Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 5 of 5     «   Prev   2   3   4   5
fitbyfred

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 168
 #61 
Juerg, yes, precisely. May I connect this topic chat in relation to another current topics I'm chatting through?

If I start a client, assessing with MOXY and find the tHb trends under compression loads are decreasing is it valuable to move the stimulus toward that which supports reassessments showing and tHb increasing trend to initial loading ?
ryinc

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 369
 #62 
Thanks for reply Jeurg. This triggered another thought. In the book, training and racing with a powermeter (Coggan and Allen), if I remember correctly they argue that maximal strength is not often the limiting factor in cycling. They compare the maximum force that can be applied at very high resistance vs the type of force applied in cycle races for the same athlete. Racing and riding at FTP only about 25-55% of maximum force is applied. Does it make sense that we are seeing occlusions at forces that are much lower than maximum force?

Second, for cyclists that show venous occlusion trends, have you repeated tests at higher cadences and observed reductions in occlusion? I.e.there are comments in the various threads that the limiter is sport specific, but is it perhaps cadence specific in cycling? I.e. at cadence of 80 my limiter might be muscle strength (say) but at cadence of 90 limiter is for example CO?
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #63 
Great great points.
 The  Coggan Hunter point is  absolutely the  way  we have experience.
 Rhomerts  old  idea  show changes in  blood flow  by  about 30 +- % . We never see SEMG activity in a  one hour  workout   on  stable situation ( no sprints  or out of the a saddle [wink] higher than 30 +-  %  of  maximal  SEMG activity. We did  SEMG studies  with  some top world  class athletes  and  had this  always confirmed. 30 +-  max   contraction strength activity
 So  again  once we  can increase maximal power  the 30 %  will be  reached by a higher wattage.
 The question here is often  intermuscular  coordination. to avoid a  sever use of  on muscle   compared to the full team.
 Easy example is. Take a bike and  move the seat  down by 5 - 10 cm  and bike. You will have different  use of   muscles  and thereof  different performance  and as well different VO2  max  values  compared to an  optimal efficient  seat height.
. So the point they  make that maximal strength is  not that important,  if they make that  makes  sense  , when we  have a non optimal coordination  intermuscular. as   when we use a  single    muscle  and use  strength there we have a time bomb on hand due to  occlusion  risk  and  therefor delivery problem.if we see occlusion trends in cycling than we have a problem on hand  due to delivery limitation.
 On the other side  we can us this information to stimulate   utilization. will be back on this later as this is fun to work this way.
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #64 
Second  great  input  above 
 

Second, for cyclists that show venous occlusion trends, have you repeated tests at higher cadences and observed reductions in occlusion? I.e.there are comments in the various threads that the limiter is sport specific, but is it perhaps cadence specific in cycling? I.e. at cadence of 80 my limiter might be muscle strength (say) but at cadence of 90 limiter is for example CO?

Great point. Yes   we see so often the ongoing discussion n what  RPM is the best.
 There is no best , there is  an optimal RPM  at the right time in a race or  workout.
 Athletes with a weaker  maximal strength  will have a higher risk  to create a  possible   blood flow restriction in a lower RPM  and therefore may prefer a higher RPM  as there is less  compression pressure  as well as  less duration of compression  in a higher cadence. So  they can easier maintain circulation and therefor  have a better delivery of O2 .
 On the other hand as  mentioned, an athlete with a great  strength may  be able to sustain a free blood flow  at  60 RPM but on the other side,  if he increases RPM  he may have a coordination problem  and with it  is less efficient  and  he may now suddenly have a respiratory  additional demand  and  may push the  respiration over its limit  which than creates the  so often discussed possible  reactions.

Bike fitting  and  optimal technique  can nicely be look at   when we integrate  MOXY into the picture. This  gives  additional meaning to bike  fitting. We  do mainly just physiological bike fitting but best   may be  biomechanical  bike fitting paired  with physiological bike fitting  and NIRS  could be  a  fast  and  cheap option.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

HTML hit counter - Quick-counter.net