Segueing from the “anking” thread, already a segue from the biopace thread.
The method described by the link Garth includes keeping a constant cadence and KOPs, which I guess makes me an unworthy candidate, as I like a high saddle with large setback, a straight knee, toes-down pedaling style, and prefer to stay in the same gear over a widish range of conditions and cadences, with a penchant for low rpm torquing. What is interesting, to me at any rate, is what different riders find to be their more “natural” pedaling styles, and why (body type, pedaling style, gearing choices, bike setup) it is “natural." Am I right in thinking that a “natural” pedaling style (for an experienced rider) will be that rider’s most efficient pedaling style? I like a high saddle well set back; when a saddle is even a wee bit too low, my knees feel cramped. My toes tend to point down when I pedal. I have short femurs and tend to run out of breath if I pedal too rapidly. I tend to mash, tho’ I often self-consciously “scrape” my feet through the bottom of the stroke for a bit of extra torque to crest a rise or handle a wind gust. I tend to cruise in 3 or 4 or 5 closely spaced gears and, when moving out of the cruising range, tend to coast on downhills and mash on uphills. This is reinforced because with butt back and when mashing at low rpm, this makes your torso support your upper body, so that your shoulders + arms + hands do the “piano playing” bit over the bar. One my most pleasant cycling sensations is pedaling for distances at low cadence and high torque up a gradual incline or against a moderate headwind, shoved back in the saddle and in a highish gear. Interesting: We speak of the Sturmey Archer AW “three speed hub,” and of course talk about 5 or 6 or 7 or 10 speed auto transmissions. From what I read, in the auto industry, the term “speed” was originally literal: with inflexible (as to rpm) but torquey early engines you basically had speed ranges in each gear and didn’t shift to maintain optimum rpm or cadence but only when conditions were likely to make the engine stall or revolve uselessly with a lot of noise but little forward effect. It was only at either limit that you shifted. I recall a very early SA advertisement for the AW or a similar ancestor: basically, “You have all the gears you need: one for hills, one for downhills, and one for flatland cruising." I feel like one of those early automotive engines, and I also feel like the poster boy for that SA advertisement. Miscellaneous musings. I’d like too hear others’ styles, experiences, thoughts, suggestions, even well-intentioned (but *informed!!*) criticisms. Patrick “still likes 1-tooth jumps between about 60” and 80” Moore, who bailed into the 68” granny on the 17/19 t Dingle on the NW return this noon against the variable NW spring wind — for about 3 miles, then got off and shifted the chain back to the 17/75". On Thu, Mar 19, 2026 at 8:22 AM Garth <[email protected]> wrote: > I find the scraping mud sensation quite natural, but I don't consider that > ankling as I first heard of it. It's also not as if I or anyone is a > robot/machine with the incapacity to use different mucscle groups on demand > while riding variuos terrains and cadences. The term "ankling" to me infers > a conscious effort to dip the heel throughout the stoke, even the bottom. > What I'm referring to keeps the foot relatively level thoughout the > downstroke, even at the bottom. No straining. If anything I find it more > relaxing and very efficient. This is how I learned of it from the Greg > Lemond book of the 80's. In scraping mud off your feet, the feet are level > all the through the back pull. I do not scrape heel first either(nor walk > heel first), it's mid-to-fore foot that hits first, then pull back with a > level foot. It's still widely done today by many professionals, because for > many riders it's their natural stroke, where their optimal power is. > Everyone has their natural way of pedalling though, some keep a level foot, > some tend to point the toes down. Saddle height also plays a role here, if > the saddle is just too high it'll be impossible to do or even "test" this. > Strength, flexibility, mobility all contribute. Even if one "tests" it, > unless they stick with it for a long time and find it's suitable for them, > they'll likely revert back to what they were doing before. This doesn't > disprove the motion however > > Regardless, this article speaks to what 'm referring to. > https://cacyclinghub.com/what-is-ankling-in-cycling/ > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CALuTfguYR%2BDOcMz8L6kROosoE8zU4qkrxKZziW4%2B30YXJA7Tcw%40mail.gmail.com.
