Más potencia, menos gasto energético: las claves de la economía en el ciclismo

Björn: Welcome to the Afasteryou Podcast, where everything revolves around endurance sports and training. Here, Sebastian Schluricke, Björn Kafka and Niclas Ranker give you valuable tips and insights that help you take your performance to the next level. Hello and welcome to a new episode of the Afasteryou Podcast. Today it's in German again, and today it's just me, Björn. Hi!

Niclas: You'll have to endure the boredom. I specifically didn't tidy up my office, where I've been sleeping for two days, because everyone around me keeps getting sick. Nice! Since I'm a professional hypochondriac and don't want to get sidelined, I sleep in my office. And I've gotten so lazy that I don't even fold out my couch anymore. I just sleep on this 1.40-meter couch, curled up in the fetal position. And my feet stick out at the end. And I have this stool where I rest them. So really, I mean... Okay. Can't get any worse. Very improvised. Yeah, I'd say I'm kind of neglecting myself right now. Is that healthy? No.

Björn: Well, I'd also say, if you sacrifice a bit of sleep quality and stay healthy because of it, that's maybe not self-neglect. You're actually being careful not to expose yourself to illness.

Niclas: So that can be quite positive, actually. Definitely. But I could also make it more comfortable. I just don't feel like it. I could have it nice, but I don't feel like it. It's like people who only wear turtleneck sweaters and say that's enough, and buy ten pairs of identical T-shirts so they don't have to think about what to wear anymore. I don't think the idea is bad, actually, but the world would be a bit too boring for me that way. I apply that to stuff like this. No box spring bed or whatever those things are called. I can sleep wonderfully on a Tavares too.

Björn: Very nice. So, for you and for me the first race has already come up. For you as a coach, the first important races are starting now too. Some already are, I think. Right, Tim just won Lanzarote fabulously.

Niclas: Tim just won Lanzarote, Adne van Engelen finished, I think, second at Tour of Zsa Zsa or something like that, at the stage race, which was also okay. And now we've got Mediterranean Epic and Tankwa Trek for the mountain bikers. On the road things are starting too, yeah, or already underway. Yeah, let's see what else comes.

Björn: Okay, what are your predictions for Mad Epic and Tankwa? For Tankwa you've got two at the start, free and independent. Frey, Schneller and Egger. Three actually at the start, okay. And Vera Loser. Vera Loser, okay.

Niclas: And at the other one, Seewald, Hartmann. Marc Sturzmann. Backing. Backing, of course. Obviously. Toys. Toys, right. Toys. Toys Ritter. Good that you know more than I do. Yeah, nah. Right, we'll see. I haven't rubbed my crystal ball today and can't say anything yet. But we'll let ourselves be surprised. Training went, actually... Overall really well. No serious setbacks, a bit of illness here, but nothing drawn out like an inflamed knee or falling on your face and breaking something. With Hans it was a bit tough, he had a mediocre winter so far.

Björn: He has too, I think. Hans is actually being pretty open about it on Instagram, showing that things aren't going so well for him right now. But he also tears through an incredible amount. Yeah, that was a bit of the problem.

Niclas: It's just... He knows it's not optimal, he also knows it from me, but we're trying to steer the ship through the icebergs, and sometimes you spring a leak. From November to early January everything was good. Then more semi-suboptimal. A lot of illness, also nasty illness, fever, then three days of nothing, then again, then it was gone, and you think, okay, now we're getting going again, and then some trip came up and you catch a cold on the plane, and yeah, that's the mess you deal with, as they say. But now I'll note, we've had three weeks where we could really train through. And now we go into Epic and see, let's be surprised what comes. That's now just training. Just a bit of stimulus. Let's see what happens.

Björn: Fundamentally, Mad Epic is crazy strongly stacked. If you look at who's at the start, it's pretty wild. Basically everyone's on the start line, except for those few guys who are at Tankwa. And otherwise the entire world elite is at the start.

Niclas: Yeah, it's pretty well stacked, I'd say.

Björn: Okay, we'll see. Today at noon, 12 o'clock, is the start. Yeah, I think it's also being broadcast.

Niclas: Yeah, live, on YouTube.

Björn: I don't actually know. Probably.

Niclas: Let's tune in. Okay. Niclas wants to really get himself into trouble again. With the topic of gross efficiency, I'll spell everything out. It's a super important topic and I find it super exciting. The study situation, or rather the number of people doing these tests, is pretty limited. The test groups are always small, and they're incredibly different in some cases. You've got maybe five pros measured, or maybe 20. The conclusion is always tricky, but it's still a super important topic. I'll share a bit from my own experience about what gross efficiency is, and how wildly different it is, even for the same athlete. It's just absurd. You can't say, this person has the gross efficiency. I put you on a different bike and your gross efficiency isn't so great anymore. But Niclas, fire away.

Björn: So, my basic idea first was, okay, let's look at economy. Gross efficiency is part, I'd say, of economy. But when we look at economy in cycling, we can't just look at the, I'd say, physiological part, meaning the gross efficiency that Björn mentioned. Rather, I'd even say we also need to look at mechanical economy, strategic economy. Basically, all of this falls under the same heading, and in the end it's about... With how much energy expenditure and actual power produced, how much speed can you get out of it. On one hand, there's the physiological component, meaning how efficiently the body handles oxygen, muscle coordination and pedaling technique, fat burning versus carb metabolism. So.

