I am too, but forums like this one are heavily populated with MAMILs who believe that they can and must overthink things to succeed.
For example, just the other day someone asked what they should be thinking about when sprinting at really high power, as if the answer isn’t obvious, trying to rip the effing cranks off the bike.
My post was directed at such individuals, under the assumption that they had heard the classic coaching advice I chose as the title. I hoped that knowing that science has confirmed what anybody who has ridden since they were young(er) already intuitively understands would be helpful. Apparently it was a wasted effort, however.
But not according to the research that you linked, which specifically stated “reduced knee (p = 0.02-0.03) contribution to leg work were observed at the optimal+10° position without changes at the ankle joint (p = 0.39).” And, of course, the other linked research paper dealt with low load recumbent cycling with a FIXED ankle.
I’m totally down to read something about knee/hip force relative to ankle dorsiflexion specific to cycling, though. If you got something please do share. I’m searching but not finding. It’s something that’s complex enough we shouldn’t just assume it’s true by identity. For sure we shouldn’t pile it on Coyle’s crew…they did some good research. Let’s not heap them with unfounded assertions that are not theirs & are unrelated to that research.
Well, that is a case where form actually makes a big impact on the output. Go watch the video TR did about sprinting and see Nate’s initial form. He was all over the bike and his body was not connected. A TON of wasted energy.
Sorry, but heel down isn’t best for everyone. Others equate heel down with higher perceived exertion and also power being put into the pedals that doesn’t transfer to the drive train. So, that said, it may work for you and many others, but your generalization to everyone is not accurate.
You’re missing the point. Raising your torso or fixing your ankle joints are additional ways of opening up your thigh-torso angle, and hence favoring the hip and disfavoring the knee.
Assertion: Dropping your heel during the pedal stroke engages the glutes
Observation: The Coyle research does not make such an observations.
Follow up: Here are two research papers that don’t support the assertion either.
The main point is the assertion that lowering the heel during the pedal stroke activates the glutes is a construct of the original poster & is unsupported by any evidence in this thread. In fact, the evidence in this thread would serve to refute that assertion. That’s all. No big deal. Many coaching rules of thumb turn out to be false. It happens. If you wanna drop your heel during your pedal stroke go for it. If you wanna raise your heel during your pedal stroke, go for it.
Just don’t attribute that choice to any research linked in this thread. That would be a false attribution.
Your statements are factually incorrect. The two papers I cited demonstrate that opening the thigh-torso angle shifts the emphasis towards the hips. All else being equal, dropping your heel opens your thigh-torso angle.
The logical conclusion is clear, and is consistent with both long-standing coaching advice and what anyone adequately in tune with their body can feel for themselves.
Given that you thought your fit was pretty dialled in, what changes did the guy make to your fit ? Were they just minor or were there any dramatic changes?
Cheers
“The two papers I cited demonstrate that opening the thigh-torso angle shifts the emphasis towards the hips.”
You asserted lower heels during the pedal stroke engages the glutes. So the two papers you site actually refute that claim. One paper held the ankle static & the other paper explicitly stated there was no difference with ankle angle. So there you go.
If you mean to imply you should change the title of this thread to ‘Increase hip angle to engage that joint more’ …well…your hand is on the keyboard.
But that still is an assertion that is separate from the Coyle research linked in the original post. They make no assertions regarding which sort of pedal stroke engages the glutes or hips more or less. So stop trying to place your own albatross round their neck.
The assertion is not mine. It’s yours. So the burden is on you, my friend.
And the two papers you cite only serve to refute your claim. The first paper says, ‘Larger hip (p = 0.01-0.02) and reduced knee (p = 0.02-0.03) contribution to leg work were observed at the optimal+10° position without changes at the ankle joint’
So you say ‘Drop your heel to engage your butt’ and they say, ‘Increase your hip angle to increase work done at that joint’ Two different things. Yours is an unsupported assertion and theirs is backed by data.
In the second paper (recumbent cycling at loads <100W) you say, ‘Drop your heel to engage your butt’ and they say 'For the first time, this study provides GMM and power patterns for able-bodied subjects performing recumbent cycling with an immobilized ankle. ’ So not only do they make no attempt to assess the impact of ankle angle they actually took steps to make sure there was no difference in ankle angle.
Both those papers only serve to refute your assertion. But, again, if you have any evidence to support your assertion I’m an eager consumer. Just link it. I’ll give it a read. By this time, it’s starting to look like you really don’t have any evidence to support your claim but I am ever the optimist! Hopefully you’ll be able to come up with something.
In the meantime, please don’t try to link your baseless assertions with the good research of Coyle and crew. That paper can stand on it’s own. Their work has nothing to do with your assertion.
What’s the p value on that stick figure? I’m just gonna put out the call to the forum:
Does anybody have any evidence that lowering your heel during the pedal stroke engages the glutes? So far we got nothing…so if anybody has something, do speak up.
no evidence to share just anecdotally my glutes feel activated when doing low cadence, high torque work either on the flats or climbs. Usually that is tempo work but also big gear spin ups and rolling sprints.
@old_but_not_deat_yet I hesitate to mention this…but just for the sake of conversation…you might remember way back in the day there was some controversy over what muscles were primarily recruited during a squat depending on whether the heels or toes were on a 2x4.
Colloquial coaching wisdom held that if you squatted with your heels on a board then your quads and vastus medialis would be relatively more activated than the glutes/hams. Ok…I could accept that because the relative length of lower/upper legs was changed. But colloquial coaching wisdom also held that if you squatted with you toes UP ON a 2x4 your glutes/hams would be relatively MORE activated than flat-footed squatting. That just sounded goofy to me.
Eventually, somebody took the data. I think it was Dr Todd. Just did the obvious thing and hooked up the emg to some dude & had them squat. We were all surprised…there was almost no noticeable difference regardless of ankle flexion during the squat. If you looked at film of the squat motions, they were definitely different. But if you looked at muscle activity during the movement there was no difference.
Which is why when I read somebody saying heel up or heel down pedal stroke makes a difference in glute activation…I’m skeptical. Even if 1000 phds say it’s true, I’m still gonna ask to see the data. It might be true but even super, super smart people aren’t going to know if it is or not just by inspection.
EMG is shite for assessing such things. All it can really tell you is when a muscle turns or off; it is very poor at detecting quantitative differences in muscle activation. That’s why Coyle’s lab only now got around to testing his 30 year old hypothesis (using inverse dynamics, not EMG).
It’s way better than your eyeball. You unfounded assertion is still hanging, my friend. I even sent it out to the forum…no answers. I think there is some shite in this thread, all right!
I’m just gonna put out the call to the forum:
no evidence to share just anecdotally my glutes feel activated when doing low cadence, high torque work either on the flats or climbs. Usually that is tempo work but also big gear spin ups and rolling sprints.