So let’s catch up. Most links to CN unless stated.

Stage 1. The TTT. CSC win, Sastre takes the jersey.
Stage 2. First road stage and McEwen launches too early. Bettini takes it, Hushovd leads overall.
Stage 3. Ventoso suprises in the sprint. No change to the lead.
Stage 4. More amazement as Zabel takes his first big win in 3 years.
Stage 5. We hit the mountains and Di Luca takes it and leads on GC! Pez report here.
Stage 6. A win for Hushovd.

McEwen, tired after a long season, is outside the timelimit.

So let’s catch up. Most links to CN unless stated.

Stage 1. The TTT. CSC win, Sastre takes the jersey.
Stage 2. First road stage and McEwen launches too early. Bettini takes it, Hushovd leads overall.
Stage 3. Ventoso suprises in the sprint. No change to the lead.
Stage 4. More amazement as Zabel takes his first big win in 3 years.
Stage 5. We hit the mountains and Di Luca takes it and leads on GC! Pez report here.
Stage 6. A win for Hushovd.

McEwen, tired after a long season, is outside the timelimit.

Watched Aussie PM John Howard on the TV last night looking for the irrefutable proof that carbon taxes are the way to go and naysaying the science behind the urgency of it all. As I’ve said before I’ve got no problem with asking sensible questions before acting, but at what point does it simply become stalling? I have a sense of foreboding here!

Both China and India are booming along at the moment – and good on ‘em – but this adds to our problem. The Aussie hypocrisy is to sell resources and take no responsibility for what’s done with ‘em, as unsettling the miners will unsettle the economy. Well oceans rising 80m because of melting ice caps will also unsettle the economy! I’m living high on a hill but I can see my suburb becoming an island in the next 10-15 years as the only road in is flooded. It floods now when it rains hard (which happens less now, admittedly) and we have a king tide simultaneously). As each year passes the water laps a bit higher. That will cost a bit to stop. If we don’t turn the heat up on the global output of carbon we’ll be rebuilding seawalls, and levees, moving people out of flooded homes, building new bridges to get to flooded suburbs. And using gondolas a lot more. All that building will be a cost to the economy as well as a spur to investment in those industries that will support the building and removal work. Harder to renew will be people’s lives and morale. So why not start adding this cleanup cost as a tax now? If it was simply removed from the economy then I agree – not a great idea. But the proposal is to invest in carbon-soaking or avoiding activities, like planting trees, refitting homes with more efficient lighting, plumbing, water storage tanks, solar panels and so on. So wouldn’t the economic hit be assuaged by the extra spending?

And once done – once we have retrofitted our economy to run more efficiently with less waste – we can slow down the carbon release that’s plaguing us. What is so hard here?

Don’t forget I have an Aircraft Gallery right here! Most of these images date back to the 70s and 80s and there’s an airliner bias.

One more week goes by and a weekend arrives. What is its mission? Why is it here? Just to break the month up into segments? (I’m having one of those moments.)
Technorati Profile

Bike racing is so confusing. BMX? MTB? Road? TT? Track? And what about the bike itself? Do I have to buy a bike for each discipline?

Well everyone is different, and yes there is more than one style of bike – let alone rider. We can exclude what I don’t know – ie BMX and Mountain Bikes – and concentrate on road, crit and track bikes for now.

Firstly, don’t worry too much about buying lots of bikes, or even the best bike. Try to grow with the sport, try a few things and get a feel for it before committing too much dosh. Road is the easiest way in and your average road bike will suit many criterium circuits too. So a good quality road bike is your best bet. Remember this rule of thumb: you will get 90% of the lightest, coolest and fastest bike gear for 50% of the price. My point? To get that last 10% will cost you heaps. It’s what an economist will call the law of diminishing returns. To an elite althlete it matters, but they will have sponsors, too. But if you really just want ‘the ultimate’ then sure, go for it. But remember that a $2500 bike will do almost everything just as well as that smick and snazzy $5,000 job. It’s your cash, you decide.

As you work your way up the grades you will also realise that a few key bike modifications will may your racing faster, more enjoyable and maybe even safer. Start with the lightest frame you can afford. Then swap components as you grow with your sport. In this way your $2,500 bike can be upgraded easily to match – perhaps even better – that more expensive purchase.

You can swap out just about anything – drivetrain, saddle, bars – and as everything wears out in time anyway, why not upgrade? But your biggest ‘bang for the buck’ will come from a wheel upgrade. It’s the first change I’d recommend. Lighter wheels will often roll better, will have better hubs as well and will accelerate more easily – especially uphill. Beware of deep rims, though, as these often will be uncomfortable in crosswinds an on bumpy surfaces. Of course if you find yourself enjoying time trials – TTs – then the deeper aero rim will help you, so it’s a worthwhile investment.