Niclas: You actually went one step too far just now, I'd say. You said gross efficiency is basically energy expenditure, bodily energy expenditure, and how much power comes out, and then you said speed. Now you're mixing two things. Yeah, that's true. I was actually paying attention. Unbelievable. So with energy expenditure and speed, you're of course right, if we're talking about running, theoretically. But I'd say, since we can also calculate running energetically, meaning in watts. I'd say, how much energy do I need to produce a certain power output? Am I the V8 engine that needs 20 liters, or am I the VW Lupo that needs 3 liters? And that's ultimately gross efficiency. We have a total amount of energy, and part of it dissipates as heat. And honestly, this part that dissipates as heat is enormous. It can range between 20... Exactly, 20 to 25 percent goes into the drivetrain, moves you forward, and the rest is heating. That's why rooms get warm when you sit on the trainer, and especially two people riding 200 watts around or whatever, a few more watts go into heat, and that's why rooms get warm. What does a normal heater put out? How many watts does it blast through? 500? No, more. I have no idea. A cheap fan heater, when you turn it on, it goes up to 1.5 kW. I don't know how efficient they all are. What's actually the efficiency of electric cars? I think it's also around 20, 25, and for combustion engines significantly worse. Man, now I'm... You did prepare, didn't you? Yeah, but not for electric cars, huh? No, I'm completely out there. That has to be thought about normally. No, no. Okay, so let's get off the siding back on track.

Björn: Right. So the gross efficiency we just talked about, I'd relate that to the physiological side. But you can also look at the mechanical... the mechanical side, let's call it. So aerodynamic position, for example, also plays a role in economy when we look at the whole of cycling. Material choice, meaning tires, bearings, lubrication, waxed chain, oily chain, dirty chain. And then, seen in racing, strategic economy. So do I ride in the slipstream, where do I position myself in the group, how do I pace, how do I plan my race, what about nutrition and energy management. Just a simple example: whenever you ride at the front in the wind, you have to expend more energy than the one behind you. That later also influences how much energy you burn at which point in the race, whether you can replace it through nutrition or not, and whether you end up faster or slower in the end.

Niclas: Important, just quickly, we had a great podcast with Jamie Loden in English. Definitely worth listening to. It was, of course, all about aerodynamics. Jamie Loden is the aerodynamics expert at Team Visma-Lease a Bike. And really, how aerodynamically the riders sit even on their road bike. And even in a peloton it makes sense to save three or four watts, because those are what's left at the end to go really fast. There was a very cool study on this, by the way, I think from Holland, that came out four or five years ago. They really measured a whole peloton. They rebuilt it. They really had, I think, 180 riders, built slightly smaller. And they put that in the wind tunnel and really looked at which positions are best to ride in. And it was a really wild study with a lot of effort behind it. And definitely a study that pushed the bar forward, in terms of aerodynamics, and especially aerodynamics in the field. And now, everything takes a while, people are starting to think about, okay, how can we ride even more efficiently? Does it make sense to be super aerodynamic already on the road bike, because the 4 watts I save in the peloton might be decisive later, especially in a three-week race.

Björn: Exactly, that's the point I was going to make, that aerodynamics, and with it seating position, what you wear, meaning how aerodynamically you're dressed, and how you ride in the race, is super decisive. In a one-day race, the longer such a race is, the more decisive it becomes, because energy expenditure grows, but especially also interesting in multi-day races. Simply having to bring up that energy every single day. Everything you can save, you have to take in less and end up fitter afterward. Save every grain, go farther to the front. Very nice, exactly. So, now gross efficiency... the physiological consideration. We're talking about mechanical power, the watts we put out, times the energy turnover, kilojoules per minute. And now, the interesting thing, in the end we can only really measure this through spiroergometry, if I understand correctly. Yes. Meaning, we have to look at how much power is being pedaled and how much oxygen is being consumed. And then we can calculate it all. How does this work, for example, when you do a FasterYou test?

Niclas: Well, the nice thing about cycling is actually that we're relatively fixed there. How many milliliters of oxygen does someone draw to produce one watt? One joule per second. Usually you say, I don't know, 11.7, 11.4. The fitter someone is, the flatter this curve typically falls. But we can roughly say, I'd put everything between 10 and 12 as the efficiency. The fitter someone is, the better the efficiency usually. There are of course totally crazy exceptions. Like that Swedish guy, what was his name, the U23 world champion with the 97 oxygen uptake, who then... Gustav something?

Björn: Ah, you mean the Norwegian. Norwegian, yeah, Norwegian. Yeah, he also quit after the U23.

Niclas: Right, exactly. And there's a nice excerpt in Rönnestad's book. It shows how efficient he was. And he actually got worse. I think he ended up drawing almost 13 milliliters, or 12.5 milliliters of oxygen, to produce one watt. He did have an enormously high oxygen uptake. But it didn't help him. He effectively got worse, especially in terms of threshold power and the like. And oxygen uptake expressed in watts also got worse. And yeah, that's a really interesting topic. But that's the only case I can really think of where someone got extremely worse. Inexplicably worse. And yeah, you'd have to take a closer look there. But ultimately, you have to take it with a grain of salt. We know it's always a bit of a black box when we measure efficiency and not everyone's named Blummenfelt or Iden and gets measured constantly. The smallest change in position leads to a different gross efficiency. Are you sitting upright, sitting flat, in the tri position? The lungs have different uptake, are longer, you have worse gross efficiency, theoretically higher oxygen uptake. These are factors you have to keep in mind. And therefore it makes sense to have a good bike fitting, and then also potentially look at what your efficiency actually is. There too, I remember, I've mentioned this several times, a study, I think it was actually a master's thesis, where they measured gross efficiency after bike fitting. And we thought, ha, they have higher oxygen uptake, haha, this gross efficiency has gotten worse. And there too, measured again several weeks later, the gross efficiency was back. So you can get used to every position, or not every, but many positions. You should always keep that in mind, especially on the topic of aerodynamics. Do I build myself aerodynamically onto the bike, or do I build myself biomechanically optimally onto the bike? For a short time trial it might make sense to ride in an uncomfortable position and slowly train into it. And for an Ironman, or triathlon in general, you probably have to come up with a position that... I'd put it this way, is a mix of good aerodynamics and still reasonable biomechanics. I might still have to run a marathon afterwards. So I shouldn't completely grill myself. Yeah, so... How many milliliters of oxygen do I need to produce one watt? And that's not linear. It also runs in certain ranges. If you ride Fatmax, you usually have a relatively high draw, and then it tapers off a bit toward the top. With less fit athletes, of course, it always looks relatively linear. And with relatively fit athletes, this oxygen curve, meaning how many milliliters of oxygen you need per watt, usually drops a bit. But even there I can say, it's not always like that. There are lots of exceptions. Does someone stand up while cycling, you do a spiro test, they don't stay seated, they rock around on the cranks, look at how people sit on the bike. If someone's fidgeting around the whole time, they'll have different oxygen uptake because they have more muscles in operation, compared to someone who sits relatively still. That's why this raw VO2max number is sometimes not so exciting. Someone can have an 85 oxygen uptake. At the end of the day, what counts is how many watts per kilo this person produces at VO2max. And if that's 8 watts, then we know they can ride really fast. And if it's only 6, well, 6 is already great, but if it's only 4 theoretically, then we know, not so great, even if there's a higher VO2max on paper. Those are the points where you can read quite a lot. How economical is someone? So someone with a low VO2max usually also has better efficiency, you can see that. Higher slow-twitch fiber percentage, they draw less oxygen. And yeah.

