looking for better technique isn't worth it

schreef in bericht
ups.com...

I do that to cyclists, too, they get really nervious.

the steeper the hill, the less advantage gearing has over direct power
transfer (like skiing or walking). One can't ride a bike on a hill
steeper tha 45 degrees, but walking up that is just fine. Skating is
still not the most efficient way of power transfer, since there is a
sinus of an angle involved. Which probably explains that skating does
not beat classic up really steep hills (assuming perfect grip)
There's this time trial up Mt. Washington (at least so I read), where
runners are mere minutes slower over an hour than a cyclist. And that's a
runner I never heard of vs. Tyler Hamilton in his "best" days. A ca. 10%
hill I seem to remember.
I wonder how skates and skates+poles compare on such hills to a bicycle. At
some point a bicycle may just be a 6.8kg piece of equipment vs zero for a
runner, and 2-3kg for a rollerskier. The runner and rollerskier also have
the advantage of higher max heartrates, which may affect performance here.

When I rollerski, I always have a buddy handy on much faster rollerblades.
Makes it a great workout that sees me collapse sometimes within a minute.

I would like to do a direct comparison between rollerskis and racing
skates. Racing skates probably have better wheels than racing
rollerskis. A direct comparison would be putting the same wheels on
rollerskis and skates and having the same person going up the same
hill, with the same pacer on a motorcyle or whatever.

I've done a ~45 min uphill rollerski race where I've been bitten by ~1%
by a guy on racing skates (Vince, the owner of VOmax). I had 3-wheel
rollerskis with the fastest and harderst wheels I could get my hands
on. But his turnover was higher than mine. He was slipping on wet spots
and I would catch up, but then he would pull away when the pavement
turned dry. But he would also beat me by a similar margin in snow
skiing races, so, go figure.

On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 19:57:00 +0100, "Jan Gerrit Klok"
wrote:

schreef in bericht
oups.com...

I do that to cyclists, too, they get really nervious.

the steeper the hill, the less advantage gearing has over direct power
transfer (like skiing or walking). One can't ride a bike on a hill
steeper tha 45 degrees, but walking up that is just fine. Skating is
still not the most efficient way of power transfer, since there is a
sinus of an angle involved. Which probably explains that skating does
not beat classic up really steep hills (assuming perfect grip)
There's this time trial up Mt. Washington (at least so I read), where
runners are mere minutes slower over an hour than a cyclist. And that's a
runner I never heard of vs. Tyler Hamilton in his "best" days. A ca. 10%
hill I seem to remember.

My first cycling coach was the first cyclist to beat the time of the
best runner up that thing. That was in the 1970s.

--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

"John Forrest Tomlinson" schreef in bericht
...
My first cycling coach was the first cyclist to beat the time of the
best runner up that thing. That was in the 1970s.
How would you guess a world class biathlete on rollerski's of choice would
compare to the best runner and cyclist times? The VO2 of a runner, and some
of the roll of a bicycle...

Experiment in better technique: skate uphill with Poling versus Skate
with no poles.

My result climbing a steep hill on asphalt, grade around 10%:
on the same day:
* 2 times with Poling (V1), times 3:01, then 3:02
. (my best ever with Poling)
* then one time No poles: time 3:16

a month ago:
* No poles: time 2:54
.. (that was with a bicyclist ahead of me as a "rabbit")

Poling with skating strikes me as an obvious "no-brainer" as a better
technique compared with No-poles skating. But seems worth only 8%, and
that's too high, because it doesn't count that my legs were getting more
tired after the previous timed intervals. And my best time with V1 poling is
still 4% slower than my best Legs-only time.

Not the result I expected.
I'll be interested to see what the difference is when I get on snow -- I
hope obviosly larger in favor of poling.

Ken

Poling with skating strikes me as an obvious "no-brainer" as a better
technique compared with No-poles skating. But seems worth only 8%,

Ken, AFAIK you are a former bike and skate racer. No wonder your legs
are just naturally strong and you may not feel like you need the poles
at all. Mastering the poling technique and working on the upper body
strength (double-poling) should provide more than just 8%.

wrote
Ken, AFAIK you are a former bike and skate racer.
No wonder your legs are just naturally strong and you
may not feel like you need the poles at all.

Yes my exercise this year has been kinda focused on legs.
Actually I was never a bike racer -- other than three or four Run-Bike-Run
duathlons like then years ago. But for lots of years I've definitely a bike
rider in the sense of long tours. I've only done two skate races, more than
two years apart.

