Do Pros Really Pedal More Smoothly? | GCN Does Science

We often think that smoother pedalling technique is better - but is it really? We investigate, with the help of some UAE Emirates pro cyclists, and some not-so-pro riders too.
Subscribe to GCN: gcn.eu/Subscrib...
Register your interest in the GCN Club: gcn.eu/uJ
Get exclusive GCN gear in the GCN shop! gcn.eu/uI
Pedalling technique is always a controversial subject amongst cyclist. Is smoother better? Should we try and pedal more smoothly or should we just leave it up to instinct and our bodies will find the most efficient way naturally. Well, we thought we try and do a little experiment. We are at the headquarters of Elite in Northern Italy cause they have a pedalling analysis app that utilises some of the mind-boggling array of data that's generated by the top of the range Smart Trainer, the Drivo. And two top Pro Cyclist, Marco Marcato and Federico Zurlo, are just about to walk through that door. Do pros pedal smoothly? And does it really matter? We're gonna do a simple test to really get a feel for just how smoothly their pedalling and we're gonna gauge it using the Elite Pedalling Analysis App. It gives us a real-time polar view which you can see this behind me there. It's measuring the force that Marco's putting out. 24 times per pedal stroke. The more even output, the smoother the pedal stroke. So to start with, they're gonna be riding 150 watts. We should tacks them greatly Federico in particular is probably gonna be cursing his luck that he's in the middle of his off-season. But then they're gonna up it to 300 watts for a minute for finally 450 watts for a minute. The end of each interval we're gonna get a number which is the uniformity index and that should categorically show just how smooth they really are. Marco, you ready?
- Yes, I'm ready.
- Let's go.
- Smooth, I think. Smooth! Federico, you ready?
- Yes.
- You ready, alright, so 150 watts for one minute, let's go for it. I feel like a mad scientist down here making them run at 450 watts. Now before we delve to D.P. end results as you could probably tell I can't resist and I'm gonna have a go as well. Clearly I don't have the talent of the other two, but potentially there is a chance that I might be as smooth as the other two, fingers crossed. Who's gonna win the Crystal Crank trophy?
If you'd like to contribute captions and video info in your language, here's the link 👍 gcn.eu/uG
Watch more on GCN...
Pedalling and Cadence 📹 gcn.eu/uH
Elite Factory Tour 📹 gcn.eu/Elite
Photos: © Bettiniphoto / www.bettiniphot... & ©Tim De Waele / www.tdwsport.com
Music:
Short LIfe 3 - Niklas Gustavsson
Rotations 2 - Jack Elphick
Pink and Blue - Niklas Ahlstrom
We are legends 1 - Rannar Sillard
Everything Must End (Summer Hips Remix Version) - Sture Zetterberg
About GCN:
The Global Cycling Network puts you in the centre of the action: from the iconic climbs of Alpe D’Huez and Mont Ventoux to the cobbles of Flanders, everywhere there is road or pavé, world-class racing and pro riders, we will be there bringing you action, analysis and unparalleled access every week, every month, and every year. We show you how to be a better cyclist with our bike maintenance videos, tips for improving your cycling, cycling top tens, and not forgetting the weekly GCN Show. Join us on KZbin’s biggest and best cycling channel to get closer to the action and improve your riding!
Welcome to the Global Cycling Network | Inside cycling
Thanks to our sponsors:
Alta Badia: gcn.eu/AltaBadia- // Maratona Dles Dolomites: gcn.eu/Maratona...
Assos of Switzerland: gcn.eu/Assos
KASK helmets: gcn.eu/KASK
fi’zi:k shoes and saddles: gcn.eu/fizikshoes and gcn.eu/fiziksad...
Topeak tools: gcn.eu/Topeak
Canyon bikes: gcn.eu/-Canyon
Quarq: gcn.eu/Quarq
DT Swiss: gcn.eu/DtSwiss
Science in Sport: gcn.eu/SiS
Orbea bikes: gcn.eu/Orbea
Trek Bicycles: gcn.eu/-Trek
Vision wheels: gcn.eu/Vision
Zipp wheels: gcn.eu/Zipp
power2max: gcn.eu/power2max
Wahoo Fitness: gcn.eu/Wahoo-Fi...
Park Tool: gcn.eu/-parktool
Continental tyres: gcn.eu/continen...
Camelbak: gcn.eu/camelbak-
The GCN Club - gcn.eu/club
KZbin Channel - gcn.eu/gcnYT
Facebook - gcn.eu/gcnFb
Instagram - gcn.eu/GCNInsta
Google+ - gcn.eu/gcnGPlus
Twitter - gcn.eu/gcnTW
Leave us a comment below!

