mousepad double clicked the post button...

The guy that did a bike fit for me in 2008 said people should think of pedaling in triangles. It's funny to think about now, because I heard "pedaling boxes" used to describe poor form. A box has 4 sides, right (think two dimensional, not three)? From that logic, triangles would be even worse, but not as bad as pedaling with only 2 directions, or just pushing down, which is one direction.

However, I still think of it as triangles. Even worse, he said to not worry about lifting up until you perfected pushing down until at the 3 o'clock position and then pulling back. I'm still at that point.

The other thing he said that stuck with me is to not push with my toes. Think of your ankles as ball bearings. At the time, I questioned him about it, but his answer made sense. It forces you to use more of your big muscles, and less of your smaller muscles. Over the course of a long race, your larger muscles get more work done per energy spent.

In the big picture, if I had to choose between being able to get more volume in, or having better form, I'd take the volume. Better form doesn't hurt anything, but I doubt it helps much on the bike.

[quote=TryScott] Better form doesn't hurt anything, but I doubt it helps much on the bike.[/quote]

I'll disagree with that. Bad for will hurt your efficiency, power, and set you up for injury.

That being said not every pedal stroke is or should be the same. what are you trying to do? cover 100 miles at a constant pace, get across town or break off of the front of the pack? you are obviously strongest with the "down" portion of the stroke so if you are going for absolute wattage then stand up and mash down on 'em.

Now going the distance is about efficacy. Just like the thread some time back about wheel size, tire pressures and rolling resistance, think about the extremes and it becomes a little clearer. When riding to cover distance you want to be as smooth and circular as you can do so efficiently (a little vague but so is life). people say pedaling boxes, triangles, dodecahedrons, whatever... What your are after is powering the pedal the entire way around so that you don't have a "coast" phase in each pedal stroke. we generate less power on the "top/bottom" of the pedal stroke so people try to focus on those phases to not have the power to the wheels drop of and have micro negative accelerations (yes, not deceleration as that doesn't exist) which will later have to be made up on the "sides" of the stroke to maintain a constant speed. Preventing this slowing is the key to efficiency in every endurance based activity.

In other words, pedaling all the way around the bottom bracket is the ticket for efficiency until you read the point where you are putting so much effort into the weaker part of the stroke that just burns up more energy than it saves you in not having to accelerate on the down stroke. if you are looking for power... just mash'em and forget about the perfect pedal stroke as it is going to be such a small fraction of your power output that it is lost in all but the longest of rides. Well, that's my $0.02.

[quote=jnrice][quote=TryScott] Better form doesn't hurt anything, but I doubt it helps much on the bike.[/quote]

I'll disagree with that. Bad for will hurt your efficiency, power, and set you up for injury.

[/quote]

I agree with jnrice. Bad bike form (including bad fit) can lead to issues with joints, their longevity, comfort, and overall pedaling efficiency.

I also agree with the statement that you get "most" of your power from a good down stroke.

However, being Triathlon related. Pedaling for Tri results is a lot different than sitting in on a peleton.
For pure cycling getting the most watt per rev is paramount for winning.
This is because there is nothing to come after the bike ride. You're done.....

With triathlon the idea is efficiency over time. So, unless you're gunning for a podium (or PR) in a sprint, standing up to mash is likely going to be counterproductive. The only long course tri benefit gained would be an impressive bonk/muscle fatigue later on.

I've found that each ride can be safely broken down into pedal stroke styles to help spread around the workload. Using a mixture of styles can help evenly spread fatigue around the muscle groups or to isolate certain muscles to help retain strength for later use. (ie saving some hamstring for the run, ect)

Mashing: I tend to use mostly quad and a tad of glute when mashing seated followed by recruitment of calf as intensity increases.

Scraping: This I've found really helps recruit the hamstrings and calves into the mix. When the quads are barking, I'll switch to a more scrape oriented stroke to let them rest a bit.

Pulling: The upstroke is almost purely hip flexor (which are pretty important for a good run cadence) with a little bit of hamstring. I find that I tend to switch to this style (and move to a higher cadence) to warm up the hips and hammys a few miles out from T2

Overall: Each trient listed above has it's own benefits/detriments regarding purpose, muscle recruitment, and efficiency.

Conclusion: So at the end of the day, I say let your results speak. Get data, observe trends, experiment, and find what works for you and your intended purpose. There is no such thing as a triathlete that's never had a bad race or race/fueling plan backfire.

Another related topic would be amount of "heel drop" and how it affects muscle recruitment.

EDIT: Also, for you math gurus out there....is there a word like quadrant that means divided by 3? Trient was as close as I could figure...