Help on hills needed

[Fab Foodie]

This guy is delusional

Clearly ....
I've pi55ed myself with joy watching that ....

 

[Fab Foodie]

Here is a retired pro talking rubbish.

God there's alot of us talking nonsense out there!

 

[black'n'yellow]

Here is a retired pro talking rubbish.

Not rubbish at all, although I suspect you were trying to be ironic. Gearing, cadence and position are all useful (if somewhat elementary) considerations while climbing. None of them will get you up the hill quicker than a guy with a better threshold though...

 

[Hacienda71]

Here is some other idiot championing a technique that will have no effect. Clearly tainted by the association with drugs cheats.

 

[Hacienda71]

Not rubbish at all, although I suspect you were trying to be ironic. Gearing, cadence and position are all useful (if somewhat elementary) considerations. None of them will get you up the hill quicker than a guy with a better threshold though...

I totally accept that. but what about the two riders with the same threshold. Will the better technical rider not get to the top of the climb quicker?

Gone on admit it, then we can all stop this bickering and let the op go and ride up some big hills and improve his VO2 fitness....

 

[black'n'yellow]

I totally accept that. but what about the two riders with the same threshold. Will the better technical rider not get to the top of the climb quicker?

no - can you explain to me why you think that would be the case..? Regardless of riding style, tell me why two riders on the same gearing, laying down the same w/kg would not ride up the climb side by side?

 

[Hacienda71]

Not rubbish at all, although I suspect you were trying to be ironic. Gearing, cadence and position are all useful (if somewhat elementary) considerations while climbing. None of them will get you up the hill quicker than a guy with a better threshold though...

You have just pointed it out . I don't need to explain, you have done it here. The person with the better threshold will go up quicker, but thresholds being equal between two riders which one will get to the top first? The one with the good technique or the one without? The good climbing technique they refer to maybe elementary to you as a seasoned racer but it may not be to the OP who by his own admission is fairly new to cycling.
Why would pro's and high level coaches as linked to peddle their snake oil to the masses about having a good climbing technique? If the irony of my previous links is so off the mark then maybe you should email the writers of the articles and the coach on Youtube and put them right.

 

[endoman]

Here's a bit about " technique" written by Gunnar Gronlund, ex National Hill Climb champ, second this year, when I've watched him climb it looks effortless, like he's hardly trying, but his threshold power will be huge as he TT's a lot as well. Tried his strategy in the last hill climb I did and it did keep me spinning without changing to an easier gear, never hurt so much though, but that is the point of a hill climb comp!

Comes from longer article here, http://roadcyclinguk.com/riding/tra...-champion-gunnar-gronlunds-top-tips-1642.html

Climbing technique
It’s more efficient to climb in the saddle and that’s my preferred technique – but obviously if it’s really steep then you have to get out of the saddle! Rather than change down a gear, I prefer to get out of the saddle, get the gear back up to speed and then sit back down.
I never ride a fixed gear bike. I like to have the option to change gear, although only ever once or twice. Changing down is something I try to avoid at all costs when I’m racing. Mentally you want to put it into an easier gear but by that time you’ll already be at your limit so you’ll suffer just as much even if you go down a gear.

 

[black'n'yellow]

You have just pointed it out . I don't need to explain, you have done it here. The person with the better threshold will go up quicker, but thresholds being equal between two riders which one will get to the top first? The one with the good technique or the one without? The good climbing technique they refer to maybe elementary to you as a seasoned racer but it may not be to the OP who by his own admission is fairly new to cycling.
Why would pro's and high level coaches as linked to peddle their snake oil to the masses about having a good climbing technique? If the irony of my previous links is so off the mark then maybe you should email the writers of the articles and the coach on Youtube and put them right.

mate - you are at risk of disappearing up your own arse if you keep linking to pseudo-science and conveniently anecdotal youtube clips. I bet that none of those 'high level' (?) coaches (if that is what they are) would favour technique over aerobic performance, and I know what they would tell you to work on as a priority to get the best results. Technique will not get you up hills quicker. It doesn't get experienced cyclists up hills and it certainly won't get beginners up them either.

Anyway, you missed my question, below...

no - can you explain to me why you think that would be the case..? Regardless of riding style, tell me why two riders on the same gearing, laying down the same w/kg would not ride up the climb side by side?