[@roksraka9241]

This should have been a blind test, without them looking at the screen, possibly without even the riders knowing that their pedalling efficiency in particular is being analysed.

[@robinfrost6858]

This is only five years late, but I couldn't agree more. The direct live feedback would have so contaminated the "experiment" that the results would be essentially meaningless.

[@halincandenza7640]

You shouldn't show the data to the rider during the experiment

[@rkan2]

Hal Incandenza yeah... This paid test is flawed from the selection of the gear"

[@ltu42]

Why? As long as all participants had the same conditions, the results should be comparable.

[@halincandenza7640]

Yeah they are comparable but you may be measuring whether pros are more willing or able to adapt to the feedback on the monitor which has nothing to do with the question they were trying to answer.

[@ioanzogr]

Please try this test with oval chainrings. Do they improve pedaling style/smoothness with regards to regular chainrings? Amazing video!

[@RyonBeachner]

Yannis Zographopoulos I’ve run Osymetric, Rotor Q Rings, and Standard, and find my pedaling efficiency increases on the non round Rings (inefficiency in this case would mean wattage applied in any direction other than the direction of pedaling.) measured with a Pioneer power meter. I don’t know if this is due to the irregular shape being better suited to muscle groups used to pedal or simply because the changing mechanical advantage through the pedal-stroke isn’t interpreted correctly by the system.

[@ioanzogr]

Thank you Ryon Beachner! I believe shedding light in this kind of staff is really interesting. We always try to improve our wattage and fitness level but if there is a shortcut to free speed, why not take advantage of it ;)

[@RyonBeachner]

Yannis Zographopoulos It’s certainly interesting! I only stumbled upon the Osymetric rings that I now use all the time because I had problems with my knees, and I found that they helped alleviate this. I was trying to pedal in a circle, and actually found myself with an overuse injury from improperly using certain muscles. (Chondromalacia patella) Now I can’t pedal in a circle to save my life, but I’m much more comfortable and going faster little by little with the Osymetric.

[@guest_informant]

Despite the repeated claim - and occasional ludicrous attempts to draw valid conclusions - GCN *never* does Science, and you've made very clear some of the significant shortcomings in all these sort of videos.

[@rivalrepairs]

I think the pros just pedaled normally as they have nothing to prove. Si and the rest attempted to smooth out there pedal stokes to improve their scores. Should have hidden the screen and told everyone completing the test they were investigating something else.

[@TheJoePavlik]

This would have been the best way to do the test, or only show the screen for an initial minute.

[@jacksquat2067]

Yes, exactly this, 100%. Should've been completely blind. No one should've had any idea what was being researched. Putting a monitor in front of everyone introduced bias to the experiment. :(

[@Pratalax]

was this test blind? Did all your volunteers know you were testing for smoothness? if they did, they might be changing their pedalstroke, especially if they can see how smooth they're being on a live feed in front of them.

[@philadams9254]

Simon certainly did.

[@graemecrowther8742]

Also the pros and apparently Matt were outputting higher wattage so not an accurate comparison

[@fiddleronthebike]

that higher wattage for them is not more effort - but that should be the reason I think. If you train and get fitter, those strong muscles get much stronger, but those muscles unable to do a significant percentage of the overall power will not benefit as much from training and will not get nearly as much stronger

[@michaltoman2805]

Exactly what I was thinking when watching it

[@D.Eldon_]