These tips pretty much work for road or track by the way. In either discipline spare wheels are always handy. Train on the old heavy wheels, race on the lighter, smicker ones.

OK, so that’s it for now. Always keep things in perspective. It’s nice to have a ‘Sunday’ bike, but a ‘training’ bike will come in handy, too. When you take your first – sadly inevitable – spill on that ‘Sunday’ bike you may suddenly wonder why you invested so much money on nice paintwork or fancy components. Perhaps a good, serviceable but still fast bike isn’t such a bad choice after all. They all need to be pedalled in any case!

More soon, but if you want to read on now I have also written much more on this subject in my guide to bike racing.

Way out but worth it

Because I can, I will share here some weirder choices from my personal bookshelf. You may not agree with ‘weird’, indeed weird is the wrong word. Nevertheless I use it advisedly in the sense that I will cover subjects beyond literal truth. And I use truth advisedly as mathematics is the only provable truth. Everything else is either awaiting a mathematical proof or is a belief, a theory or an assumption.

Just to explain my thinking: you may believe in what you can see, hear and/or touch, and that’s cool; but it’s not necessarily a literal truth. Even if a thousand people see, hear and/or touch that thing it doesn’t make it true. It may be real enough to the people concerned but it’s not an incontrovertible truth. It may be an illusion. It may be a shared thought. It may be a shared assumption. It’s something, but it’s not a literal truth. To be a literal truth requires proof. To my mind we can only be certain of mathematical proofs, as I haven’t seen any other proof that convincingly lives outside the mind or perception of man.

And I could be wrong about maths. Perhaps there is no independent proof? Ahhh, but that’s an undiscovered country from whose bourne no traveller returns….

So to the first installment of my ‘way out but worth it’ booklist, in no particular order:

• Bill Shakespeare’s works in full. An essential lesson in the use of the English language, up there with Fowler’s.
• The Elegant Universe (by Brian Greene. Post-Einstein string theory to get you thinking.)
• Anything by Richard Dawkins or Stephen Jay Gould. As I said, there are mathematical proofs and there are theories. Some theories are more compelling than others.
• The Torah (the Pentateuch, the Book of Moses: a lively read, basis for Judaism and the Old Testment and a fascinating read on any level)
• The Bible (Greek for ‘Books’; The Old and New Testaments: basis for the Christian cults and a brilliant read)
• The Koran (Arabic for ‘Recital’: another excellent piece of writing and the basis for Islam. I have the Dawood translation)
• The History of Magic (by Eliphas Levi: a great, compelling read. Spot the a ha! ‘Harry Potter’ moments and see the footprints of Rowling’s research)
• The Theory of Celestial influence (by Rodney Collin: immensely detailed, it wallows around trying to ‘prove’ a case scientifically but falls magnificently short. Can be heavy, clumsy and painful to read… but still worth it for the determined!).

That’s just for starters. Let me know what you think.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, August 23rd, 2006 at 9:51 am and is filed under No idea where this one goes, Writing, Religion and Essential Truths. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Way out but worth it

Because I can, I will share here some weirder choices from my personal bookshelf. You may not agree with ‘weird’, indeed weird is the wrong word. Nevertheless I use it advisedly in the sense that I will cover subjects beyond literal truth. And I use truth advisedly as mathematics is the only provable truth. Everything else is either awaiting a mathematical proof or is a belief, a theory or an assumption.

Just to explain my thinking: you may believe in what you can see, hear and/or touch, and that’s cool; but it’s not necessarily a literal truth. Even if a thousand people see, hear and/or touch that thing it doesn’t make it true. It may be real enough to the people concerned but it’s not an incontrovertible truth. It may be an illusion. It may be a shared thought. It may be a shared assumption. It’s something, but it’s not a literal truth. To be a literal truth requires proof. To my mind we can only be certain of mathematical proofs, as I haven’t seen any other proof that convincingly lives outside the mind or perception of man.

And I could be wrong about maths. Perhaps there is no independent proof? Ahhh, but that’s an undiscovered country from whose bourne no traveller returns….

