps on elbow width on pedaling riders under load (some facilities can't load up riders with any resistance, which is something to think about) in order to understand how axial force changes – narrower isn’t always better.

Cycling Weekly Question #2

[cycling weekly] What general principles would you look to include in a good aero position?

[kraig] After directing 1000+ wind tunnel runs with over 90 athletes (including hacks like myself all the way up to world champions and tour de france podium finishers), I have seen many things that re-inforce the position that the aerodynamics of a pedaling three-dimensional human is a very individual thing. One can generalize, but really, in this context, “generalizing” is synonymous with “guessing”. I recommend using the best tools at your disposal to help quantify both the supply side (power generation) and the demand side (aerodynamic resistance) during the position evaluation process. The experienced use of the best tools can speed the process up.

Here’s some more of my thoughts (prior to doing a bunch more wind tunnel work which has changed my mind a wee-bit):

http://www.biketechreview.com/performance/pareto.htm

Cycling Weekly e-Interview - part 1

A few months ago, I was sent a series of questions from Oliver Roberts of Cycling Weekly over in the UK.

I spent a wee-bit of time answering all of the questions he sent my way, and some of those answers made it into the final publication (which was cool to see!) - although, I had to purchase a digital copy of it to check out if I was quoted well! ;0)

http://www.zinio.com/cover?is=228905657&img=l

Anyway, since I took the time to answer the questions for him - I reckon my answers would make for some good fodder here on kdublog - I've added some additional nuggets where I felt like it, FWIW!

here goes - question #1:

[cycling weekly] "The received wisdom is 'as low as possible is better' is this in fact the case?"

[kraig] I don’t think so.

I’m living proof that lower is not necessarily better. For the better part of 15 years of bike racing my TT setup was such that I made the bars as low as possible. Then, I went to the Wind Tunnel here in San Diego (http://www.lswt.com/) and explored what I call the "design space".

I quantified how much my axial force changed as a function of reach, drop, elbow width, forearm angle, saddle position, etc… over several different tunnel sessions. What I found out was that I had been riding below my potential in flat TT’s, largely in pursuit of becoming as "aerodynamic" as possible.

Last year (2006), I set lifetime personal bests at the 20k distance with a bar position that was 10+cm higher than previous positions - simply because I intelligently used the tools at my disposal to measure both axial force (I used a wind tunnel) and power production (I used an SRM Pro Power Meter). I also re-learned how to surf the pain curve during the actual time trials - that's worth quite a bit of time, I reckon!

Here's a photo comparison of my position in 2004 vs 2006:



Sure, going lower will generally make you more aerodynamic (that’s why folks tuck on descents!), but at what cost to the other parameter - power production? Going fast is a balance of one’s axial force, power production, and most importantly, putting it all together and executing via the supercomputer on race day.

Here’s an article I wrote that tries to send the message that using tools to help guide the positioning process is often times helpful:

http://www.biketechreview.com/performance/faster.htm