Very interesting!!! Please revisit this subject and do more tests. Regarding "pulling", there appears to be some bad information floating around by some well-meaning bike fitters that you should not pull up on the stroke. They usually cite the fact that our hip flexors are not powerful enough for us to do this and it will lead to hip problems. This is true if you try to do it too much. But there is nothing wrong with "pulling" for short durations at strategic points in a race or ride. The most obvious example would be during a sprint when "pulling" is essential for winning! In my own experience, I've found that I can increase my power output (measured with a Stages power meter) as much as 40% by pulling and there is very little perceived increase in effort. I do this during steep climbs while remaining on the saddle and it enables me to maintain a higher cadence and power level. But it's not something I would try to sustain for a long time. I also "pull" in intervals on flat roads when I'm getting tired and need help keeping my cadence and power up (as when doing an FTP test). Pulling temporarily allows some relief for my primary muscles since I can relax my "pushing". I don't think we can look at our pedal stroke as a static thing where there is only "one" best or optimal pattern for us. What I think we need is a variety of pedal techniques that we've mastered for different situations so we can use the right "tool" out of our pedaling toolbox for the "job" at hand. Lastly, I do not think that a fixed trainer is a good device to use for these tests. The problem is that it doesn't allow you to lean the bike from side to side as you pedal and this may artificially increase pedaling asymmetry. I'm aware of only one trainer that may overcome this problem: the Rock and Roll Smart Trainer from Kinetic ( www.amazon.com/dp/B01J0BQM2Y/_encoding=UTF8?coliid=I1J31Q7QA9H4BC&colid=1VQDTWUQD9MXU&psc=0 ) but I haven't had a chance to try one yet. I believe your data will correlate better to the "real world" if the cyclist is able to move the bike laterally as they pedal. Is there a power meter you can use on the bike that will provide as good of data as the Elite Drivo? (It would be great it if could distinguish upstroke power from downstroke power.) If so, please do your next tests either on the road or on a Kinetic Rock and Road smart trainer. Thanks.

[@heathwakefield6883]

Maybe do the test on a set of rollers using a bike equipped with left and right power meter?

[@neoneherefrom5836]

As with almost everything in life what is optimal depends on a case by case basis among individual types as well as road circumstances and demands. Everyone always wants a universal and simple response when variables are the reality.

[@SLALOMBRUNO]

Agree 100%, pulling for short periods allows to mantein speed while resting the principal group of muscles

[@Heatseeker1]

So Elite's mind boggling array of data doesn't include the upstroke power, and therefore the pedalling uniformity calculation presented is useless, got it.

[@RyonBeachner]

Tolyzor Sounds like they should contact Pioneer.

[@baley7]

I gather the fact they can see the results pretty much also invalidates the whole test!

[@r2k314]

absolutely. crazy. BTW there are machines that sense force vector through 360 degrees, and a study of elite track cyclists (4000 meter specialists) showed they don't scrape nor pull up while in steady state.

[@someguy9520]

i never knew what pulling up would do except make the whole movement feel weird. i prefer to power through the strongest spot to keep better momentum in the dead spot in combination of a 95rpm cadence. works hella good with TT. 85-90 rpm for MTB and normal spirited riding

[@hgiusdfajgfds]

Yeah. Of course if you are seeing the results real time you're going to try to be as uniform as possible. This is like testing "can pros hold 300W on instinct???" and then showing them their power output during the test..

[@noelius4481]

This is a good experiment. Can you guys redo this with a modern oval (absolute black, wolf tooth, etc...) chainring to prove what they're claiming? #torqueback

[@MusicStuffSome]

I think this could be interesting too

[@UbzUnclemax]

Chris Froome's and Sir Bradley Wiggins's O'symetric chainrings too!

[@markbailey70]

Being a former pro Si you should know why pros pedal they way they do. However you touched on it right at the end. I believe the US team 7-11 did a study regarding pedalling back in the 80s. In basic terms they found that pedalling for more of the up stroke that they gained more power however this did not improve their performance as it affected their efficiency. Pros pedal in the way they do because it is most efficient. Allowing the leg to relax and rest for a moment on the up stroke is a good thing. People teaching cyclists to pedal through the up stroke while riding normally on flat terrain (not under sprinting load) is quite an ignorant thing to do.

[@NielsHeldens]

You should have let chocolate voice do this as well, in order to find out whether his pedalling technique is just as smooth as his voice.

[@tdougs77]

Eeek, what does the sponsor think to those results? sounds to me like you don't need to track the technique. cracking video as always Si.

[@koko-lores]

Maybe we are lucky and sponsors just sponsor, but don't influence the "science" ? That's how it should work in real life scientific studies - but doesn't always happen.

[@BikeBodyMind]

I think I'll just keep working on my ftp.

[@JerrysScenicCycling]

As Si says, more science needed. I appreciate Si's willingness to try flat pedals. To do flat pedals correctly, need good mtn bike flat pedals and good stiff shoes. Most important is to move the pedal to mid-sole to take the calf muscle out of the stroke. (Ankles and small calf muscles prevent all power from large glut muscles from reaching the pedals. For example, would you prefer to be on your toes or flat footed when you attempt a vertical high jump?)

[@zacharyrobbiano859]

I wonder if you had everyone ride at relative ftp percentages if you would see a different trend then with the absolute wattages. I would guess the more fit people can just hammer it while the less fit have to give their best, smoothest performance.