So to the first installment of my ‘way out but worth it’ booklist, in no particular order:

• Bill Shakespeare’s works in full. An essential lesson in the use of the English language, up there with Fowler’s.
• The Elegant Universe (by Brian Greene. Post-Einstein string theory to get you thinking.)
• Anything by Richard Dawkins or Stephen Jay Gould. As I said, there are mathematical proofs and there are theories. Some theories are more compelling than others.
• The Torah (the Pentateuch, the Book of Moses: a lively read, basis for Judaism and the Old Testment and a fascinating read on any level)
• The Bible (Greek for ‘Books’; The Old and New Testaments: basis for the Christian cults and a brilliant read)
• The Koran (Arabic for ‘Recital’: another excellent piece of writing and the basis for Islam. I have the Dawood translation)
• The History of Magic (by Eliphas Levi: a great, compelling read. Spot the a ha! ‘Harry Potter’ moments and see the footprints of Rowling’s research)
• The Theory of Celestial influence (by Rodney Collin: immensely detailed, it wallows around trying to ‘prove’ a case scientifically but falls magnificently short. Can be heavy, clumsy and painful to read… but still worth it for the determined!).

That’s just for starters. Let me know what you think.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, August 23rd, 2006 at 9:51 am and is filed under No idea where this one goes, Writing, Religion and Essential Truths. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

InfoWorld reports that China now has the world’s largest aggregation of mobile (cellular) phones, at 432 million. There’s no surprise that the world’s largest nation by population would have the most cellphones. I also have no problem with China, India or any other nation equipping its people with what are pretty handy devices. What I do want to point out is this: as each of these populous nations grow in wealth and begin to emulate the ‘western’ nations, it means similarly huge numbers of every conceivable product. From houses, airconditioners to cars. From MP3 players to cell phones. Everything. Now this is great news for the product makers, as they will sell a lot of product. It will also drive down prices and make these products even cheaper, everywhere.

Just imagine. China has a population of roughly 1.3 billion. Of which only 432m have cellphones, so far. I don’t know about mobile uptake in India but imagine something similar, in a population also over 1 billion. That’s a lot of plastic yet to be sold, a lot of electronic circuit boards yet to be made, a lot more cardboard boxes and packing. A lot of shipping. A lot of energy. And phones get replaced every 2 or 3 years… so it’s also good news for energy producers, the oil industry and the mining industry in general.

Now when you add all of this production into the total world mix, what happens to energy consumption overall? What happens to the resources that are removed from the earth, never to be replaced? What happens to prices for these commodities over the next 10 years?

And what about climate change? This isn’t just about sharing wealth… it’s about rethinking our global approach to consumption. Even recycling is bad…it’s better than burying it as junk, but it takes energy to recycle. Even better is durability. Making products last. Unfortunately this is not how the capitalist world works – not yet anyway. Currently we make money out of making new stuff, facelifting it, turning it over quickly.
So, just how long can we keep working like this? 

Jon Udell points out in his InfoWorld blog that del.icio.us can be used as a personal database of sorts. Indeed such unintended uses are the way of the future, if not the present. The proliferation of ideas continues with new tools erupting almost daily and to be honest I just can’t keep up. Some get under my radar, some don’t. I grab them as they pass, try them out, lose them. I have mentioned a few mash-ups here and they are examples. AJAX is another. Web 2.0 is another way of saying that what we had was a great start but we can do so much more, so much better. What we have is a cycle of innovation that is only beginning to get going. Not every idea will prosper, and some ideas will find unexpected synergies or new uses. It’s exciting, probably the most exciting development that I’ve seen in my 20 years or so immersed in personal computing technology. Get on the bus, folks, before it becomes a rocket.

Jon’s hybrid human-bacteria multicellular blog post is also worth a read. Strangely enough I read the 90% stat recently in the Sydney Morning Herald (that just 10% of our mass is actually ours, the remainder being bacteria). The trouble with finding the original source, of course, is finding the time to research it. Espacially when not all libraries are as yet online.

Some pics courtesy Brett Lyons, who was in France during this year’s Tour…

Some pics courtesy Brett Lyons, who was in France during this year’s Tour…

Some images of the 2006 Tour de France… not just of the racing but the colour and action of the event… images copyright Brett Lyons.

Some images of the 2006 Tour de France… not just of the racing but the colour and action of the event… images copyright Brett Lyons.

Otherwise known as administration. Getting the settings right. Rewriting CSS and PHP. Doing stuff. What would I have been doing 100 years ago? (Had I been around, I mean.) This is such a chair-bound existence, even when we go outside we sit on chairs to drive, or even to ride our bikes. Bizarre. And in 100 years from now?

Because I can, I will share here some weirder choices from my personal bookshelf. You may not agree with ‘weird’, indeed weird is the wrong word. Nevertheless I use it advisedly in the sense that I will cover subjects beyond literal truth. And I use truth advisedly as mathematics is the only provable truth. Everything else is either awaiting a mathematical proof or is a belief, a theory or an assumption.

