Tuck

Watching yesterdays stage of the Tour of Spain cycle race on
Eurosport one of the motorcyclists touched the wheel of a rider.
Which was a shame as earlier we'd had excellent pictures as a
m/c cameraman showed the lead group of 8 riders rider in a tuck
as they freewheeled down a not too steep downhill straight.
Each rider had a different position, from sitting back with teeth
on the stem to very forward with chest over the stem and head
towards the tyre- very dodgy!!

Which set me thinking about our tuck postion on a long straight
not too steep downhill where good aerodynamic skills can really
reap the benefits.
I've not seen posts on this recently so what is the current position
being taught these days.
Is it bent knees getting the body mass close to the trail or an
upright stance bent at the waist.
Are the arms straight forward over the skis or are the wrists
together, elbows in.
What became of the proposal to hold the arms and poles out
backwards, was there any benefit from that?
Mike

On Wed, 10 Sep 2003, Taywood wrote:

Watching yesterdays stage of the Tour of Spain cycle race on
Eurosport . . .
Lucky fellow - I'm trying to tape the OLN coverage while I'm at work -
didn't work yesterday - we'll see about today's stage.


Which set me thinking about our tuck postion on a long straight not too
steep downhill where good aerodynamic skills can really reap the
benefits. I've not seen posts on this recently so what is the current
position being taught these days. Is it bent knees getting the body mass
close to the trail or an upright stance bent at the waist. Are the arms
straight forward over the skis or are the wrists together, elbows in.
What became of the proposal to hold the arms and poles out backwards,
was there any benefit from that? Mike

While there may be important aerodynamic differences, I have come to the
conclusion that a _resting_ tuck (elbows resting on knees - relaxing as
many muscle groups as possible) when feasable does me the most good. It's
good enough aerodynamically to allow me to gain on those not in a good
tuck, and much better for my aerobic recovery.
When the downhill is a bit more difficult, I'll get a bit higher - to be
better able to step, or brake, or whatever. That position, however, is
less restful.
-Ken


************************************************** *********
Kenneth Salzberg
Hamline University
School of Law (651) 523-2354
1536 Hewitt Ave.
Sisu Skier - 50K Club St. Paul, MN 55104
************************************************** ****************

I used to ride road and it seemed like the biggest factor in wind tunnel tests
on a bike was essentially frontal area. With a little bit of eliminating a
"scoop" effect thrown in. So basically I think anyway you can reduce your
frontal area, and get some rest, without presenting a "scoop" with your upper
body to the wind, seems like a good plan.


Eric "Shmo" Chandler
Duluth, MN

As in cycling, the less frontal area you have and the better the air flows
around/over you the faster you will go. Of course that's pretty obvious. So
I would say that flat back as clost to parallel with the ground as possible
and as deep of a bend at the knees as possible (i.e. sort of 90 degrees) so
to get the greatest reduction in frontal area as possible. Which is super
important. For this legs straight is not the way to go but a deep bend at
the knees is more taxing on the muscles if you are not used to it. If you
are flexible you should have no problems getting this position. Essentially
the same as in cycling. (so I reckon).

cheers

Bob



"Taywood" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
Watching yesterdays stage of the Tour of Spain cycle race on
Eurosport one of the motorcyclists touched the wheel of a rider.
Which was a shame as earlier we'd had excellent pictures as a
m/c cameraman showed the lead group of 8 riders rider in a tuck
as they freewheeled down a not too steep downhill straight.
Each rider had a different position, from sitting back with teeth
on the stem to very forward with chest over the stem and head
towards the tyre- very dodgy!!

Which set me thinking about our tuck postion on a long straight
not too steep downhill where good aerodynamic skills can really
reap the benefits.
I've not seen posts on this recently so what is the current position
being taught these days.
Is it bent knees getting the body mass close to the trail or an
upright stance bent at the waist.
Are the arms straight forward over the skis or are the wrists
together, elbows in.
What became of the proposal to hold the arms and poles out
backwards, was there any benefit from that?
Mike

Bob Creasote wrote:
As in cycling, the less frontal area you have and the better the air flows
around/over you the faster you will go. Of course that's pretty obvious. So
I would say that flat back as clost to parallel with the ground as possible
and as deep of a bend at the knees as possible (i.e. sort of 90 degrees) so
to get the greatest reduction in frontal area as possible. Which is super
important. For this legs straight is not the way to go but a deep bend at
the knees is more taxing on the muscles if you are not used to it. If you
are flexible you should have no problems getting this position. Essentially
the same as in cycling. (so I reckon).