[@mitchellsteindler]

I know this is an advertisement for the trainer intended to give useful information, but it just doesn't. These tests should have been done outdoors over a period of several rides with several pro and amateur riders. And definitely shouldn't have been done staring at the graph.

[@tquest1]

Mitchell Steindler its a test they build around a product they want to showcase. Buy this trainer to improve your pedaling lol

[@colinsmith8908]

I think Simon has controversially confirmed, the only thing to do with peanuts is, eat them.

[@asgard69]

why not use garmin vectors which can properly distinguish between left and right power ?

[@MacNeilR]

I too would like to see this. The conclusion I came to is that pedal analysis can only be reliably done with a power meter at the pedal, not in the rear wheel.

[@JakkiFN0rmus]

Oh simon, so desperately clinging on to "you get power pulling up" Tbf the results are pretty logical, irregular downstrokes being the result, with increase of power only on the downstroke, because that is the most (only) efficient way to pedal. Power on the pedals = accelerating momentum.

[@sisaktamas]

For sure lately my most favorite sessions on the trainer are those with variable cadence. Gradually or abruptly changing, I don’t care, just bring’em on!

[@jonahconner1111]

Looks like everyone wants to see oval rings tested, GCN.

[@dantepryor5276]

Why? we already know the answer. They are oval...how could they ever ever ever produce a round pedal stroke? Oval rings are designed to produce a power down easy up pedal stroke.

[@someguy9520]

totally agree. I personally switched to oval(not osymmetric) about half a year ago on my roadbike and 1 yr on my XC hardtail. whnever i switch to round rings it feels less pronounced and less smooth(at least a bit). My powermeter says that too that my pedal smoothness is slightly better with ovals(same cadence, wattage)

[@t42press15]

oval rings are the opposite of what they should be; they bump you on the top of your stroke instead of eliminating the dead part of the bottom of your stroke. FROOME rides this oval ring; obviously explaining his many losses :)!

[@someguy9520]

t42 Press lets say, they feel smoother. Locigally they arent of course as ya mentioned because of the bump in power in the downstroke. But in the 3 o'clock position is the hardest part. The so called dead spot is slightly easier at the 6 o'clock position. If you were talking about shimanos biopace chainrings, forget them. They are making things 100% worse. Whereas oval ones don't make it any worse and potentially easier. I personally believe in osymmetric chainrings. They seem to work for me pretty well

[@RixterNow]

I can't figure out how to interpret that 'pedal peanut'. How are you suppose to read that graph?

[@robbchastain3036]

Just call Planters and ask for Mr. Peanut.

[@4879daniel]

Explained here: support.wattbike.com/hc/en-us/articles/115001848609-A-Beginner-s-Guide-To-Perfect-Pedalling

[@RixterNow]

Robb Chastain I’ll get right on that

[@RixterNow]

Mr B thanks 👍

[@brianwillaman1776]

I love your channel! You guys come up with fantastic videos and great ways to put the questions to the test. Great job. Keep it up!

[@cracked229]

You forgot to ask one very important question and that is what muscle groups are they using to produce the power during the pedal stroke. I have a theory pros have a gastroc dominant pedal stroke while amateurs have a more quadriceps dominant pedal stroke.

[@MijoMontego]

It's good you did this test, and from your results it proves really nothing is important about the smoothness of your technique. Whatever gets you down the road works!

[@dantepryor5276]

As much as you can, continue to get pros involved in the content...it’s great. 👌

[@hunterallen6057]

As said below, this is only the Positive side of the stroke 0-180 degrees. There are negative and positive forces at work from 181-360 degrees as well. So this really is meaningless. I did a webinar on pedaling analytics on the TrainingPeaks>WKO4 channel. Explains it more completely.

[@Uitspuw]

You should look up Control Entropy. It theorizes that elite runners have a les even stride because of their ability to adapt to differences in stride because of their huge amount of experience/amount of miles. In less experienced runners they see a much more even stride because they have less adaptability. When a person hits the wall, lets say after running a marathon and their body shuts down, they saw that the stride, even in elite runners, becomes very uniform, because the body has to preserve all energy it can, and thus doesn't have the energy to provide a big amount of adaptation. So elite cyclists could have a less uniform pedalstroke, just because they don't actually need one. Should be interesting to do some EMG-testing after complete exhaustion.

[@kiverrussell8369]

The body knows. What's right for one isn't right for another but our bodies find an efficient way for us over time, don't overthink it...maybe...always worth a bit of experimentation to see if the unthinking instinct might've missed a trick.