Just to explain my thinking: you may believe in what you can see, hear and/or touch, and that’s cool; but it’s not necessarily a literal truth. Even if a thousand people see, hear and/or touch that “thing” it doesn’t make it true. It may be real enough to the people concerned but it’s not an incontrovertible truth. It may be an illusion. It may be a shared thought. It may be a shared assumption. It’s something, but it’s not a literal truth. To be a literal truth requires proof. To my mind we can only be certain of mathematical proofs, as I haven’t seen any other proof that convincingly lives outside the mind or perception of man.

And I could be wrong about maths. Perhaps there is no independent proof? Ahhh, but that’s an undiscovered country from whose bourne no traveller returns….

So to the first installment of my ‘way out but worth it’ booklist, in no particular order:

• Bill Shakespeare’s works in full. An essential lesson in the use of the English language, up there with Fowler’s.
• The Elegant Universe (by Brian Greene. Post-Einstein string theory to get you thinking.)
• Anything by Richard Dawkins or Stephen Jay Gould. As I said, there are mathematical proofs and there are theories. Some theories are more compelling than others.
• The Torah (the Pentateuch, the Book of Moses: a lively read, basis for Judaism and the Old Testment and a fascinating read on any level)
• The Bible (Greek for ‘Books’; The Old and New Testaments: basis for the Christian cults and a brilliant read)
• The Koran (Arabic for ‘Recital’: another excellent piece of writing and the basis for Islam. I have the Dawood translation)
• The History of Magic (by Eliphas Levi: a great, compelling read. Spot the a ha! ‘Harry Potter’ moments and see the footprints of Rowling’s research)
• The Theory of Celestial influence (by Rodney Collin: immensely detailed, it wallows around trying to ‘prove’ a case scientifically but falls magnificently short. Can be heavy, clumsy and painful to read…but still worth it for the determined!).

That’s just for starters. Let me know what you think.

I can only assume that Miranda Devine wants to wait until it’s 100% certain, even if that’s risking being too late. Better to wait and be wrong, than to act now and risk being wrong anyway. Or better still, let’s be calm, critical and reasoned – and still wait – rather than impassioned, determined and involved – and do something. Being impassioned can scare folks, after all. Presumably she has rationalised this: there’s a chance after all that we are not impacting upon climate change at all, so let’s go with that idea. It could be a natural cycle and we have not significantly contributed, so let’s just sit here and watch what happens. Or maybe in her mind we just can’t do anything, so let’s not try? Ms Devine is a puzzle of pop-art reactionary nonsense at the best of times.

Sure, I have no problem with criticising the detail of individual speeches, interviews, movies, docos and books – as Miranda does with Al Gore’s recent evangelising; I can also understand wanting to be careful and not jumping to conclusions. But surely there’s a point of no return, where waiting any longer will seriously impact our efforts to reverse what we’ve started. We are talking climate change of course, so the stakes are high.

Thinking about criticising the detail of a public utterance, Miranda wrote (in the SMH): “It is human nature when faced with a problem too large to solve to simply ignore it in the hope it will go away. Funnily enough, the other eco catastrophes so confidently predicted 30 years ago – acid rain, nuclear winter, species extinction, the population bomb – never did eventuate.”

So I take it that Miranda thinks it’s all too hard, so let’s give up? I also take it that she is unaware of the appalling, continuing loss of species; unaware that the world’s human population is a frighteningly abundant figure beyond 6 billion and growing; unaware that acid rain did indeed destroy forests and was only countered by concerted action; unaware that we have taken concerted action to reduce pollution and that it has proven effective to some degree, but that we need to continue the fight for sustainability. As for a nuclear winter, thankfully we haven’t as yet put that to the test. What exactly has to happen to ‘prove’ an eco-catastrophe in Miranda’s mind?

So how long do we wait before we fry?

Good to see Mick Rogers attacking in style, taking his team leader to the
top of the GC of the Regio Tour (result via Cyclingnews):
http://www.cyclingnews.com/road.php?id=road/2006/aug06/regio06/regio063

Next up is a 23km TT. Should be interesting…

Good to see Mick Rogers attacking in style, taking his team leader to the
top of the GC of the Regio Tour (result via Cyclingnews):
http://www.cyclingnews.com/road.php?id=road/2006/aug06/regio06/regio063

Next up is a 23km TT. Should be interesting…

Fo power data freaks we have SRM (perhaps the ultimate bike accessory,
using force transducer-equipped cranks), PowerTap (using a
transducer-equipped re hub), Polar (least invasive, using optical sensing
of chain deflection) and now… Ergomo. It’s optical, but it’s inside the
BB! Check it out at http://www.cbike.com/ergomo_powertraining.htm

OK, you can also use ‘manual’ calculations based on effort over time, like
the HAC4 does. That’s the cheapest, lightest and probably least accurate
way to do it.