Björn: Right, so you just brought up a lot. I'm so sorry. All good. To classify this, what can actually influence gross efficiency, meaning economy on the bike? We have, for example, muscle fiber types, you just brought that up. So slow-twitch fibers, type 1 fibers, are more economical than fast-twitch fibers. Most highly trained endurance athletes have a proportionally higher share of type 1 fibers. But you have to add, for example, cross-country riders actually want to have fast-twitch fibers too, because they also need to be fast. So training them super economically may not be the way. Training them only on slow-twitch fibers isn't the golden path. I think there's always a, you should consider for example, that they definitely need fast-twitch fibers, and then the body should be accustomed to using them well, and then in turn being economical in that range too. So you always have to consider that. Just because someone has many fast-twitch fibers doesn't necessarily mean they're uneconomical for their demand profile, because they draw more oxygen; maybe that's even what you want. So a track cyclist wants to, as far as that goes, be in quotes uneconomical regarding type 1 fibers, but have his type 2 fibers economically structured, and he wants to push lots of energy through in a short time, which might not be economical over the long run. So you always have to be aware of the demand profile.

Niclas: That's also, by the way, briefly, always the crux with sprinters on the road. They have to make it to the finish. So they also need a large share of slow-twitch fibers. I'd say, sometimes you see these watt values and think, wow, wild, 1800 watts here. But those are actually really good, but there are also lots of regular people who can blast out such watt values. I think, or I believe I've seen, when you have soccer players, they also have incredibly high watt values in some cases. They have a really high percentage of fast-twitch fibers, or at least a higher percentage. And I don't know what the normal distribution is, but I read something about it many years ago. Alberto Salazar, the marathon runner, who was involved very negatively with the Nike Oregon Project back then.

Björn: He led that, right?

Niclas: Steve Magness blew the whistle on that. Very worth listening to, Steve Magness's podcast, by the way. Also just put out a new book, I saw. And he had a 92% slow-twitch fiber share. Salazar was highly adapted to marathon running. And even rowers have really high shares, still around 85%, from what I've read. And with cross-country skiers it's also quite interesting, I just saw this, that they also have an extremely high share of slow-twitch fibers in their arms, where you always think, that's really a very dominant share of fast-twitch fibers, but it's not. Fibers can always rebuild themselves a bit or take on a characteristic, let's say. And it's not, it's not a light switch. Fibers aren't light switches. It's not like, you only have fast fibers, only slow. It's always a spectrum, like a gray card. It goes from black to white, and somewhere in between is where you move a bit. And you can train it back and forth a bit. I'd say, if someone, just quickly, if someone... has a very high share of FTX fibers, meaning really fast sprint fibers, Usain Bolt style, then they have a fundamental advantage over everyone else. They don't need oxygen. And then we have the share of fast-twitch fibers, the normal ones. We can rebuild those a bit. Either they become more slow-twitch, or we leave them be and they're a bit more fast-twitch, can sprint a bit better. But those are kind of the ungrateful sprinters. They are fast, but if they can't make it to the finish, you have to train them more economically, and then you have the problem that they usually lose their snap. That's why these pure creatures, or phosphate sprinters I call them, who just have god-given super fast fibers, they're always at an advantage. Those are usually the ones you see, and the lead-out riders are then the ones who, with high glycolytic power, press through again at full tilt and bring them to the finish, and the really fast ones do the sprint. Right. And you also see, there are such phase-switchers even among the really fast ones. They become these super fast sprinters, they're young and think, wow, winning everything. And then they get older, and then they're not quite so fast anymore. Then they can still ride pretty well, and suddenly they're also riding Paris-Roubaix well, you see that sometimes. But they no longer have that final speed, because the fiber isn't quite so fast anymore. Become a bit slower, maybe also glycolytically. You have this switch from top to bottom. Although there are discussions that it might possibly go a bit backwards. Don't really know yet. Could be. At least I don't know. Right. And now we've made a little detour, and now Niclas can start sorting everything together again.

Björn: Sorry. All good. The next thing I'd bring up, which you already briefly touched on, would be pedaling technique and coordination. So, the better you sit on your bike, the better the bike is adapted to you, the less oxygen you consume. So if you have a rounder pedal stroke, let's call it that, and for example sit better on the bike and therefore have to use less, conversely, upper body musculature to produce good power, your upper body consumes less oxygen, you have, bluntly put, more oxygen left for your legs, and can ride better. Simply put. Same thing applies, for example, to cadence, though cadence is always a thing. Basically the study situation says about 85 to 95 is the optimum.