[@bobfoster687]

Letting the riders see the screen could invalidate the results.

[@kuanhau4323]

Si Richardson's videos are my favourite!!!

[@dantepryor5276]

The entire theory behind oval rings suggest that smoothness does not matter when it comes to producing power. Rather, it’s more important to quickly move through the dead spot getting back to the downstroke. Also, diminishing returns suggest it would cost too much energy to pedal smoothly for the relatively low amounts of watts produced by the hamstrings through the bottom and over the top of the pedal stroke. No one is putting out 500 watts on the upstroke, but you can hurt your knees/hips/hamstrings if you try to. #PushdownRestup. Great video 👌

[@AP-vd8ve]

You should test some track cyclists and try oval chain rings as well.

[@Craigo5000]

Track cyclists somehow believe they are superior because they are fixed. I was berated by an experienced track racer while learning track coming from road. He challenged me to two sprint laps, both of us on 88 inch gear which forced us to max out cadence. I won both races against him back to back. He’s been quiet ever since and has now shifted his criticism on me to ‘track craft’. My point is that most seasoned cyclists will have a pedal stroke that’s right for them. Being trained is much more important than pedalling smooth and trying to force a pedalling style that you’ve not grown into. Teaching a child to pedal smoothly is perhaps a good idea but not 30-odd year old blokes who’ve rode and raced bikes most of their lives.

[@TalonMerlin777]

Not nearly pro anymore, but I can confirm that we do pull up. My most enjoyable days were when my upstroke was strong.

[@50yobeast]

wouldn't 2 x pedal power meter measure power up and power down and the bottom heel scrape force? with out all these metrics i do not see much point in this.

[@markogden477]

That beautiful Colnago C60 tho......

[@thomasvmanning]

What about one footed training where you remove one foot from the cleats, and trying to keep the freehub from clanking while spinning at a relatively high cadence? I've heard this cam be used to good effect not in my in increasing smoothness, but also increasing your ability to pull up on the pedals with more power.

[@veronicaivy3671]

It'd be much better if the data was pulled from a race where: 1. the athlete isn't thinking about the data being collected to compare, and 2. the athlete isn't *looking directly at* the graph of the data!

[@veronicaivy3671]

But still really cool...

[@batbawls]

I desperately want to see real science on GCN given the presumed income generated by the channel (or maybe I'm far off course). I really do appreciate the cycling content and the amount of work it takes to produce, so thank you.

[@toddmcdonough]

I change my stroke often during a ride to rest muscle groups. For instance I'll alternate between 3 distinct styles: stomping, scraping, and kicking or use combinations of the three. That said, fit and comfort on the bike is more important to me than performance.

[@liambarber9036]

Pushing through the dead spots may not add to efficiency, but it will allow you to use a higher cadence easier and more effectively. It will also allow you to put out more power on the up-stroke.

[@senseye1977]

And what about ankle angle during the pedal stroke. Should we go heals down, heals up or just try to have a constant angle? #torqueback

[@ChrisHayworth100]

senseye1977 I think it's different for everyone. I try to keep just off parallel and with the toes down. I use flat pedals though.

[@BentSpokes]

Thanks for more "science". I have seen your comparisons of cadence efficiencies in the saddle. I notice a more narrow range of cadence rates in prolonged (not sprint short duration) standing pedalling cadence, I'd like to see you compare standing cadence efficiencies for 2-3 min intervals; if you can do it! Does that sound like a challenge? I think so! Cheers

[@demacherius1]

Pleas make the tedt with a oval front gear. I would be interrested if it makes you less smooth and if it brings a power boost or not

[@raphaelbornert6955]

Some scientific studies have been made, at least on Osymetric, and i don't know about smoothness, but on power they can't say yes or no because it never reaches the point where it's considered statistically significant. So in short we still don't know. The problem with making a GCN test on oval rings is you have either to use people who are already using them, or doing the test for a long time because there is a time of adaptation, the pedale stroke is quite different, and some love it, some hate it.

[@PrzemyslawSliwinski]

#askgcn Would you plan checking the smoothness on oval rings?

[@alessandrob3684]

was about to ask the same thing! i'd be very curious to see those results!

[@gfsdgfabfsdafjsavbdfs1253]

Well, since smoothness is apparently a pretty irrelevant measure, it would be waaaay more interesting to measure efficiency* with round vs oval rings ;-)

[@ttrrs_o3498]

Rocking side to side? Its called peddeling in squares, plus raise your seatpost-greg lemond ref. Power can be smooth-except a, guess?- sprint! My thought.

