cycling tips should you push harder with the wind or against the wind
When cycling outdoors, one unavoidable natural factor is the complex and variable wind direction. If you encounter a tailwind, cyclists can easily reach high speeds, whereas when facing a headwind, even with maximum effort, they can only maintain a relatively high speed. If a route has both tailwind and headwind sections, what strategy should be adopted to achieve the most efficient cycling effect, that is, to use the least amount of time?
Many people believe that cycling with full effort during a tailwind is the most effective method. However, research by former professional team and time trial expert David Millar shows a completely different result. Millar explains simply that during high resistance (headwind or uphill), cyclists can produce higher output power, and power is the guarantee of speed. Therefore, if a route has both tailwind and headwind sections, to ride faster, you should save your energy for the headwind sections to explode.
David Millar's energy allocation theory
To prove his theory, David Millar cited his victory in the individual time trial at the 2010 Commonwealth Games. His biggest competitor that year was the British TT national champion from the Movistar Team, Dorset. The course was an out-and-back route with completely opposite wind directions in the first and second halves. The first half had a strong tailwind, while the second half had an equally strong headwind.
David Millar completed the tailwind section with an average power of 395W and an average speed of 57 km/h, leading Dorset by 3 seconds at the halfway point. In the second half, Millar's average power was as high as 450W, with an average speed of only 40-45 km/h. However, he decisively won the second half by 52 seconds, ultimately winning the race by a large margin of 55 seconds.
In the post-race exchange, Dorset said his strategy was to accelerate fully during the tailwind section (still losing by 3 seconds, ultimately not as strong as Millar), and then grit his teeth and hold on during the headwind section. Although Dorset also gave his best effort, Millar believed he lost because he didn't ride 'economically': 'Maintaining a proper speed and then exerting effort in the highest resistance areas is the key to victory.'
From David Millar's explanation, although this theory is vivid, it seems to lack sufficient persuasiveness. Therefore, I interviewed a triathlon coach and a cycling literature author. They both coincidentally mentioned Graeme Obree, the innovator of time trial bikes and former hour record holder.
Obree once said that the fastest rider is not necessarily the winner of the race; the one who can maintain their speed has a greater chance of winning. In other words, a time trial cyclist must strive to maintain a stable speed to win the race, rather than pursuing short-term high output and high speed, which would cause significant speed fluctuations in different situations.
The key to winning a time trial is to endure on the sections that slow you down and maintain a high speed on the tailwind sections. Although it is impossible to ride a time trial at a constant speed, an experienced cyclist will know how to reasonably use their physical limits.
The biggest opponent in cycling is resistance, including ground friction and wind resistance. The faster you ride, the greater the wind resistance becomes. Under the same road conditions, increasing speed from 40 km/h to 45 km/h requires an additional 100W of power output. However, when climbing or facing a strong headwind, increasing speed from 15 km/h to 20 km/h only requires an additional 50W of power output, which saves a lot of power compared to accelerating at high speed. Therefore, in theory, the greater the resistance and the slower you ride, the more you should exert full effort, as it is more economical in terms of power.
Imagine you and David Millar both have to ride a 40 km individual time trial, with half being a tailwind and half being a headwind. Due to different resistances, the time spent on each side will definitely be different. If you adopt Dorset's strategy, the average speed on both sides will vary greatly, while maintaining a stable average speed is a more efficient method. This is because the power required to maintain a high average speed is actually lower than breaking a speed limit and can be better sustained. Therefore, exert full effort during the headwind, and take the tailwind as a chance to slightly rest.
(Article sourced from the internet. Please inform us for deletion if it involves infringement.)
Many people believe that cycling with full effort during a tailwind is the most effective method. However, research by former professional team and time trial expert David Millar shows a completely different result. Millar explains simply that during high resistance (headwind or uphill), cyclists can produce higher output power, and power is the guarantee of speed. Therefore, if a route has both tailwind and headwind sections, to ride faster, you should save your energy for the headwind sections to explode.
At this point, some cyclists might argue that although the cyclist's output power increases during a headwind, air resistance also increases significantly compared to a tailwind. From a physics standpoint, this argument is certainly correct, but it ignores a key principle.
David Millar's energy allocation theory
To prove his theory, David Millar cited his victory in the individual time trial at the 2010 Commonwealth Games. His biggest competitor that year was the British TT national champion from the Movistar Team, Dorset. The course was an out-and-back route with completely opposite wind directions in the first and second halves. The first half had a strong tailwind, while the second half had an equally strong headwind.
David Millar completed the tailwind section with an average power of 395W and an average speed of 57 km/h, leading Dorset by 3 seconds at the halfway point. In the second half, Millar's average power was as high as 450W, with an average speed of only 40-45 km/h. However, he decisively won the second half by 52 seconds, ultimately winning the race by a large margin of 55 seconds.
In the post-race exchange, Dorset said his strategy was to accelerate fully during the tailwind section (still losing by 3 seconds, ultimately not as strong as Millar), and then grit his teeth and hold on during the headwind section. Although Dorset also gave his best effort, Millar believed he lost because he didn't ride 'economically': 'Maintaining a proper speed and then exerting effort in the highest resistance areas is the key to victory.'
From David Millar's explanation, although this theory is vivid, it seems to lack sufficient persuasiveness. Therefore, I interviewed a triathlon coach and a cycling literature author. They both coincidentally mentioned Graeme Obree, the innovator of time trial bikes and former hour record holder.
Obree once said that the fastest rider is not necessarily the winner of the race; the one who can maintain their speed has a greater chance of winning. In other words, a time trial cyclist must strive to maintain a stable speed to win the race, rather than pursuing short-term high output and high speed, which would cause significant speed fluctuations in different situations.
The key to winning a time trial is to endure on the sections that slow you down and maintain a high speed on the tailwind sections. Although it is impossible to ride a time trial at a constant speed, an experienced cyclist will know how to reasonably use their physical limits.
The biggest opponent in cycling is resistance, including ground friction and wind resistance. The faster you ride, the greater the wind resistance becomes. Under the same road conditions, increasing speed from 40 km/h to 45 km/h requires an additional 100W of power output. However, when climbing or facing a strong headwind, increasing speed from 15 km/h to 20 km/h only requires an additional 50W of power output, which saves a lot of power compared to accelerating at high speed. Therefore, in theory, the greater the resistance and the slower you ride, the more you should exert full effort, as it is more economical in terms of power.
Imagine you and David Millar both have to ride a 40 km individual time trial, with half being a tailwind and half being a headwind. Due to different resistances, the time spent on each side will definitely be different. If you adopt Dorset's strategy, the average speed on both sides will vary greatly, while maintaining a stable average speed is a more efficient method. This is because the power required to maintain a high average speed is actually lower than breaking a speed limit and can be better sustained. Therefore, exert full effort during the headwind, and take the tailwind as a chance to slightly rest.
(Article sourced from the internet. Please inform us for deletion if it involves infringement.)
Created: 2016-05-05 03:19:03