Niclas: It's actually really interesting there. The very old studies, or older studies, say 50 to 60 is the optimum. But those, they just grabbed some people off the street and they were riding at 120, 125 watts and drew incredibly little oxygen. It's intensity-dependent. And it's really interesting. Clemens Hesse, who's now the coach at Q36 and we've been in touch for a while and know each other pretty well, we still talk frequently. He put out a study in August, and it was really about cadence and where we're most efficient. And depending on the current performance level, a low cadence, I'd say, basic endurance training, you're going at 70, 72, and the more intense it gets, the higher the cadence goes. Now you have to ask yourself, does it make sense to grind around at a cadence of 70 the whole time? In a race it might not make that much sense, because you also have to accelerate. So it's not necessarily the super alternative, but it can definitely make sense, I already mentioned, for a long time trial on a flat course, like this here, what's that thing called, Kottel there, around that lake. Yeah, King of the Lake. King of the Lake, where everyone goes all out, the world championship of... Hobby time trialists? Yeah, hobby time trialists, exactly. We need to come up with a better one. No, it's a cool event. I find it totally interesting, because you can really tinker. UCI-wise, you can also kind of cheat a bit. So it's quite interesting. I mean, Rainer Kepplinger, who just rode sensationally strong at Tour of Oman. No, not Tour of Oman, but... Was it AlUla? AlUla, right, where Pidcock won and Kepplinger was practically second the whole time. Then in the last stage he was a bit sidelined, or also ridden really cleverly by Uno-X. And when I was training him back then, we also tinkered a bit aerodynamically and had fun. You can do that in this kind of race. And it can make sense, to bring it back, to have the frequency a bit lower. That way you just ride the whole time, how long is that ride? The really fast ones, just under an hour. I think about 55. Yeah, right. You can just blast through with a really big gear, on a great day, wind-wise optimal, maybe even a disc wheel. And then just absolutely hammer through with a 75, 80 cadence. And you have to briefly grind up that hill, but I think that works. And I can imagine there's potential there. Now I've given many people really cool ideas, they'll all go crazy and test around and buy front discs and imagine they're barely catchable.

Björn: Jamie said that yesterday too. Right, yeah.

Niclas: We did the... Wout did that, Wout van Aert at the Olympic Games, and the idea was always there that on such pancake-flat courses you can try that out. And unfortunately it rained a bit, so maybe it wasn't ideal, though for the men it worked out again, I believe. But still pretty wet. Yeah, so you can have lots of fun when it comes to cadence. And it's interesting. Where's the optimal cadence?

Björn: That was the point I wanted to jump on, that it also really depends on what you do in competition, which races you ride, where you want to be good, and what pedal cadences do you need for that. And then you should also ensure that you economize yourself in that, meaning also train it. so that you become more efficient in it. You should always think about what's my demand profile. Simply put, if I ride the Hero Dolomiti, that's a big mountain bike marathon race, you ride what feels like all day on gravel paths up 20% gradients, you'll most certainly have to pedal low cadences the whole time, simply due to the profile. Even if you put a 32-tooth chainring on. And you should have trained that, so that you can do it all day and be economical there.

Niclas: And then another point, that's the specificity you brought up. There isn't the optimal, well of course there are optimal cadences, we can say that fundamentally, but I'd go one step back. I remember a mountain biker I worked with, who liked to ride slightly bigger gears, which tends to be more economical, but then still limited in certain areas. Just train what you can't do. So the spectrum, the variance of your pedaling, should be optimized. And if you like to ride intervals, threshold or maybe even above, at an 80 cadence, because you ride big watts there and it's not so cardio-intensive, then I'd switch it. And the same the other way around. If someone prefers blasting high-frequency at 95 to 100 like a sewing machine, then it can make sense to say, ride that at 70. Then it's a completely different load and really phenomenal things can happen there, like power leaps. Cadence goes along with torque, and then activation of the muscles. Really interesting point. So I'd always say, what can you do, what do you like doing? Do something different for once. Instead of the four intervals you do now, you know, four times eight minutes threshold, a fantasy training, you ride the first with 95, the second with 70 or 60, and the next with 95 again, and the next with 70, or you have over-unders, do the overs with a big gear and the unders with a small one, or vice versa. So you can play around a lot, just to give the muscles different stimuli, because in the race you'll have to deliver it too. You have to activate fibers in various frequencies, fibers that are... that are fatigued, or activate others that aren't fatigued. That's a bit of the trick behind it. So really a spectrum. There isn't just grinding out a big gear and that's what you have to do because that's race-decisive. It's really being able to call up the spectrum, that's what's interesting. So at an Epic I'd say, for example, it definitely makes sense to be able to ride at relatively high torque. You also practice that beforehand, because the terrain otherwise just doesn't allow fast riding. It's way too rough. So you need to be able to grind through at a 70 cadence the whole time.

Björn: Yeah, that's something, I think, that I've definitely learned from you in recent years. If I have an athlete, to look more closely at their old races that they rode, and see, okay, what cadence did they ride? How did they ride? And what can the athlete maybe tell you about the race? Sure, seeing it from the past is a bit harder. But if they can tell you, yeah, okay, I totally blew up there or it ran really well. Okay, what cadence did they ride there? What could they do really well there? And from that maybe see a weakness and then train that. Like you said, if you always ride a 70 cadence, it could definitely help you to train higher cadences.

Niclas: Sure, classic. You get someone with hardly any lactate buildup, really low glycolytic power. Miracle training. Sure, strength training can be useful, but just saying, the first switch I make, but ride that at a cadence, and you watch and they're riding 70, 75 the whole time. Then you say, okay, now ride 95. Then for three, four days you get these hate-WhatsApps saying, my heart rate is totally high, what should I do now? And then suddenly lactate production goes up again. So small things help a ton, and people don't see it, even many coaches don't see it. They get measured and say, oh, that's not good, what do we do now? And then they start thinking, how do we train? We have to eat more carbs, we have to do strength training, and so on. All totally right and useful, but so minimally invasive, increase frequency, done.

Björn: That's often also, what you mentioned, they only see the one side that maybe they've always known. And that's why, I find, an exchange like we have is always important, so that you also see the other side and get new ideas, and then just try that with your athletes and see, does it actually do anything for them?