Fo power data freaks we have SRM (perhaps the ultimate bike accessory,
using force transducer-equipped cranks), PowerTap (using a
transducer-equipped re hub), Polar (least invasive, using optical sensing
of chain deflection) and now… Ergomo. It’s optical, but it’s inside the
BB! Check it out at http://www.cbike.com/ergomo_powertraining.htm

OK, you can also use ‘manual’ calculations based on effort over time, like
the HAC4 does. That’s the cheapest, lightest and probably least accurate
way to do it.

Here’s a recent image, using a Nikon D50. Now I know that “real” resolution requires 8 megapixels or more, but really, 6 megapixels is heaps. The resolution I used to get with my 35mm film Pentaxes was great, but it was film and push dependent. I tended to take fast shots of distant objects and blow them up enormously, so depth of field was not critical but shutterspeed and overall sharpness of focus was. But the end result – a print – was often grainy because I either pushed the film for speed (ASA, or ISO if you prefer) or had blown it up in my darkroom (my blacked-out laundry). And I only printed 10x8inches, or projected transparencies. So it wasn’t a big deal.

Which is to say that unless you want to print poster-size, don’t get hung up on resolution, pixel numbers and DPI. Work on framing, focus and interest instead. In fact what I usually want to do is “print” to screen on the web or maybe on a T-shirt or mug. Sure, you need to understand the minimum requirements for your end needs, but don’t go overboard. (Yes, it’s always nice to keep a backup up maximum size original image.) So, with that in mind… here’s a texture shot with the D50. Basically I got close to some weathered paintwork, used natural light, focused and checked the aperture. Given that it wasn’t a moving object and it was fairly good lighting the shutter speed and aperture weren’t really big factors in my consideration.

Here’s a recent image, using a Nikon D50. Now I know that “real” resolution requires 8 megapixels or more, but really, 6 megapixels is heaps. The resolution I used to get with my 35mm film Pentaxes was great, but it was film and push dependent. I tended to take fast shots of distant objects and blow them up enormously, so depth of field was not critical but shutterspeed and overall sharpness of focus was. But the end result – a print – was often grainy because I either pushed the film for speed (ASA, or ISO if you prefer) or had blown it up in my darkroom (my blacked-out laundry). And I only printed 10x8inches, or projected transparencies. So it wasn’t a big deal.

Which is to say that unless you want to print poster-size, don’t get hung up on resolution, pixel numbers and DPI. Work on framing, focus and interest instead. In fact what I usually want to do is “print” to screen on the web or maybe on a T-shirt or mug. Sure, you need to understand the minimum requirements for your end needs, but don’t go overboard. (Yes, it’s always nice to keep a backup up maximum size original image.) So, with that in mind… here’s a texture shot with the D50. Basically I got close to some weathered paintwork, used natural light, focused and checked the aperture. Given that it wasn’t a moving object and it was fairly good lighting the shutter speed and aperture weren’t really big factors in my consideration.

In considering the causes of cramping, one possibility is fatigue brought about by too-high (ie harder to push) gearing. The authors of this article examined “patterns of leg muscle recruitment and co-activation, and the relationship between muscle recruitment and cadence, in highly trained cyclists”. They tested at “individual preferred cadence, 57.5, 77.5 and 92.5 revs min” using (one hopes) carefully placed electrodes. Sounds cool as well. And the findings? Well the authors say that “muscle recruitment patterns varied from those previously reported, but there was little variation in muscle recruitment between these highly trained cyclists”. Specifically the “tibialis posterior, peroneus longus and soleus were recruited in a single, short burst of activity during the downstroke” and that “the tibialis anterior and gastrocnemius lateralis were recruited in a biphasic and alternating manner”. They found that “contrary to existing hypotheses, our results indicate little co-activation between the tibialis posterior and peroneus longus”.

So far so good. Muscle recruitment is important from many angles, not simply as an academic pursuit but as an aid to understanding how it is we can generate the power that we do and applying that understanding in coaching athletes in optimal patterns of training. Such understanding would also help avoid injury as well as assist in faster healing after injury.