[@ugastronomie1237]

Pls make a video/guide about tandem bikes :)

[@johnbouttell5827]

Elite cyclists naturally perform micro high-intensity intervals within each stroke and follow a Fibonacci pattern

[@rkan2]

John Bicycle umm what?

[@t42press15]

i want a Fibonacci ring sooooo bad.

[@hdwoernd]

Please plot the smoothness on the x- and choosen cadance on the y-axis in a 2d-scatter-plot. Would be very interesting too!

[@evanthomson661]

Now what about track riders? they don't have freewheels so there is no slop in the pedal stroke as long as they are moving at a constant speed, so would that be a better test? Also, what if the un-smooth pedal stroke actually helped carry momentum through the bike, almost like pumping your arms while running? Ive witnessed this in such athletes like a large track sprinter (Fosterman, Ceci, Boss, Staff, Northstine), what if the inertia of their leg, hips, and mid-line actually helped propel the bike forward thus not adding more "power" to the pedals but effectively adding more energy into the bike to accelerate it more quickly. Also would it matter if you were peddling smooth in a 125" gear (53,11) as long as you are adding force through the stroke you would be maintaining or accelerating?

[@EgonSpeng1er]

Could it be better to have a less uniform stroke, as the muscles aren't under such near constant load? If you put proportionally more power into the down stroke, the muscles get a recovery on the rest of the rotation. Perhaps that could reduce fatigue and stave off lactic acid build up?

[@matthewnorman2698]

I'm an engineer frame builder bike fitter, who has always been fascinated by the mechanics of cycling. I'm a firm believer in smooth pedaling from an energy conservation and injury prevention perspective. After running a watt-bike spin gym for a couple of years a number of observations became apparent these are by no means scientific. Pedaling smoothly can be learnt but has to be repeated enough with feedback so as to become a muscle memory effect to be useful. The fact that pro cyclists with big engines (ie capacity to carry large volumes of oxygenated blood to muscles for energy conversion) don't seem to need to pedal smoothly would point to the fact that muscles required for propulsion are not the limiting factor to speed. What we should be asking are athletes with the same size engine Vo2Max, Lactate Tolerance, etc. better off pedaling smoothly or not. Does pedaling smoother allow better energy conservation for the sprint at the end of the race? For myself as my pedalling became smoother my ability to time trial improved dramatically. It is my belief that pedalling smoothly is more efficient and is one way for the less genetically gifted among us to compete at a higher level, and may be clue to the GCN. Results!

[@benhedley983]

Be interesting to compare this to a track rider. Logically, Riding fixed would lead to greater smoothness as the wheels are helping turn the cranks over through the dead spot

[@archiewhite5787]

I wonder if the variety in pedal efficiency could be due to training with power. If you train with power you might change the way you pedal in order to show the same power numbers but with a decreased effort, for example finding the place in the pedal stroke where your power meter best picks up power and using micro-efforts in each pedal stroke to display and record these higher number, which over time could cause an increased inequality in muscle strength etc. , hence explaining why pros have an increased inefficiency pros as they regularly train to power. This might not necessarily be done consciously, but may be subconsciously as a way of ‘increasing power readings’ for the same perceived effort levels when mid effort and when looking at power numbers. Just a thought.

[@coguy450]

Very interesting, would love to see more science on this, would be cool to test some track riders, plus elliptical chainrings etc.

[@aerodynamicist4]

An interesting GCN Does Science may be testing the accuracy of heart rate monitors- chest strap and wrist watch.

[@JDRELGOR]

Interesting, however can you put censors on the muscle groups to find out which muscles are engaged? especially the hip flexor👍

[@ericoschmitt]

So working on varied cadence is benefical? Sounds like fixie on a hilly/windy ride. I just wonder if there's much difference when you spin 160rpm because you want (with a freewheel) or because you have to (the fixie crank is turning your legs and you eighter go with it or you get catapulted out of the bike). For me, up to some 140rpm there doesn't seem to be any difference fixie or geared.

[@PeakTorque]

And of course by this metric 'uniformity' the value goes down with higher power outputs because the deadspot power remains 0 lets say, but the peak power increases spreading the gap between Av and peak. This should not be a surprise but highlights why this isn't a reliable metric.

[@68BigSherm]

Wouldn’t using power meter pedals allow you to see if a rider is pulling up on the back half of the pedal circle?

[@Fcnicolasdiaz]

Please do this test with oval chainrings. Rotor, Osymetrics,etc.