Niclas: So, next point on... Yeah, hold on, I've got something. Okay. Q-factor. Does Q-factor make a difference, efficiency-wise?

Björn: Well, the Q-factor in turn has an effect on your seat position, and so I'd say it definitely makes a difference.

Niclas: How wide should it be? That's a discussion I've been having for a long time. It started back then with Graham Obree, who took a bearing out of his washing machine because it was narrower than normal bottom brackets. That of course has an aerodynamic benefit too, it makes you narrower. But there's also a study on that. I think it came from England, Birmingham, if I'm not mistaken. And they also measured it through. They found that around, I think about 140 or so, or up to a maximum of 145 was the optimal Q-factor. And they saved, I think, about two and a half to three percent. So efficiency got significantly better. So also, you can think about it, the question is always, how stiff do the parts remain. And the frames, I mean, I don't know how much a SRAM has, they're relatively wide.

Björn: They are relatively wide, and it also depends on the bike you ride. Yeah, it's relatively wide. You can adjust it a bit more on a mountain bike than on a road bike, through cleat position. And then you can always adjust it via the axle of your pedals. I believe Shimano sells different width axles, at any rate. SQ Lab, for example, has mountain bike pedals with different axle widths. So that also makes sense. And I have to honestly admit, for me it was adjusted for the first time in my last bike fitting, and it definitely contributed directly to me now sitting straighter and having a better left-right distribution, which I also feel currently, for example, muscularly, that I feel my right glute more, which had been less loaded the whole time before. Yeah, so it definitely also makes a difference in that respect, and that's why I think we've said several times in this episode, bike fitting is definitely a huge point for improving your efficiency.

Niclas: Sure, absolutely, yeah, you can, there's also. Either you go to the bike fitter of your trust, we can hardly recommend anyone here, I know too few, I have to honestly say, I did it for a long time and I can't recommend myself anymore because I don't do it anymore, except for the one or two selected athletes who still come by. There are of course systems that record great data. Leomo, for example, is actually a nice system. When you give it to athletes and let them ride, you quickly see dead spots relatively fast. But a really good bike fitting. There's someone in Portugal, iBike they're called, who really makes a science out of it, and that's actually fascinating. He fits people for six, seven hours, with everything, pressure sensors, Leomo, camera, the works. He's an engineer himself, aerospace engineering, has a good background, and really goes all in. And yeah, you can really take it to the extreme, and you can get an incredible amount out of it. I mean, I don't know, when Clemens and I did bike fitting back when we worked together and had a company, we also had astonishing results. There was also a quick 20 watts jumping up somewhere, yeah, threshold and things like that. And discomfort, classic. So also look at the saddle every now and then. The saddle, since we're on efficiency, and you brought it up at the beginning, calm position. You have to sit on this saddle too. Yeah, exactly. Somewhere is the counter-support. You push in 400 watts, you have to hold the other side somehow. And if you have a saddle that's either A too narrow, or B somehow weirdly rounded, or one of the two, then the sit bone just slides over. And then you simply lose efficiency and also get problems at some point. Then suddenly something in the lumbar spine hurts, because you're wobbling around the whole time. And yeah, that's why it definitely makes sense to look at it. Pressure measurement insoles, or films in general, I find, are always a pretty nice thing, in the feet and on the saddle. Gebiomais does that, I believe. Are there any other manufacturers still? I don't know, but those were the ones who used this back then.

Björn: I think in that area Gebiomais is definitely leading. The bike fitter where I went, who I also recommend to my own athletes and can recommend in good conscience, is Wattwerk from Erkelenz. Really? Can I advertise for him now? I think I can. But we'll get a coupon now, right? I will. No, I paid normally. Are you saying that now? Yeah, that's how it is. In any case, he does a really good job. He also worked for the track national team, meaning he was national coach in Austria, and he's really top-notch when it comes to bike fitting. I worked as a bike fitter myself, and I have to say, he definitely does that better than I could. I can say that. I have no problem with it. Everyone who came to you before is saying now.

Niclas: he's leaving a bit of a trail of ashes now.

Björn: Yeah, it's not bad. I can live with that. I'm young. I can stand by the fact that I definitely don't yet work perfectly, or have worked. I always keep learning.

Niclas: Everything is change. You have to accept suffering. That's Buddhism, practiced Buddhism, you're doing here. I like it.

Björn: Right. So him I'd definitely... He's the only one I know. But bike fitting makes sense, looking at your cadences, training that if necessary. And then, next point on the list, mitochondrial density. And with it, VO2max, because higher VO2max, higher mitochondrial density, means higher fat burning. Right? So? And we thus have better aerobic efficiency, because you burn more fat, and thus definitely at lower power outputs, meaning everything below threshold, you're definitely more efficient. And especially when we look at long races, you're definitely in a better spot and use less energy, or rather use fewer carbs. Everyone has enough fat on the body, so even if you have 5% body fat, that's plenty to do multiple Ironmans in a row, in terms of energy. And so a higher VO2max usually, if we leave out the Norwegian with his 97, higher VO2max brings better efficiency with it, because you have higher mitochondrial density and burn more fat. That's, I think, also the classic. Burn fat in the fire of carbs, because when you have more mitochondria, you of course also burn lots of energy, but also burn more fat.

Niclas: Yeah, exactly. Oh, I haven't heard that sentence in a while. Awesome. Love it. Yeah, exactly. But you also have to look at it. The bigger the engine, the better it is, the higher the VO2max. Absolutely. And there also, of course, efficiency, meaning VLamax of course, let's call it VLamax, glycolytic power, of course, still plays a role. Back in the day, people tried to push it down, or brutally push it down, I'd say, by riding fasted or doing low-carb strategies and so on. That led to success in some cases. Through the high carb amounts we have now, we can develop better oxygen uptake in athletes, and they're still performant enough to attack. You accept a higher lactate production rate, but overall they're simply better. And therefore, I find, that's just significantly more attractive cycling. I mean, back in the day it was first hill, second hill, third hill, okay, an attack, and you wait around for six hours until something happens once. And nowadays, sure, Pogačar rides, boom. I mean, Team Sky, as much as they revolutionized cycling, they were just cruising at the front like mopeds and nobody passed. And then at some point Froome attacked, or Wiggins did too. That was the tactic, just grind through the thing and be so efficient. That changed over the years, which is also pretty cool. Yeah, right.

