Out of the saddle

[MikeG]

If anyone wants the science, I don't think this study has been superseded.

 

[S-Express]

I bet it has, in almost 20 years. And by proper scientists too.

Would you like to speculate on which aspects may have been superceded? Newton's laws of motion are still intact, as far as I'm aware, and I'm pretty sure human physiology hasn't evolved that much in 20 years.

 

[MikeG]

Would you like to speculate on which aspects may have been superceded? Newton's laws of motion are still intact, as far as I'm aware, and I'm pretty sure human physiology hasn't evolved that much in 20 years.

Sorry, is this aimed at me? I said that it likely hadn't been superseded.

 

[S-Express]

Sorry, is this aimed at me? I said that it likely hadn't been superseded.

No - not aimed at you. Which is why I quoted @User13710 in my post above..

 

[MikeG]

No - not aimed at you. Which is why I quoted @User13710 in my post above..

Oh sorry, my mistake. Not everyone who posts on this forum is visible to me.

 

[nickyboy]

If anyone wants the science, I don't think this study has been superseded.

It's all good stuff and the physics is correct. But it doesn't address the issue of whether, in short anaerobic efforts, a cyclist can produce more watts standing up or sitting in the saddle

With the exception of a few outliers like Contador, it seems pretty well all top cyclists have settled on seated climbing for aerobic efforts. Equally, having been to a few short sharp National Hill climbs (like The Rake at Ramsbottom) all the top riders were climbing out of the saddle

 

[MikeG]

It's all good stuff and the physics is correct. But it doesn't address the issue of whether, in short anaerobic efforts, a cyclist can produce more watts standing up or sitting in the saddle.......

I'm not even sure that is entirely a valid question. Given that when standing one is bearing all of one's weight, at least some of any additional wattage which might be available to a cyclist standing up is going to be wasted on supporting his own weight as it goes up and down, and rocks from side to side. These are inefficiencies which the seated rider doesn't have.

 

[GuyBoden]

Marco Pantani was one of the greatest climbers out of the saddle. Watch him climb:

 

[MikeG]

Marco Pantani was one of the greatest climbers out of the saddle. Watch him climb:.......

If you had read the paper I linked to, you might have seen this:

Thus, at the elite level, one expects superior performance from smaller athletes in aerobic events where power requirements are approximately proportional to body mass--such as distance running and uphill cycling. (Technically, the power requirement scales more closely to mass, i.e. M0.76-M0.79 than does the power supply, M0.67; Swain, 1994). It is not surprising that the pre-eminent climber of the 1990s, Marco Pantani, is one of the smallest men in the peloton at only 55 kg. Anything that can be done to reduce the weight of a cyclist and bicycle, without compromising the cyclist's aerobic power, will improve hill-climbing performance.

 

[S-Express]

But it doesn't address the issue of whether, in short anaerobic efforts, a cyclist can produce more watts standing up or sitting in the saddle

It doesn't follow that one system produces more power than the other though. Power (ie 'producing watts') is basically agnostic to being seated or standing though. It's quite likely that a rider may be able to exert more force on the pedals in a standing position, but pedal force is not the same as power - it's just a component of it.

 

[nickyboy]

It doesn't follow that one system produces more power than the other though. Power (ie 'producing watts') is basically agnostic to being seated or standing though. It's quite likely that a rider may be able to exert more force on the pedals in a standing position, but pedal force is not the same as power - it's just a component of it.

Hmm...I wonder

Here is my theory; these anaerobic efforts are not limited by CV efficiency but rather by the body's ability to produce watts for a short period. This is linked to muscle groups used (so one cannot produce a lot of watts using just one's little finger for example). There is a greater range of muscle groups used when standing than when seated so there is the ability to produce more watts for a short period of time. I don't think power is agnostic to being seated or standing providing CV is not the limiting factor in power output

Anecdotally one always sees top hill climbers out of the saddle on short anaerobic efforts, using upper body muscles for example, so presumably they know what they're doing?

 

[Drago]

Does any of this matter? Can't people just do what feels most comfortable to them without someone else telling them they're wrong?

 

[HLaB]

I used to be out of the saddle a lot and to some degree still am but I've been recommended to stay seated more and hopefully am; standing up generates more short term power but is also more strainful and tires you out :-/

 

[S-Express]

Anecdotally one always sees top hill climbers out of the saddle on short anaerobic efforts, using upper body muscles for example, so presumably they know what they're doing?

The clip I posted earlier shows Contador climbing aerobically out of the saddle, while talking into the camera. It doesn't follow that 'out of the saddle = anaerobic'. Being either aerobic or anaerobic is dictated by your effort level, not your choice of riding position.

 

[MikeG]

Does any of this matter? Can't people just do what feels most comfortable to them without someone else telling them they're wrong?

Nobody is telling anyone they are wrong. We're discussing the science and efficiencies of the two different techniques. Is that a problem? Is it a problem if the science says something different from the way you do it?