Best stem for comfort

[bozmandb9]

Or alternatively, you could leave aside all your silly 'appeals to authority' and just answer all the points like I asked you. I've explained rationally and logically why I think core strength is not as important for cycling as you seem to think it is. You, on the other hand, claim it is something which must be addressed, while 1 offering no physiological explanation which stands up to even the most moderate scrutiny. A true armchair expert is one who can't 2 support his assertions. I did, now it's your turn.

1. I guess the British cycling link counted for nothing

2. Where?

Anyway, take it or leave it, I have better things to do. I'm out. Enjoy your armchair, pad your handlebars well, and carry on 'warrior'ing, I'm sure it's a valiant cause criticising well meant advice from a qualified individual, you should be very proud of your valiant efforts.

 

[S-Express]

1. I guess the British cycling link counted for nothing

Correct - it counted for absolultely nothing. Although if you were able to explain how an opinion article on 'hand and wrist pain' translates into a case for 'essential core strengthening', (when the article itself doesn't even mention it), then I'm all ears.

2. Where?

I have explained to you why I think your reliance on 'core strength' is a fallacy, using factual observations about core muscles and how they respond to stimulus. If you want to disagree with that, then again, I'm all ears.

If you want to see a round-up of studies on the effectiveness of core strength in athletic performance, then have a scan through these, although be warned, they might challenge your seemingly-entrenched views on the topic:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19026017
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22784233

So, you've given me your opinion and a link to an article on the BC website which doesn't even address the issue we are talking about. In return, I have given you my opinion and a couple of links to peer-reviewed scientific studies which do rather seem to back up what I am saying, just a bit. Well, quite a lot, actually.

I'm sure it's a valiant cause criticising well meant advice from a qualified individual

Is that another appeal to authority?

you should be very proud of your valiant efforts.

This is a discussion forum. I took issue with something you said and you responded by patronising me. So in return, I have responded by proving you wrong. So the ball is now in your court. That's how these things work. If you don't want to discuss this stuff, then don't make statements which you can't validate.

 

[Ajax Bay]

I have explained to you why I think your reliance on 'core strength' is a fallacy, using factual observations about core muscles and how they respond to stimulus. If you want to disagree with that, then again, I'm all ears

"Time on the turbo and out on the road will build your fitness and power, but if you want to see real improvement in your bike times, you need to look at working on the muscle groups used while cycling – off the bike. Cycling is about more than just legs. Working on your core, hips, shoulders and upper body strength with cycling in mind will lead to better stability on the bike and greater efficiency through your pedal stroke."
https://www.britishtriathlon.org/ne...oning-exercises-to-boost-your-bike-times_6764

 

[S-Express]

"Time on the turbo and out on the road will build your fitness and power, but if you want to see real improvement in your bike times, you need to look at working on the muscle groups used while cycling – off the bike. Cycling is about more than just legs. Working on your core, hips, shoulders and upper body strength with cycling in mind will lead to better stability on the bike and greater efficiency through your pedal stroke."
https://www.britishtriathlon.org/ne...oning-exercises-to-boost-your-bike-times_6764

In what way does linking to another belief-based opinion article move the debate on? If you want to dispute the science, then come up with actual studies that refute it.

 

[Ajax Bay]

I guess the British cycling link counted for nothing

Here's a BC link:
"Apples have cores, cyclists don’t
"Within British Cycling, the expression, core stability is no longer used and instead functional trunk strength and robustness are the watchwords. Functional trunk strength and co-ordination is what is needed to be able to pedal strongly, perform on the bike tasks such as putting on a rain cape and, in the case of track sprinters, lift heavy weights in the gym. Robustness is the capacity to absorb training and avoid injury both on and off the bike."
and this one:
"by being more robust and resilient, you will be less likely to injure yourself"

 

[S-Express]

Not really sure what point you are trying to make by re-posting stuff like this. LIke I already said, belief-based appeals to authority do not validate anything.