Björn: Yes, so, to summarize I'd definitely say, everything you can do to improve your efficiency will bring you something in the end. What I found super interesting from Jamie yesterday is that if you just start engaging with your aerodynamic position, you'll get... If you compare how much time you invest in training, and how much time you possibly invest in an aerodynamic bike fitting, you definitely get more performance out of an aerodynamic bike fitting or a better position on the bike in significantly shorter time than if you just dumbly train more. So this time invested in a bike fitting and then in a better aerodynamic position is definitely more efficient in hindsight than just dumbly training the same thing you've always trained.

Niclas: That's still, it all sounds so virtual, but there too, when I think about our diagnostics, I talked with Sebastian about it two days ago, that we add a few more scores that represent exactly these things. So, speed that's reachable at a certain wattage, because that's not a virtual value. I say here 200 watts, 50 kmh, and then you have some gauge that tells you, like a needle, I'd say, is that fast or is that good, how am I in comparison, so you can categorize yourself a bit. So this speed per, I don't know, power, so how many watts do I produce and what speed do I have. That's a score that's super interesting, and things like that are getting more and more interesting. Such scores will of course also, we'll build them in soon. Yes, so you have that, so you know, okay, he's really fast. And I find that actually covers relatively much about the performance of an athlete, about speed, because at the end of the day, it's not the watts that count, the boats, but always the speeds, the velocity.

Björn: I find what Olav Alexander Bu always says so nicely, he always says, only the speed that comes out in the end counts. How you get fast is actually irrelevant. So if you have incredibly much time in the aerodynamic position invested, and accept, I'd say, I don't know, one or two percent less clean training time for it, but afterwards in the competition you just sit more aerodynamically and go much faster, if you ride faster, you're better.

Niclas: Done. Look at the data from Dan Bickham when he did the hour record. I mean, that's still the second-fastest hour record ever ridden.

Björn: And he pedaled significantly less power, right?

Niclas: Yeah, I don't know. I don't have any other numbers. But the last quarter hour with Dan is really interesting. Those are values where I say, wow, what the heck, right? 270 watts isn't exactly astounding, right? But you can see, he's riding 50, over 50 around there, right? And that's interesting to see, how much influence it has, how super fast you can be when you're aerodynamically optimized, absolutely, yeah.

Björn: Yeah, so the best example, this became clear to me yesterday. So yesterday we recorded the episode with Jamie, after that I got on the bike and just said, okay, I'm just gonna test now, because I didn't, well, I knew of course, okay, if you sit aerodynamically you're better, but how big is the measurable difference really? And I took a stretch here, 1.5 kilometers flat out, flat back, and rode always one direction, so out and back always the same position, always the same watts. And just the difference between gripping the mountain bike wide, and gripping it tight near the stem, without changing my head position, just changing the grip position, is simply at 220 watts, 1.5 kilometers, 10 seconds. I thought, what the heck? So that's, compared to what we ride in a race, 220 watts is no power. And I haven't even started and for example also gripped tight and sat low or put my head down. So there's, just regarding aerodynamics, an enormous amount of difference. And I think everyone who races should just become aware of that. If you have a flat stretch, where you don't need to steer much, grip tight, done. It's always the little details.

Niclas: The faster you are, the more decisive aerodynamics is. That's just how it is. And... I mean, that's why Sebastian developed this aero test many years ago. For outside. And we see the results that are being ridden here. I mean, how many WorldTour teams are really just using our system? And anyone can use it. It's super, super, super simple. The app is free. You can download it in the Garmin store. Then you just need a speed sensor, meaning a magnet on the spokes. Please not those things on the hubs. And then you have your wheel circumference and then you test, and please don't test with high-profile wheels or whatever, just nice and easy position. And then the system spits out, bang, you ride one way, one back, another way, another back, and then you have your CdA value immediately. It gets sent to your Garmin. Done. And then you know, okay, that's fast or that's not fast, and then you do an aero test. So sensitizing yourself to your position on the bike, a lot needs to happen there still. I mean, we all drive wild cars that have all been modeled aerodynamically in the wind tunnel. And people give little thought to how I'm actually sitting on the bike or whether I'm aerodynamic. They buy a €5,000 S5 or something, which is also an awesome bike. But sit on the bike like an IKEA shelf. Doesn't really help, right? Then you can also get your steel frame, it's just as fast. Or an aluminum tube, a Cannondale CAAD, whatever. Cool bikes, but maybe not that aerodynamically optimized. And yeah, so think about that and just test, test, test. The 20, 30 watts you get out after two tests, you can't train onto your threshold in a year. No chance. Aerodynamics is... Dope.

Björn: And legal too. Okay, if we look at training now, what would be the workouts you'd prescribe to every athlete who wants to improve their efficiency? Just quickly, before you answer, my simple thoughts here are always, first become aware of your demand profile, which races do you want to ride and what do you really have to deliver in the race. You have to invest a bit of time to look at how the guys who win my races ride, what they do, how they sit on the bike, we just talked about that, but also when do they pedal, how much power, what cadences do they ride, how do they maybe also ride around corners, so things like that. And then perhaps in the next step, look at, okay, what do they train? That's probably, if you don't have access to all the tools, a bit difficult. But I think if you look a bit at, okay, what's my demand profile, you can with a bit of knowhow already draw good conclusions, or you get a coach who does that for you.

Niclas: We could also talk for an hour longer.

Björn: Yeah, I'd definitely like to give people a bit of training tips. What could you do to improve your efficiency for your races? So very basically.