[@ralph1269]

Fascinating stuff! Love this channel. I wonder what a track cyclist's stroke would look like.

[@gfsdgfabfsdafjsavbdfs1253]

Afaik mountain bikers have the smoothest pedaling technique, because they ride at very low speeds and low gears.

[@L.O.K.I]

I would include the smooth pedaling technique in the same class with Bermuda triangle, Big Foot and UFOs. In my opinion the best pedaling technique is the one that fits best your body geometry and body parameters. In my case I discovered that the left foot is more powerful and the right foot is more technical and this is why at higher cadence the right foot does 54-56% of the work while at low cadence the left foot takes over and does most of the work. And if I am to go even deeper in analysis I discovered that my right foot start pushing closer from 12 o'clock pedal arm position while my left foot pushes starting at a more forward point. This is why when higher power is required my right foot struggle while my left foot seem to be better. I would say my smoother leg is not good at outputting high power Another curious finding is the fact that I hold better cadences of 87 and 92 rpm but I have trouble holding 90 rpm. This might be resulting from the fact that only certain cadences are optimal for my body. Should I try and get better at holding the 90 rpm or instead I should be pro enough and use what works best for my body?

[@ShamiehAdam]

Nice edit, digging the music

[@robbchastain3036]

Thanks, Si, such a fascinating topic, how we apply power to the pedals. And I recall Eddie B advocating, in a seminar in '83, that racers should rest a leg after every so many pedal strokes and then do the same with other leg. Do pros do this sort of thing these days? And for me, a sport commuter on a mountain bike, my pedal strokes are all over the road and happily so. I run a triple and I have options and I use 'em--spinning and standing and mashing and coasting and smoking.

[@doxisch]

Hey guys, great video. You mentioned a few research papers; could you please provide the sources? Thanks a lot

[@michaelsingh843]

Watched this video then and now, I am as lost then as I am now, should I be more relaxed / loose with my legs, should I practice to pedal at higher cadence on a easy gear without bouncing.

[@rubengeminis8915]

check this with a oval chainring....

[@grainfrizz]

Ruben Geminis an***

[@juliuspre.4950]

Wasn't there a competition about the red Drivo in the background?

[@benmilner3650]

I'm still a believer that the best cadence is your natural cadence, will always be the most efficient for you, (you can work on it and change it with practice - but overall it's your natural cadence that is most efficient for your body)

[@shonebowman]

Any chance we could see the difference in smoothness between round chainrings and ellipses like the Osymetrics or Rotor Q-Rings?

[@nicdav100]

there was a training tool that was introduced maybe 20 years ago or so that allowed each arm to rotate independently, I forget what they were called now. But you could actually remain clipped in and do single leg drills at the same time. I think they were supposed to help smooth out your pedal stroke. I'm guessing they didn't catch on...

[@intrainingevents]

Called Powercranks... Cadel Evans used them throughout his career as well as a lot of other pro's. They are still around btw

[@theweejr]

May i know which program that you guy use in video to collect degree of pedal

[@earthstick]

I started with clipless pedals thinking you should pull up as well as push down. Next I hear that creates negative torque and you should just relax on the up stroke. Now the test contradicts that and the pros technique isn't smooth after all and they may even pull up. The only thing I can be sure of is that clipless pedals require special shoes.

[@melbman43]

Interesting, having been instructed from two ex pros was also instructed to pedal at 11'0clock and pushthe stroke until 6 'o'clock.

[@andrewgordon6179]

It would be interesting to see if there is a diffrences between endursnce track cyclist v road cyclist v sprint track and weather someone that uses fixed gears pedles smother then those who dont

[@andyheilmann1656]

Cadence is a tricky one. I come from a swimming background, and while swimming it really comes down to feel.

[@racovert1]

I agree with all those who said the test should have been blinded to the riders. Knowing the anticipated outcome creates the opportunity for bias and self adjusted performance. The theory that the upstroke improves power generation seems like a reasonable way to explain the variation in energy generated throughout the 360 deg rotation of the stroke as measured by the power meter. As riders we can feel that effort as our muscles contract. So to assess that you should add EMG monitoring of the hamstring muscles to the test to see the difference in how pro riders recruit their muscles vs the rest of us. On top of that, put all the riders on an isokinetic testing device to measure the torque they generate throughout their range of motion. The pros would likely put us all to shame.

[@jonatanayala807]

Were they riding Lasty's custom painted Trek Madone, as designed by Lasty himself? What a privilege!

