Pedaling Technique Myth Busting - The Science (Part I)
Does a mechanically effective pedaling technique leads to better efficiency? I am breaking down some of the science for you this week! Plus, bike of the week #3
Hi 👋, happy Saturday! A big welcome to all the new faces who joined us since the previous article... I am excited to have you & hope you are taking the time to dive in and go through the growing archives.
Bike Of The Week #3
The schedule for appointment is starting to pick up pretty fast, which means spring is coming! It is my favorite season, and the latest ‘bike of the week’ reminds me of spring.
If you are new here, the bike of the week feature is to showcase some of the awesome bikes I have the privilege of working on. For the most part, the bikes people bring to my studio are their pride and joy, no matter how much they cost or how experienced they are as riders, etc. I believe in showcasing all types of bikes, not just the superbikes, because everyone should do bikes differently, in a way that they enjoy, riding a bike that fits their riding goals, personality, and budget. It can be a $25K bike, or a $500 bike, it does not matter!
The third bike of the week edition is a Liv EnviLiv! Click the button to see more of this gorgeous bike.
Pedaling Technique Myth Busting - The Science (Part I)
As a part of my post graduate studies in Sports nutrition (IOC post graduate diploma), we had the option to attend one international sport science conference per year. While it was not mandatory as part of the program, it was highly encouraged as it was an opportunity to meet our professors in person (they were spread across the world, working at various universities), have additional learning time with them, learn at the conference and meet our fellow students. It was a two year program - I graduated in 2009 and attended both the 2008 (Guangzhou, China) and the 2009 (Oslo, Norway) conferences. Oslo was the European College of Sport Science conference. It was awesome and we even got to visit the Norwegian institute of sport… (I have been to Oslo again since and I love that city, but that is besides the point).
On top of all the sports nutrition sessions I had to attend as part of my studies, I managed to find time to attend sessions that were related to non sports nutrition aspects of performance. If you have been to large conferences like this before, you know that often times you have several sessions going on at the same time, and of course they are usually at the other side of the conference center, so attending all the sessions you are interested in can be quite the challenge!
One of the sessions that left a lasting mark, was a part of a cycling biomechanic symposia. It was a presentation titled: ‘The pull up action in cycling: implications for performance and trainability’ (G. Mornieux, University of Freiburg, Germany). It dove a bit further into pedaling motion than the title suggests and I got the chance to chat with the presenter afterwards, which was interesting. In a nutshell, the goal of that study was to see if training the pull up action using feedback (showing the pedal forces profiles while riding) would modify the pedaling pattern and to which extent the pull up action would be beneficial for cycling performance, if at all. They tested using 2D force pedals and measured oxygen uptake and electromyography for relevant muscles using various conditions, twice a week for 6 weeks. Results showed that using feedback allowed riders to modify their pedal force during the upstroke (compared with a control group), increasing activity of the tibialis anterior, rectus femoris and biceps femoris. In addition to increased activity of those muscles during the upstroke, oxygen uptake increased also, meaning reduced efficiency. Basically, it showed that it is possible to change muscle recruitment during the upstroke with training, but questioned if it is actually beneficial to performance… I spent a bit of time chatting with the researcher afterwards and he mentioned that they took each rider bike fit into account and that they do not necessarily recommend teaching athletes to pull up during the pedal stroke. It made me dig a little bit deeper when I got home and pay more attention while working with athletes on an individual basis.
A few side notes: 1) I am not solely going from memory here - I have the above info from the book we got at the conference (I still have the usb card). 2) I asked it they will publish the full study and the answer was no. They mentioned that a lot of their studies never get published and only get shared in conferenced… I remember that because it kind of annoyed me. I love conferences, but it’s not always realistic to attend them. So, this is unpublished work, although the same group did publish somewhat similar work about the pull up action with different pedal types.