Anyway, the authors found that “peak EMG amplitude increased linearly with cadence and did not decrease at individual preferred cadence. There was little variation in patterns of muscle recruitment or co-activation with changes in cadence”. I take this to mean that most elite cyclists use the same muscles and that varying cadence does not significantly change the pattern of recruitment. In other words you are still using the same muscles, irrespective of the tested cadences.

Reference: Leg muscle recruitment in highly trained cyclists.
Authors: Chapman, Vicenzino, Blanch, Knox and Hodges from the Division of Physiotherapy, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia and the Department of Physical Therapies, Australian Institute of Sport, Bruce, ACT, Australia.
Source: Journal of Sports Sciences; Feb2006, Vol. 24 Issue 2, p115-124

My view: For me this means that Lance Armstrong spinning at 110 revs/minute is probably using the same muscles as Jan Ullrich at 90 revs/minute. It’s important to pin that down. Higher cadences do not necessarily mean a different arrangement of muscles doing the work.
Beyond that important point, there are neuromuscular factors involved as well as the lower per-rev power output at higher revs, so a comparison and conclusion Lance vs Jan isn’t going to happen here. However I think it’s interesting to note that seating position could affect the outcome. To me Jan looks cramped on the bike. Highly effective but a little less comfy than Lance. Perhaps (this is me postulating, not the authors above!) position will be a defining factor and possibly cadence is less important to the ultimate outcome than we have imagined. Any professional opinions on this out there?

In considering the causes of cramping, one possibility is fatigue brought about by too-high (ie harder to push) gearing. The authors of this article examined “patterns of leg muscle recruitment and co-activation, and the relationship between muscle recruitment and cadence, in highly trained cyclists”. They tested at “individual preferred cadence, 57.5, 77.5 and 92.5 revs min” using (one hopes) carefully placed electrodes. Sounds cool as well. And the findings? Well the authors say that “muscle recruitment patterns varied from those previously reported, but there was little variation in muscle recruitment between these highly trained cyclists”. Specifically the “tibialis posterior, peroneus longus and soleus were recruited in a single, short burst of activity during the downstroke” and that “the tibialis anterior and gastrocnemius lateralis were recruited in a biphasic and alternating manner”. They found that “contrary to existing hypotheses, our results indicate little co-activation between the tibialis posterior and peroneus longus”.

So far so good. Muscle recruitment is important from many angles, not simply as an academic pursuit but as an aid to understanding how it is we can generate the power that we do and applying that understanding in coaching athletes in optimal patterns of training. Such understanding would also help avoid injury as well as assist in faster healing after injury.

Anyway, the authors found that “peak EMG amplitude increased linearly with cadence and did not decrease at individual preferred cadence. There was little variation in patterns of muscle recruitment or co-activation with changes in cadence”. I take this to mean that most elite cyclists use the same muscles and that varying cadence does not significantly change the pattern of recruitment. In other words you are still using the same muscles, irrespective of the tested cadences.

Reference: Leg muscle recruitment in highly trained cyclists.
Authors: Chapman, Vicenzino, Blanch, Knox and Hodges from the Division of Physiotherapy, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia and the Department of Physical Therapies, Australian Institute of Sport, Bruce, ACT, Australia.
Source: Journal of Sports Sciences; Feb2006, Vol. 24 Issue 2, p115-124

My view: For me this means that Lance Armstrong spinning at 110 revs/minute is probably using the same muscles as Jan Ullrich at 90 revs/minute. It’s important to pin that down. Higher cadences do not necessarily mean a different arrangement of muscles doing the work.
Beyond that important point, there are neuromuscular factors involved as well as the lower per-rev power output at higher revs, so a comparison and conclusion Lance vs Jan isn’t going to happen here. However I think it’s interesting to note that seating position could affect the outcome. To me Jan looks cramped on the bike. Highly effective but a little less comfy than Lance. Perhaps (this is me postulating, not the authors above!) position will be a defining factor and possibly cadence is less important to the ultimate outcome than we have imagined. Any professional opinions on this out there?

Thinking about cramping and supplements, Creatine is sometimes implicated in some cramping events. If it’s possibly going to cause cramps we should ask, does Creatine supplementation actually work?

posted by gtveloce at 1/25/2006 04:23:00 AM | links to this post

Thinking about cramping and supplements, Creatine is sometimes implicated in some cramping events. If it’s possibly going to cause cramps we should ask, does Creatine supplementation actually work?

posted by gtveloce at 1/25/2006 04:23:00 AM | links to this post

Within 20km of the finish of the 200km Goulburn to Liverpool, NSW race (some 20 years ago now) my thighs were seized by crippling pain. I’d had a few warning cramps but these were completely show-stopping. Well maybe not completely. By shifting the load onto other muscles I eventually got to the finish. Other than that one memorable time I have had cramps in my calves when standing on a big gear in a sprint, and post-race sitting in a chair. Why?

