It’s no secret that I’m prone to riding in the big ring as much as possible, mostly on account of my not being a giant sissy. In accordance with the ISO Non-Sissy Standard, I also never read instruction manuals or ask for directions when lost. I make sure to only rarely ask my VMH to turn up the radio when Adele comes on, usually followed quickly by an ernest explanation of how I thought it was Metallica, and how Rolling in the Deep ripped off the opening to Enter Sandman. The record does show, however, that I occasionally fly into hysterics when surprised by an insect or amphibian – but that’s just good common sense.
Pantani’s in-the-drops climbing style has always impressed me, but he’s only one of the riders who won races going down in the drops looking for more power on the climbs; Jan Ullrich was often climbing in the drops as well as our mate Johan Museeuw – not to mention Richard Virenque and so did Frank Vandenbroucke. Looking at that list, I wonder if the UCI should explore adjusting the test for EPO to examine time spent climbing in the drops.
Riding the route of Liege-Bastogne-Liege with Johan last Keepers Tour, I noticed a pattern in his riding style. Whenever the gradient increased on a climb, instead of changing gear he just moved his hands to the drops and rose out of the saddle to casually push the same gear over the steep. It looked so easy, it was impossible to resist trying it myself. At first, there is a strange sort of sensation, like you’re dipping your nose into the tarmac. But then when you switch to the hoods, you notice an immediate loss of leverage. After practicing it, it becomes second nature.
Someone once told me that the key to going fast is to try to break your handlebars, and that’s just what I’ve been trying to do lately although I hope I’m ultimately unsuccessful. Since gleaning this trick from Johan’s riding style, I’ve been staying in the big ring longer and climbing out of the saddle in the drops, pulling hard on bars and feeling them flex. Its not always faster than spinning a low gear but it has the benefit of taking the load off your cardiovascular system and putting it on your muscular system – a handy thing if your form is missing something or you’ve got massive guns (which I don’t).
This has brought another notion to light: the lower the hand position, the better able you are to find the leverage you need to turn the pedals. This is one of the principle issues with the sit up and beg epidemic, apart from it looking crap and being less stable. But hand height seems to impact power; I’ve noticed that when I’m climbing on the tops, I can breath easily and I’m able to maintain a speed well, but acceleration is difficult. To accelerate or hold a pace up a steep gradient (which is almost the same as accelerating), I’m better served riding on the hoods where my position is a bit lower. But when I really need power, I go looking for it in the drops.
All this brings into question the current trend towards compact bars and flat hand positions between the tops and hoods, with the drops only a bit lower. Compare that to the deep drops ridden in the past, in the style of Eddy Merckx and Roger de Vlaeminck where the hoods were halfway between the tops and the drops. The modern bar shape and hood position seems to reduce the riding positions to as few as possible, while in the past, they were designed to provide as many as possible.
In any case, big sweeping drops look the business and I’m pretty sure they are in complete compliance with the ISO Non-Sissy Standard.
I know as well as any of you that I've been checked out lately, kind…
Peter Sagan has undergone quite the transformation over the years; starting as a brash and…
The Women's road race has to be my favorite one-day road race after Paris-Roubaix and…
Holy fuckballs. I've never been this late ever on a VSP. I mean, I've missed…
This week we are currently in is the most boring week of the year. After…
I have memories of my life before Cycling, but as the years wear slowly on…
View Comments
@Puffy
That's very interesting, both for the article and for your charmingly naive idea that science and logic might have any impact on Frank's pre-conceived and utterly unshakeable beliefs.
On the article it is certainly against the grain - not just in cycling but many strength-based sports believe that low-rep-high-resistance training builds muscle strength.
No doubt the experiment was properly done but I wouldn't be prepared to jettison decades of empirical results on the basis of a single study.
Having said that it also highlights a disconnect in what Frank and others are talking about - powering up a short sharp climb in the big ring is fairly standard but it isn't low cadence strength building. 10 or 12 times for 5 minutes each @90% power, and alternating with high RPM in between at similar power - that's a low cadence workout.
@frank
They say the girth matters more than the length.
Can't say I'd know, though.
I have been eyeballing the Ritchey neo- classic. nice classic bend in compact geo. While I would be classified as tiny by American standerds I don't have small hands. on a compact now but the tighter bend is't awesome for my mitt size. the Richtey seems a rounder( much better looking ) bend. Nice article, when I feel shitty and there is a 15% short ramp ahead getting in the drops and shifting to a bigger gear usually makes me much happier.
@frank
Who said anything about big-big and small-small? I'm talking about small-big! 39/23 will get you up a hill at 20 kph at 90 rpm. On a 7% grade that is something like 5-6 watts/kilo (according to an online calculator that may or may not be accurate). Sounds about right to me. Isn't that in the elite class?
@geoffrey
Yes it is but the missing element in your post is duration (and weight).
Most anyone can do 5-6 w/kg for a short burst but I doubt anyone here would even come close to it on a 45 minute climb.
If they can they should be contacting an agent to arrange their pro contract.
@ChrisO
I put 20 minutes into the calculator. The usual number for FTP calcs. I put in a few different weights for the rider from 50 to 100 kgs hence the 5-6 range.
@geoffrey
Maybe a few would get close to 5 w/kg for 20 minutes, but then to calculate FTP (sustainable power for one hour) you discount by a further 5%.
On Andrew Coggan's scale FTP of 5.2-5.8 w/kg is classed as Domestic Pro.
@ChrisO
I have to agree with your thoughts . All well conducted studies into strength training show that higher resistance training is more efficient in increasing strength gains . This comes with the proviso of using resistance high enough to approach the point of muscular failure . This would be much more difficult to achieve on a bike rather than in a gym where you can simply drop a barbell or dumbell instead of falling off your bike after 20 pedal strokes . In the quoted study subjects had to ride intervals of 6 minutes at 40 rpm which would equate to doing sets of an exercise in the gym for 240 repetitions : you wouldn't find too many athletes or coaches advocating that particular regime for strength gains .
Interestingly though I think that Frank is on the right track . He often refers to how some positions or riding in the big ring feel better (and faster) . Have you ever wondered why riding a climb second time around feels easier (and faster) ? Is it that our guns have increased in power since the first climb ? Has our VO2 suddenly increased ? Or is it all "in the head" ? Is it The V ?
So I actually tried this climbing on the drops thing. Took 5 seconds off my best time on a steep (11%) 500m climb.
It's weird - it uses different muscles to normal standing climbing. Normal standing climbing feels like climbing bouncy stairs. This feels more like pushing a heavy weight up a ramp.
@Puffy
This seems weird to me.
According to the abstract the "highly trained" athletes show considerable gains from moderate training, and the low cadence athletes showed nothing? That doesn't make any sense at all.
I don't have access to the complete study though.