 

[black'n'yellow]

Climbing technique
It’s more efficient to climb in the saddle and that’s my preferred technique – but obviously if it’s really steep then you have to get out of the saddle! Rather than change down a gear, I prefer to get out of the saddle, get the gear back up to speed and then sit back down.

All of which will only become possible when you have the fitness to apply it. Also bear in mind why the article was written and who the article is written for. Strangely, the article also omits details of the many hundreds of hours of base conditioning, interval training and racing that Mr Gronlund had been knocking out in the months before the hill-climb. Unfortunately, that's not the sort of thing that interests the readers...ironically, that is where the real work is done.

 

[nathanicola]

uh..? He may be 'your best climber', but that doesn't mean he is talking sense...

He might not be talking sence but he does have 12 hill koms and countless ones that he is just a couple of seconds off

 

[Fab Foodie]

B n Y
Watch my lips:

NOBODY IS ARGUING THAT TECHNIQUE IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN FITNESS ...
BUT IF 2 PEOPLE HAVE EXACTLY THE SAME FITNESS THE ONE WHO CAN APPLY IT BETTER i.e HAS THE BETTER TECHNIQUE WILL BE THE BETTER CLIMBER.

I'd use an analogy, but you don't understand them.

 

[Fab Foodie]

The notion that gripping the bars tightly 'diverts' energy from your legs is completely laughable. This would only even be potentially valid if you were making a maximal (ie anaerobic) effort up a long climb - which is not sustainable anyway. Nor does it explain why sprinters sprint out of the saddle, usually rocking the bike from side to side - surely they would be better off keeping still, so as 'not to divert energy from their legs'..? Come on...

It's pretty simple human physiology, if you're tensing muscles they're doing work which needs more fuel and O2 than when relaxed. A newbie climber might not have the best CV system in the world and so every bit of energy wasted is energy not available for driving the bike forward. It's simple stuff. I could suggest an experiment or an analogy for you by way of demonstration.
Sprinters sprint out of the saddle for a very short period of time and can afford to run-up anaerobic debt as they'll soon stop to recover, sustained climbing is different. The 'technique' is not the same and the max power sprinters deliver is probably much greater than good climbers.



If you need to adjust your position to bring certain muscle sets into play, then your position needs looking at.
So Pro's never 'sit on the rivit' or move around on the saddle depending on how they're riding? No they're rooted to the spot ...
And I have had my bike properly fitted and sitting back on the saddle works for climbing. See some of the random links



By your own helpful definition of 'technique' above, that's advice - not technique.
Yes but using the best output of that advice is good technique ....



I've been riding a while - I've never come across anyone doing this, unless they have some kind of respiratory problem. No need to 'control' something which your body usually takes care of automatically anyway.
Well I've climbed with plenty newbies who are panting away like dogs, when they start to control deeper breathing they find improvement. Again it's simple physiology creating better O2 uptake and CO2 removal, restricting exhalation also improves CO2 removal.

Once again, that is advice, not technique. In fact, it's not even advice, it's just an option.
No, again it's part of climbing technique, knowing when to stand and honk and knowing when to sit and spin and maximising your physiological capabilities

Once again, there is little relevance here, for the reasons stated earlier.
And for the same reasons as earlier I disagree, wasted effort on a sustained climb is just that if it doesn't make you go faster or you can't sustain it. Sprinting and climbing are different disciplines with different techniques.

 

[black'n'yellow]

He might not be talking sence but he does have 12 hill koms and countless ones that he is just a couple of seconds off

he sounds awesome..

 

[black'n'yellow]

B n Y
Watch my lips:

NOBODY IS ARGUING THAT TECHNIQUE IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN FITNESS ...
BUT IF 2 PEOPLE HAVE EXACTLY THE SAME FITNESS THE ONE WHO CAN APPLY IT BETTER i.e HAS THE BETTER TECHNIQUE WILL BE THE BETTER CLIMBER.

I'd use an analogy, but you don't understand them.

eh? so two people with the same gearing, same w/kg - but one is quicker..?? Tell me how the 'better technique' will make them quicker please..??

I'm fine with analogies - but I am having trouble making sense out of your random waffle.