Firstly, what is a cramp? OK, obviously they are strong, involuntary muscle contractions that commonly occur during or shortly after hard exercise, or when cold. Most cyclists – but not all – get them in the quads, hamstrings and calves (or like me, in the feet!). They can really hurt, really suddenly.

One theory of “cause” is that as a muscle fatigues, the brain sends more and more signals telling that muscle to contract to get the same strength of contraction, ie to get the desired result. The theory goes that when the muscle becomes utterly fatigued the brain sends a continuous contraction signal, which initiates a cramp. It could also be a protective mechanism. “I’ve reached my limit or I’m damaged”, says the muscle, or the nervous system; and so it locks up so it can’t be used. Great news if you are bike racing, eh, and the quads are calling it quits?

So, it’s not good, but maybe we need to get ‘em sometimes. But how do we avoid them?

Firstly, avoid muscle fatigue in the first place. Ask yourself, which muscles are prone to cramping? Can I shift the load more evenly?

Secondly, ask yourself when is it that you cramp? Is it toward the end of a long or hard ride, or only when racing? It may be that you have simply not trained adequately for the distance or the intensity of your riding. Some people cramp just before or during the sprint, for example. A 30km race is a lot more intense than a 30km training ride, so gradually up your training intensity. Upping the training distance may help push your limits as well. But make changes gradually, by increments, not in one huge leap!

You may cramp when pushing a big gear. Perhaps your cadence is too low? Try using lower gears to help get some spin back. Try not to drop below 85rpm. Whilst your endurance is measurably better at lower cadences the effort per rotation is greater. So strike a balance that offers easier pressure on the pedals by going for more spin.

Ask also if you are dehydrated, have depleted your electrolytes or have run out of energy. This is basic. Don’t get dehydrated – you lose power and it may bring on cramps. And don’t “bonk” (the cycling version of ‘hitting the wall‘) or run out of energy. Keep eating carbohydrate rich foods during your rides. Your needs will vary with intensity and training, but 1-2 energy bars or satchels every 25km seems to be enough for my purposes. Certainly eat at the start of the ride, but not so much that you want to vomit when the racing starts! You are just topping up, not pigging out. Eat a main meal 2 hours before riding. This pattern of eating should also fix your electrolytes, but on a really hot day consider electrolyte-balanced sports drinks instead of water.

A lack of calcium is also implicated in cramping. As calcium is needed for strong bones and teeth you may as well consider a supplement. Cycling is non-weight bearing so you need to consider some calcium supplementation as well as some running, skipping or weights to help keep your calcium balance.

Other reputed causes of cramping include various medications and inappropriate supplementation. Regular stretching of muscles may reduce cramping (but for me that causes them!).

And of course avoid the cold or any position thats cuts off your circulation. Stretching cold muscles almost always brings on a cramp for me; as does sitting in chairs with high support under the knee. I think it cuts off or limits blood flow around the hamstring… add in a fatigued muscle and whammo! Good luck!

Within 20km of the finish of the 200km Goulburn to Liverpool, NSW race (some 20 years ago now) my thighs were seized by crippling pain. I’d had a few warning cramps but these were completely show-stopping. Well maybe not completely. By shifting the load onto other muscles I eventually got to the finish. Other than that one memorable time I have had cramps in my calves when standing on a big gear in a sprint, and post-race sitting in a chair. Why?

Firstly, what is a cramp? OK, obviously they are strong, involuntary muscle contractions that commonly occur during or shortly after hard exercise, or when cold. Most cyclists – but not all – get them in the quads, hamstrings and calves (or like me, in the feet!). They can really hurt, really suddenly.

One theory of “cause” is that as a muscle fatigues, the brain sends more and more signals telling that muscle to contract to get the same strength of contraction, ie to get the desired result. The theory goes that when the muscle becomes utterly fatigued the brain sends a continuous contraction signal, which initiates a cramp. It could also be a protective mechanism. “I’ve reached my limit or I’m damaged”, says the muscle, or the nervous system; and so it locks up so it can’t be used. Great news if you are bike racing, eh, and the quads are calling it quits?

So, it’s not good, but maybe we need to get ‘em sometimes. But how do we avoid them?

Firstly, avoid muscle fatigue in the first place. Ask yourself, which muscles are prone to cramping? Can I shift the load more evenly?