Also, getting the hands out front to break the wind without making a
scoop out of the arm torso position. Plus, try to keep the poles
parellel to the ground (rather than straight up in the flag waving
position as many I have observed tucking) Of course, without those
curvy downhiller poles, the ends will be splayed around your hips or
legs, but what can you do?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article ,
Bob Creasote wrote:
As in cycling, the less frontal area you have and the better the air flows
around/over you the faster you will go. Of course that's pretty obvious. So
I would say that flat back as clost to parallel with the ground as possible
and as deep of a bend at the knees as possible (i.e. sort of 90 degrees) so
to get the greatest reduction in frontal area as possible. Which is super
important. For this legs straight is not the way to go but a deep bend at
the knees is more taxing on the muscles if you are not used to it. If you
are flexible you should have no problems getting this position. Essentially
the same as in cycling. (so I reckon).


_ Long ago and far away we used to do this drill pretty
reqularly.

Find a moderate hill about 1/4 mile long with a long flat
or slightly rising( that's best) runout. Do repeats on this hill, and
pick a spot at the bottom where you just hold the tuck and see
how far you glide. I think that you'll find that keeping a flat
ski and unweighting over the bumps has way more effect on your
speed than your tuck position. Keeping a flat quiet ski is
something that you can only learn by practice.

_ Booker C. Bense




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBP1+mAWTWTAjn5N/lAQGV7QQAnw6syU/pF3PzkA/Omdruq3j3SmzrQpbJ
pTA/H5O+4JNOkvfWS5zdu6x8JslUKwaL1eVu1UZSN+K3NJ5WJAZ0O5 a5VqJ/S0ar
UVcOeDbc9oVdxVpO6Y/dxaa1rJHFOVsFa9O25tumdEuWKzJaRCT+PaycyOmWRtVX
5o05etdjrWM=
=q34T
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Yah there are some long-ass downhills on the parkway at the Keski and
I remember being in a tight tuck as long as I could take it and then
easing off a bit. Of course it helps that with my ski gear I weigh
close to 200lbs, so all those scrawny waifs who dust me on the uphills
were a blur going down.

bt

Jim Farrell wrote:
Bob Creasote wrote:

As in cycling, the less frontal area you have and the better the air
flows
around/over you the faster you will go. Of course that's pretty
obvious. So
I would say that flat back as clost to parallel with the ground as
possible
and as deep of a bend at the knees as possible (i.e. sort of 90
degrees) so
to get the greatest reduction in frontal area as possible. Which is super
important. For this legs straight is not the way to go but a deep bend at
the knees is more taxing on the muscles if you are not used to it. If you
are flexible you should have no problems getting this position.
Essentially
the same as in cycling. (so I reckon).


Also, getting the hands out front to break the wind without making a
scoop out of the arm torso position. Plus, try to keep the poles
parellel to the ground (rather than straight up in the flag waving
position as many I have observed tucking) Of course, without those
curvy downhiller poles, the ends will be splayed around your hips or
legs, but what can you do?

What feels best to me is - as deep a knee bend as possible, as flat a
back as possible, deep tuck as possible, and hands pushed forward with
the poles parallel to the ground and as close to parallel to the track
as possible. Mileage varies a lot depending on how tired I am and how
hard I am breathing. The poles forward position really makes you more
stable on downhills.
One interesting experiment I did last year at Trollhaugen was to descend
with my poles pointing straight out to the side. You can *really* feel
the braking effect.

Marsh

Find a moderate hill about 1/4 mile long with a long flat
or slightly rising( that's best) runout. Do repeats on this hill, and
pick a spot at the bottom where you just hold the tuck and see
how far you glide. I think that you'll find that keeping a flat
ski and unweighting over the bumps has way more effect on your
speed than your tuck position. Keeping a flat quiet ski is
something that you can only learn by practice.


Very true, I was taught how to play with this by a former downhiller.
He had me be aware of my weight both front to back and side to side on
each foot. You can maybe get a little more speed by slightly lifting
some weight off your toes. However, I found the biggest effect (once I
had a good body position) was in keeping the head down, looking under my
eyebrows only 10 meters ahead and glancing up only occasionally. The
head position has a huge effect on terminal velocity (something we hit
all the time on the afton trails.)