Niclas: So basically, efficiency. I'd now, I always think about, how does training work? And quite bluntly, you want to ride a bike race. How do you train for a bike race? You don't stand there and always ride a bike race. That's not training. That's racing. That's racing, exactly. But you want to train for a bike race, and you ride races now. That's not, of course there's some stimulus, but maybe not the one we necessarily wanted. Especially it leads to overreaching. That means you first have to start isolating training stimuli, and possibly break it down into components. And when we're talking about efficiency, we're usually talking about the pedal stroke and the position. Position, clearly, we can do something with bike fitting and this and that, and through that we can maybe have a better pedal stroke, then you look at hip angle, how that is, but what does that also mean for the muscle, so where does energy dissipate, where do we have the biggest power loss? So either we sit too high, what happens at the 12 o'clock position? So in the 12 o'clock position we push forward. That's the first thing I always think about. Where are we losing a bit of stroke? Can the chain speed up top be increased, for example with an oval chainring, if you want that? Or can I train this muscle so I can actively push over better? Many, many years ago. This was long before my time, shortly before, after the fall of the wall, many Russian cyclists were around in Berlin, and they always played soccer. Before the race in some cases. I thought, huh? They always shot using the instep. And then a former roommate, who was also considerably older than me, explained why they do that. Just to... better execute this movement out of the hip. And this thought, whether that works or not is kind of moot, but I found this thought really interesting. I found this thought really interesting. And we have that in running too. I need to have a high knee. And improving this movement speed in, let's say, the 10, 11, 12, 1 o'clock position, possibly training it isolated first, saying, I have a rubber band, a Theraband or whatever, attach it to the radiator or something else, and just pull my leg forward in a kind of pedaling position, and see what happens. Then you'll quickly notice, oh, this muscle gets tired. Or classic, ride one-legged. Though the question is always, does that make sense? Because we pedal with the other leg too. But consciously noticing, what happens when I ride one-legged? Where do you have the problem with one-legged riding? At the dead spots. At the dead spots, yeah. Down low it usually still works. But this pulling up, and especially the push phase, that's actually always what's decisive.

Björn: You mean now the transition from, I pull up, to I push back down. That point up top. Right.

Niclas: Actually I'd leave out the pull phase. There are also a few studies on that. Is there a round pedal stroke? Who has a round stroke? Many years ago it was determined that mountain bikers have a much rounder stroke.

Björn: Yeah, of course, we're the better cyclists.

Niclas: They have much steeper terrain, they're forced to pull, but in principle you shouldn't pull. That's a misconception too. So please don't pull. Sure, it happens sometimes when it gets really steep, then it can possibly be useful, but actually you will, through movement speed, so that the muscle... the passive muscle doesn't start grinding around there, otherwise it messes up practically, the pedaling pattern. But this position, 11, 12, 1 o'clock, actively pushing the leg over. And over the years I've observed, we haven't done that yet, at least with the athletes, that if you execute this push better, they just ride better. They just ride faster. Especially in positions that are aerodynamically interesting. That you're able, in a low position, to call up this ability, to generate power there. That's, I find, a really interesting thought. And right, you always have to see... breaking things down. I find that's a totally cool thing. What's fast, what's not fast, how is the pedal stroke built up, why do you do that? That's similar to Obree, who lay on his back and then just pedaled, pedaled into the air, and watched, oh, somehow my legs are really narrow there. And that's actually my natural stance. I'm not, I don't ride so bow-legged. And then he started pulling the bearing out of his washing machine and then built a narrower bottom bracket and then constructed a frame for himself. And right, efficiency exercises, so you could imagine leading that along a bit with strength training too, something like what the leg axis does, do I buckle in or not, what's the reason for it, is it a muscular problem somehow in the legs, is it a problem with my feet, do I have a problem where my foot arch collapses? Can I do something about that? Can I just passively stuff in an insole? Or do I start picking up towels with my toes or doing the Janda short foot or whatever it's called? So great physio exercises. Great. Yeah, I mean, it makes sense. It also makes sense for real life. A flat foot isn't great. It's a sprung spring. And everything else that you have to dampen with a flat foot, or rather can't dampen, lands directly in the knee or hip. So your foot is the, it's the leaf spring of your body. So it makes sense to also train it. With cycling, it just doesn't get trained. That's why you just throw an insole in there. Though there are of course insoles that strengthen that a bit, and activate the foot arch a bit and hold it a bit more. Right, just sitting still, also an interesting thing, to become aware, I'm sitting calmly now. Many years ago there was a company called... I think it was also called iBike or iSEN, I don't remember. They put out the first sensors that, I'd say, didn't measure their own dynamics. They also had this little channel where it went in. But they could detect if you're riding in the slipstream or not.

Björn: That's also a bit what, I think, the new Wahoo bike computer can do, or is supposed to do.

Niclas: Is supposed to. I haven't heard anything further. I already wrote Javier, he said, we tinkered a bit but haven't really taken it out properly. Right, and you could do that there. But they had another capability, these bike computers. It was this white thing with green. Technically of course hard to use, all data, all a catastrophe, yeah, so user experience equal zero, unfortunately. And they also had a kind of spirit level. I think it was integrated into this display, I don't have it clearly in mind anymore. And it showed you how much self-movement you actually have on your bike. And that's actually also a really interesting thing. At which pedal stroke is the bike wobbling along the whole time, or is energy really going forward? You should really pay attention to that too, am I sitting calmly, am I not, am I wobbling, and if I sit in front of the mirror, what am I actually doing, am I calm? I mean, Bradley Wiggins, a beautiful example, when he won the Tour of California. 2012, I think. There was a nice commentary from one of the moderators, who said, Wiggins just rode up there like a moped, unfortunately wasn't nominated for the Tour that year. That would have been interesting, because he was really in shape. And that was also the year, I think, when... Froome broke his foot. Okay. On this cobblestone section during the Tour, and Nibali won. Yeah, I think I remember pretty well. Didn't Froome break his hand then? Or his hand, something was, right, hand or foot.