At some point after that conference in Oslo (I honestly can’t remember the exact date, maybe within 6-12 months), I had a booking with someone who was taught to pedal ‘the big circle’. His concern was that his pedal stroke was perfectly circular, just as he was taught using a CompuTrainer spin scan, but not only was he not going any faster, he was getting slower and more fatigued while riding. He was looking for answers and since I was also a CompuTrainer user, he wanted a second opinion. I still remember my jaw dropping to the floor when I placed his bike to my CompuTrainer and had him pedal at various watts. The circle was perfection. Completely round… I have never seen anything like that. No wonder he was frustrated. I recall it was actually quite challenging to convince him that his pedal stroke should look more like a peanut than a big, perfect circle, but the proof was in going faster (I would like to mention that the person who promoted ‘pedaling the big circle’ back then was a fantastic human, an important part of the local cycling community and I enjoyed our interactions when we run into each other from time to time. We were simply different in our approach to cycling, coaching and bike fitting).
Just because you can change something through training, does that mean you should change it? Is there a right and wrong way to pedal? Does anyone here remember those super annoying decoupled power cranks? What about oval chainrings? If you have been here for a while you already know my go to answer (it depends)!
I am splitting this topic into two parts: Part I (this article) covers some science and references, without much practical information. Part II (to be posted early next week) takes all the science and puts it into practice, mixing in my experience working with athletes. This is partially to keep the article length a bit under control but also because of the following two reasons:
It takes a lot of time to search for the best articles on a topic, find all the full text articles, then read and summarize them all (I do not reference articles where I only read the abstract) before writing practical recommendations that you can actually implement into your riding, training and racing.
I know some of you like the science bits, and some of you want to get straight to business (ie. the practical stuff). So, in an effort to cater to both the science nerds (I say that with love, I fall under this category) and the practical crowd, it’s easier to split an article like this into two parts.
As mentioned above, part I is science, and part II is putting the science into practice. If you don’t want the science, you can stop reading here and I will see you next week when I publish part II (although I suggest you at least skim the information below for some background). If you want the science, carry on!
Cycling is about efficiency. Coaches, scientist and of course cyclists all want to know if a mechanical effective pedaling technique leads to better efficiency, for obvious reasons. There are a lot of myths in the cycling world, and there is a lot of information that gets passed down from generation to generation. As an example, I started riding/racing road bikes in 1992 and I still hear people give out the same advice I was given 30+ years ago… Yikes. I know it’s mostly well meaning, but things change over the years and we should stay on top of current data and put it into practice best we can. Sadly, the relationships between technique and performance are not well understood. By technique, I am referring to how forces are applied on the pedals and how multiple muscles are coordinated with each other during the pedal stroke.
Pulling up on the pedals + Pedaling Science
The most common advice I hear is centered around pulling up during the pedal stroke. Hands up, how many times did someone give you this advice?! 🙋♀️
I am not going to go too far back on the science here, so lets start with the mid 2000’s. Published in 2007, Korff et al (1) conducted a study with a goal to determine the effect of different pedaling techniques on mechanical effectiveness and efficiency. It was a small study with 8 men pedaling at 90 rpms and 200W either riding as they feel, pedaling in circles, emphasizing the pull on the upstroke and emphasizing the push during the downstroke (6 mins each). Pull up emphasis increased mechanical effectiveness, but lowered efficiency compared with the other pedaling conditions.
Another study by a different group, published in 2012 (2), had similar goals but they used a longer duration of 45 minutes, lower cadence (75 rpms) and 75% of estimated MAP. Like the study shown in the Oslo session described above, they used visual feedback to emphasize the pull up phase during the first test and no feedback for regular pedaling during the second test. Their results showed lower efficiency in the first 15 minutes, but efficiency ended up the same between pull up pedaling and riders preferred technique between the 15 minute and 45 minute mark. They claim that perhaps there is benefit to emphasizing the pull up phase for the purpose of sparing certain muscle groups, but since the muscle groups that would be spared are typically bigger, more powerful muscle groups, I am not convinced. It should also be noted that there were several glaring holes in the methodology in this study, ie. no detail on the training/experience levels of the riders (the data we do have shows they were not highly trained), we do not know what the riders ‘preferred technique’ was (and I assume it varied between each participant), using a MTB on a mag trainer only adjusting the saddle height for each participant and 180 cranks for everyone.
In 2010 (4), another study showed more hamstring recruitment and earlier anterior tibialis recruitment when pulling up, but again on the expense of oxygen consumption and efficiency. The effects of technique training, attempting to improve pedaling effectiveness on efficiency are not clear at this point (9).