Secondly, ask yourself when is it that you cramp? Is it toward the end of a long or hard ride, or only when racing? It may be that you have simply not trained adequately for the distance or the intensity of your riding. Some people cramp just before or during the sprint, for example. A 30km race is a lot more intense than a 30km training ride, so gradually up your training intensity. Upping the training distance may help push your limits as well. But make changes gradually, by increments, not in one huge leap!

You may cramp when pushing a big gear. Perhaps your cadence is too low? Try using lower gears to help get some spin back. Try not to drop below 85rpm. Whilst your endurance is measurably better at lower cadences the effort per rotation is greater. So strike a balance that offers easier pressure on the pedals by going for more spin.

Ask also if you are dehydrated, have depleted your electrolytes or have run out of energy. This is basic. Don’t get dehydrated – you lose power and it may bring on cramps. And don’t “bonk” (the cycling version of ‘hitting the wall‘) or run out of energy. Keep eating carbohydrate rich foods during your rides. Your needs will vary with intensity and training, but 1-2 energy bars or satchels every 25km seems to be enough for my purposes. Certainly eat at the start of the ride, but not so much that you want to vomit when the racing starts! You are just topping up, not pigging out. Eat a main meal 2 hours before riding. This pattern of eating should also fix your electrolytes, but on a really hot day consider electrolyte-balanced sports drinks instead of water.

A lack of calcium is also implicated in cramping. As calcium is needed for strong bones and teeth you may as well consider a supplement. Cycling is non-weight bearing so you need to consider some calcium supplementation as well as some running, skipping or weights to help keep your calcium balance.

Other reputed causes of cramping include various medications and inappropriate supplementation. Regular stretching of muscles may reduce cramping (but for me that causes them!).

And of course avoid the cold or any position thats cuts off your circulation. Stretching cold muscles almost always brings on a cramp for me; as does sitting in chairs with high support under the knee. I think it cuts off or limits blood flow around the hamstring… add in a fatigued muscle and whammo! Good luck!

A 2nd place for Health Net’s Greg Henderson… from Cyclingnews: Haedo continues sprinting to wins at Manhattan Beach By Mark Zalewski, North American Editor JJ Heado (Toyota-United Pro) Photo ©: Steve Cohen (Click for larger image) The forty-fifth edition of the Manhattan Beach Grand Prix, with its infamous hot dog-style course came down to another field sprint, which really means the race to the last 180 degree turn just 300 meters from the finish. And coming into that turn with the best position was Toyota-United’s sprinting machine Juan Jose Haedo, who out-sprinted Greg Henderson (Health Net-Maxxis) for the NRC win.

A 2nd place for Health Net’s Greg Henderson… from Cyclingnews: Haedo continues sprinting to wins at Manhattan Beach By Mark Zalewski, North American Editor JJ Heado (Toyota-United Pro) Photo ©: Steve Cohen (Click for larger image) The forty-fifth edition of the Manhattan Beach Grand Prix, with its infamous hot dog-style course came down to another field sprint, which really means the race to the last 180 degree turn just 300 meters from the finish. And coming into that turn with the best position was Toyota-United’s sprinting machine Juan Jose Haedo, who out-sprinted Greg Henderson (Health Net-Maxxis) for the NRC win.

Worth noting a good result for Ben Day in Portugal… from Cyclingnews Stage 10 – August 15: Idanha-A-Nova -Castelo Branco ITT, 39.6 km Results 1 David Blanco (Spa) Comunidad Valenciana 53.54 2 Martin Garrido (Arg) Duja-Tavira 0.04 3 Ben Day (Aus) Carvalhelhos-Boavista 0.11 4 Juan Gomis (Spa) Comunidad Valenciana 1.00

Worth noting a good result for Ben Day in Portugal… from Cyclingnews Stage 10 – August 15: Idanha-A-Nova -Castelo Branco ITT, 39.6 km Results 1 David Blanco (Spa) Comunidad Valenciana 53.54 2 Martin Garrido (Arg) Duja-Tavira 0.04 3 Ben Day (Aus) Carvalhelhos-Boavista 0.11 4 Juan Gomis (Spa) Comunidad Valenciana 1.00

It’s all go for the Aussie sprinters at the Los Angeles Cycling Classic in Carson, CA (August 13, 2006). Cyclingnews reports on Bayley, French, Perkins, Meares and McPherson here. Good 3rd place result for Josiah Ng from Malaysia, too.

It’s all go for the Aussie sprinters at the Los Angeles Cycling Classic in Carson, CA (August 13, 2006). Cyclingnews reports on Bayley, French, Perkins, Meares and McPherson here. Good 3rd place result for Josiah Ng from Malaysia, too.