Björn: He definitely crashed on the cobblestones.

Niclas: We can note that. And I remember precisely, because I was invited, I was at the Tour, I was there twice I think, in between I was at Transalp, worked there, and then flew in again to Paris on the Champs-Élysées. That was also the first women's race. And at least I was invited there. And Nibali won, I think, that year. That's why I remember it well. But to come back around, at least Wiggins rode up this mountain with a relatively high cadence and just nothing moved. Nothing. And the commentator said, look at this Bradley Wiggins. You could set a teacup on his shoulder and nothing would spill. And that's this elegant, efficient riding. That brings something. And we measure that in oxygen uptake too. If someone's fidgeting around, you have a higher oxygen uptake. But if someone's really calm and brings efficiency forward, then most are a bit better in terms of performance. So training this makes sense. Really concentrate on being calm. No, I don't fall into this pattern of working the upper body and so on, but just say, calm, my legs are working, and the rest sits calmly. It makes sense to look at the saddle there, it makes sense to strengthen your core stability, as it's so nicely called, somehow cross-sectionally. You pedal with left and hold with right, to catch the energy. That's why it makes sense to also do something like a cable pull from below up once on the right. Something like that, you can come up with, and we're back to breaking down the tasks in cycling, and you always have to be holistic, and you can do an insane amount, and you just have to find the time and the leisure for it, and then there are coaches who do that. But they also have to have the time and pattern for it, because I, sorry, I can't really do that. You do that maybe for ten pros who are still there, and where it really matters. And for the others it's also a high financial burden to do such things. Right, but thinking for yourself, what am I actually doing? How do I sit on the bike, and how can I become more efficient? And efficiency always means, a calm body produces energy.

Björn: Yeah, so I think, what you just mentioned, if you simply have a coach who's already thought about such things, and then for example, that's what I have for my athletes, put together different strength programs, okay, which exercises make sense, which exercises can you do there, and basically, if you do a good athletic training twice a week, where exercises, that, what you mentioned, this left leg is loaded, right arm is loaded for example, exercises that include something like that, anyone can do. It'll ultimately, if you do it twice a week and over a longer period of time, probably make you better. So to that extent, you can of course already represent that, really go into detail. Most, or also many pros I know, have an extra trainer for that. They get their cycling plan, I'd say, they're told, okay, Tuesdays you do your athletic training, and then maybe every now and then you go to someone who does athletic training with you and looks more precisely at that, because that absolutely makes sense. We can't always be on site and work on site with everyone.

Niclas: But unilateral exercises, one-arm kettlebell swing, things like that. Though bilateral things also work quite well. Rowing, for example. So look at rowers, how they sit on the bike. They're rock solid. That's why, before you start buying a new bike, buy a rowing ergometer. Best investment. And they also last so long. They never break.

Björn: Rowing ergometer and kettlebells. With those you can cover 90% of the strength training you need. Even more.

Niclas: We've said that before. You can represent everything with those.

Björn: There's an episode on that.

Niclas: There's an episode on that, yeah. I'm a big rowing ergometer fan, because I think it's the best training there is. You do everything for the body, and you're reasonably fit afterwards. You have to watch a bit on the lumbar spine, that you don't get too much pressure, or if there are problems, you have to counter-steer there, or not pull too hard, otherwise you can really hurt yourself on the ribs and such things, have all experienced. But exactly, that also leads to sitting much more efficiently on the bike, because you simply become incredibly stable throughout the trunk area. Movement for speed.

Björn: Right. What my tips would be still, which I've already mentioned, look at your demand profile. For example, mountain bike marathon, you spend a lot of time on climbs, for example in threshold range or sweet spot range. That means that possibly also in the competition-specific phase, train that, look for the A race, what gradient is there, are they super steep, meaning you'll probably ride a lower pedal frequency, train that with sweet spot training or also over-unders threshold training, whatever, so look at it a bit, cross-country riders possibly add more sprint training here and there, so that you think about, okay, what do I need for racing, fundamentally all year work on improving your VO2max, put in proper base miles, sure, but then in the specific blocks, in my opinion, every training that specifically fits your competition is allowed. And you just have to pick that out and adjust it accordingly. So, seat position, pedaling technique, and then equipment and nutrition. Meaning, take in enough carbs. And material choice, waxed chain, I think that's by now well known that it helps. Fast tires, good tires, all adjusted to the surface. So if you have very hard terrain, a wider tire makes sense. I think that's also well known in gravel sports by now, the better the tire is tuned to the terrain, the faster you are. There too, wider is possibly better, even if it's aerodynamically worse. And then bearings, possibly, though Ceramic Speed bearings for example, so ceramic bearings, don't always have to make sense, I'd say. It depends a bit, if you already have a well-running bearing. Whether it really has to be the 3, 4, 5, 600 euros that fun costs, or whether you can work on other things first, is always the question. I think most athletes who buy themselves such a nice oversized pulley wheel cage have enough other things on the list where you could probably invest the 800 euros better.

Niclas: And don't start testing wheels by picking them up and spinning them. That's also an illusion, because there are many bearings that only run really well under pressure. So maybe have them in the bike and then spin them, you have a better impression of it. Whether they really run smoothly or not. But yeah, sure, ceramic bearings can be useful, but they also wear out fast.

Björn: Yeah, and I think it only makes sense because they're simply so expensive. For 99 percent of people, invest the money in other places first. So if someone tells me he's got a complete Ceramic Speed bike but has never been to a bike fitting. Yeah, great. So you could have invested that money differently too. Yeah, possibly.

Niclas: Maybe. Good. Good. We made it through somehow, I'd say, today. I found it really good. Learned something again. Especially finally an episode where I wasn't prepared, but could still say something.

Björn: And once again an episode in German for those who don't follow the English episodes so much. Very nice. Then thanks a lot, Björn. Have a good week. And we'll talk next week. Until soon. Ciao, ciao.