[@rajatgosal2703]

Nice Work GCN

[@test868]

Would this have been different if you used a crankset based power meter like Rotor’s 2Inpower? Might Rotor’s analysis have told you what was going on in the up stroke?

[@lisalacey365]

seems to me the real time feedback would bias the participants efforts, potentially skewing the results.

[@rodrigoalejandrosuarez6540]

Just like you said on the "Top 5 Training myths" video, it is impossible to move in a perfect circle.

[@iancanuckistan2244]

So why didn't you try pedaling with just the left leg then just the right leg? It would give you the smoothness fairly accurately but as you said, does this really matter?

[@stuartclough915]

Psuedoscience. Pulling up must be matched by an equal and opposite force. Therefore more downforce on the other pedal. Therefore torque increased by 2 X upfoce X crank length. And consequent increase in power. I suspect that mountain bikers and cyclo-cross have smoother power distribution relative to roadies to avoid loss of traction at higher power. Similar may apply in extremely steep climbs, where higher power in the top of revolution reduces speed drop off and risk of stalling.

[@derekjob7339]

That isn't actually true. The other pedal is irrelevant as you can pedal using only one foot.

[@stuartclough915]

Derek Job , Fair point. But with dual pedal use, the vast majority of counter forces will come through the legs. The seat and bars are used primarily to counter the torque.

[@gregnichols9363]

Do the test without the bio feed back of the screen. Collect this data during a zwift race unbeknownst to the rider. In others words a blind test

[@parkysouthlondon]

I'd like to see the results using a fixed wheel bike on the turbo, as I know track riders are suppose to have greater souplesse

[@sandrodiclemente2305]

Hi I think you should have given out the Cadence of the people who did the tests and whether they were smooth or not what was there actual Cadence that they were running at were there they were smooth or not I would have been helpful

[@RegisACoelho]

What about the influence of non circular chainrings on the smoothness of the pedal stroke?

[@brianschiff2934]

Do the pro's keep there hips and upper body still to compensate for the uneven pedal stroke?

[@SwedishHouseFifa]

I agree with some people down in the comments, this test would've been more fun without the test persons knowing that they were being tested!

[@frenchbikewrench7451]

Be curious how top level track riders would fit into the spectrum, (other fixed gear riders like Redhook Crit racers)

[@404nobrakes]

I think that having the GCN staff ride at lower wattages than the pros was a mistake. I think what happened was that the pros AND staff produce exactly the same amount of power in the dead spots - very little. However, the pros produce way more power on the power stroke (power produced on the upstroke of the right leg can be interpreted as power produced on the downstroke of the left and vice versa, there is fundamentally no difference). Thus, to produce the average power of 450 while taking into account the "weight" of the (say) 20 watt dead spots, the pros would have to spike comparatively higher on the power strokes than the staff would to reach (say) 350 watts. I think changing the wattage target was a huuuge mistake on your part, Si. I'd be interested in seeing a round 2, where you keep the wattage targets more attainable.

[@chrissteffanoni8698]

Yep.

[@williamkeys5701]

Is it possible that the larger difference between max power and min power comes down to the pros just putting out more torque at the max point?

[@hebrews11vs5]

I think that is what this study has shown precisely: pros put down more power max at say 3 O clock, compared to the average power for the entire stroke. max:avg is greater for a pro than a non pro. or otherwise said pros are not smooth.

[@chrissteffanoni8698]

Absolutely. The higher the overall power output, the more pronounced the "dead spot" will appear on these kind of graphs.

[@a.garcia9815]

Don’t forget to test with hexagonal rings and chains lubed with snake oil. 😂

[@aloh3248]

How would oval chainrings affect this test? Get froomey in there for a test.

[@cameronmoultrie3580]

Seems to me that a reverse powermeter would give a complete picture. Something setup to measure pedal pull.

[@GNX157]

I think the pros are smoother, but you interpreted the data wrong. I think a compensation algorithm needs to be created to adjust for the higher wattage levels. Of course someone not pedaling hard against a high resistance will be smoother, and conversely when pedaling against a higher resistance the tendency for the resistance to interrupt the smoothness will be higher.

[@PeakTorque]

For a fair test you can't let the subject see the graph whilst pedaling! Cmon guys!! It has to be totally blind, they will naturally try to keep it uniform, this won't happen in real life.

[@alexeiz]

Why did you use fixed wattage points in this test rather than W/kg?

[@earthstick]

It was only one pro. What about someone like Ian Stannard? He makes it look so easy.