It feels a little easier to use poling -- just doesn't make me go much
faster.

Mastering the poling technique and working on the
upper body strength (double-poling) should provide more than just 8%.

I think I agree -- but it would be interesting to see some measured results
from other skiers.

Funny that back when I was focusing on Classic racing, double poling was my
big strength. One of the New Paltz coaches said I was a "gorilla" in my
poling. I think I'm still pretty good at poling now this Fall -- like a
couple of weeks ago I easily double poled past the high school runners, even
though I was on slow wheels.

One idea is that I think my turnover frequency when climbing a hill with
Legs only is significantly higher than when combined with V1 poling. Perhaps
when I get on snow, the long skis will prevent me from using such a high
Legs turnover rate, so the contribution of Poling will be proportionally
larger. And since snow is slower than asphalt, my legs will need more help
to keep delivering the higher Force needed to keep from stalling on a steep
hill.

Interesting report of skaters doing the famous big climb up the Mont Ventoux
road in southern France: One of the skaters tried using poles, but
abandoned them along the way because they didn't seem to help:
http://www.rollerenligne.com/fr/articles.php?id=967 -- at least that's what
I think this sentence in French says:
" ... il a voulu tester une partie de l'ascension en utilisant des bâtons
(comme ceux des rollerski ou du 'nordic-walking'), mais cela s'est avéré
être une source globale de fatigue et cela n'a pas soulagé ses jambes."

Ken

Interesting report of skaters doing the famous big climb up the Mont Ventoux
road in southern France: One of the skaters tried using poles, but
abandoned them along the way because they didn't seem to help:
http://www.rollerenligne.com/fr/articles.php?id=967 -- at least that's what

I know... sometimes I think of rollerskiing as of race-walking (is that
how it's called?) I.e. not the most efficient (and quite dorky-looking)
way of self-propelling, but - gotta play by the rules! But see below.

I ski w/o poles when I am skiing with my wife. I.e. it slows me down,
and not by a meer 8%.

Could it be that on snow there is a lot of slippage going on, making
the power transfer from the legs less efficient as opposed to dry
pavement? In this case, since the poles don't slip, you get the boost
in performance. Actually, I think this is what it is.

wrote
sometimes I think of rollerskiing as ... not the
most efficient (and quite dorky-looking) way of self-propelling ...

Actually I get lots of favorable responses from people seeing me doing V2
skate on rollerskis. (and on inline skates I'm finding that V2 poling
combined with double-push leg-stroking is rather fun)

I ski w/o poles when I am skiing with my wife. I.e.
it slows me down, and not by a mere 8%.

I agree that I should be seeing more benefit from using poles. Here's two
more theories:
(a) I've spent lots of time honing my coordination and feel of Legs-only
skating on both asphalt and snow. Last winter even on snow I bet I spent at
least half my hours skating without poles. So I just haven't worked out the
neuro-muscular coordination for integrating poling -- maybe that will take
me next four months.
(b) I haven't yet developed the central cardio-vascular capacity to take
advantage of the additional muscle mass in arms and abdominals. I don't
think I'm supposed to surprised to find central CV emerging as a bottleneck
when doing those 3-minute intervals. I might see a bigger advantage to using
poles in like a 20-30 minute time trial.

Could it be that on snow there is a lot of slippage going on, making
the power transfer from the legs less efficient as opposed to dry
pavement? In this case, since the poles don't slip, you get the boost
in performance.

I agree that snow is less efficient for power transfer than asphalt. But
doesn't that apply to transmitting the pole-push also?

A related problem is that perhaps I'm unconsciously holding back on my
poling force on asphalt, because I haven't developed the feel for how to
plant the pole tip without it sometimes bouncing or skidding off.

Ken

Like one's press, beware of fans. Years ago someone told me I skated
like a teacher, when I was still stuck in the center most of the time.
People on the side of the trail literally used to applaud and
compliment my diagonal stride, and I was bouncing over all the place
with weak poling. I accept nice words, but video is all I truly
believe.

rm


"Ken Roberts" wrote:

wrote
sometimes I think of rollerskiing as ... not the
most efficient (and quite dorky-looking) way of self-propelling ...

Actually I get lots of favorable responses from people seeing me doing V2
skate on rollerskis. (and on inline skates I'm finding that V2 poling
combined with double-push leg-stroking is rather fun)