A study by Blake et al in 2012 (6) had the goal of identifying the balance of muscle timing and coordination, pedal force application, and total muscle activity that maximizes overall cycling efficiency. It showed that mechanical efficiency is dependent on the activation levels, timing and coordination of all the active leg muscles, not one muscle in particular and it was independent of the direction of the force. In other words, its about the system, not the sum of its parts. The interesting part here was that the highest mechanical efficiency did not happen at the highest power outputs, because it was achieved due to coordinated contraction of muscles and the need to use multiple muscles to produce large joint torques. There was a significant relationship between mechanical efficiency and the variability in coordinating the muscles across the top and the bottom of the pedal stroke.
In 2015, a study comparing professional level cyclists to elite and club level cyclists showed that the professional level cyclists showed less negative torque during the upstroke phase for the same watts, which is likely related to adaptation to training and better fitness / higher ability level. Hip flexor muscle strength and the timing of muscle activity is likely better in higher level cyclists, allowing them to lift the leg mass against gravity do there is better transition around the top dead center (remember that cranks are coupled) (11).
Fast forward to 2023 (5) and we are finally getting more data looking at quad muscle activation patterns, specifically the rectus femoris and vastus lateralis, using both highly trained and very highly trained cyclists (including world tour level). This study ties in a bit better with a few practical points I will be covering in part II, so TBC.
Toes down? Heels down?
Pedaling with toes up (heels down) vs toes down (dorsiflexed and plantarflexed) is also a part of the picture when it comes to pedaling mechanics. Some people claim that this is a preference thing and while to a certain extend it might be, there is more to the story here and I have seen extremes that are a result of specific bike fit issues (note to self: do not to get side tracked here, this is a topic for another time) and/or issues related to ankle mobility, etc. A 2007 study (3) looked into efficiency in self selected pedaling vs dorsiflexed and plantarflexed positions, but there is no data provided for the actual ankle angles used for each, and we don’t know what self selected pedal stroke actually means with regard to pedal motion. The data suggested that more heels down during the pedal stroke (dorsiflexed position) increases calf muscle activity (gastrocnemius lateralis to be specific) and decreased efficiency when compared to self-selected pedal stroke.
What about uphill riding?
A 2013 study (8) looked into the effect of gradient on cycling efficiency and pedaling technique. 18 cyclists were tested for efficiency, pedal force effectiveness, distribution of power production during the pedal stroke and both the timing and level of muscle activity of eight leg muscles. The participants cycled on a treadmill at gradients of 0%, 4%, and 8%, each at three different cadences (60, 75, and 90rpms). They observed that efficiency decreased at a gradient of 8% compared with 0% and 4%. As expected, pedaling technique is changed as uphill cycling increased overall muscle activity level, mainly because of the increased calf muscle activity and the more even distribution of torque during the pedal stroke.
Other considerations, limitations + We don’t actually have enough science
There are more studies that were done using lesser trained individuals as opposed to intermediate to high level athletes, making it a bit more challenging to draw conclusions. Sadly, we do not have enough science in this area. I think it is also important to mention that every single article I found on this topic was done on men… We are used to seeing this in the sport science community, sadly, which is a whole other topic. I am currently going through some data points from various bike fit sessions to see if I can spot some gender difference trends as I prepare for part II, so I will get into it a bit more next time.
It has been suggested that the upper body does not necessarily produce power, but does facilitate producing higher power outputs by providing stability for the legs. Scientifically speaking, it is not clear if improving the coordination of upper and lower body might improve performance or not. Also, changing various aspects of the bike fit leads to changes in how the muscles work at different parts of their force-length relationships, affecting pedaling and mechanical performance (10). I asked the researcher I chatted with in Oslo if they took bike fit into consideration in the research, and he said yes. Not all studies mention bike positioning.
This type of research, attempting to establish if a cyclist’s pedaling technique is optimal or not, is tough. This is because there are so many things that need to be taken into account… From muscle strength, to training levels, to fatigue, discomfort, rider coordination, injury history, the nature of the effort (endurance, uphill, sprinting…) and more.
In part II, I will get into what to actually do with all this information and some of my observations from a few decades if coaching, bike fitting and working with athletes.
References
(Only available for paid subscribers)
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Endurance Collective to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.