A 3 hour fitting???

[sleepyfelix]

Really enjoyed reading this thread and hearing your insights.

How much of what you do on a fitting is transferable to a remote session? As in, if I sent you a video of me on a trainer in set position/s and from angles that you dictate, how much could you tell? I get that we wouldn't be able to ride together, but I've noticed there are lots of remote offerings springing up. Everything from AI based analysis, to 'send a guy a video' level, and wondering how effective this would be vs a face to face session (assuming a level playing field of having the same competent fitter for both).

[teleguy57]

Originally Posted by Ti Designs

That's because you worked with a fitter who learned form Steve Hogg.....

I have 5 fittings lined up for tomorrow....

The one thing I love about all of Steve's students is that they never say they'll put you in the perfect position or that they can solve any fitting problem. Honesty in marketing is so rare these days...

Ed, first I'm happy for you if you're happy with all the business. People are getting some of the best support available working with you (based on all your contributions and insights here, contrarian as some may be )

I've had the benefit of working twice with Colby Pearce, another Hogg-trained fitter as well as exceptional athlete. Have done minor, minor tweaking since then and feel like I'm in a position that works for me as an about-to-become 68yo rider. I echo what you wrote about Steve and his trainees and their approach.

[jkbrwn]

Originally Posted by Ti Designs

That's because you worked with a fitter who learned form Steve Hogg. I've read just about everything Steve has written three or four times over. His students are not only looking at what's happening on the bike, but how that's caused by sensory feedback to the brain. They also pay far more attention to asymmetry in the body as the bike is always the worst case. When you're walking or running the foot has freedom of movement - it can go anywhere once it leaves the ground, so you're self adjusting. On the bike you're mounted to pedals which are mounted to cranks which share a bottom bracket - it forces your right and left side to do the same thing.

The only thing I have against the work done by Steve and his students is the attempt to make it a one & done process. The body adapts, and if the rider is aware, the body gives feedback. There is a general rule about making corrections if there is a measurable difference - make half the correction and observe the results. That's because making the full correction often has things go horribly wrong in the other direction. The body adapts over time, two weeks later the correction made isn't gonna have the same result. I get that Steve and his students do fittings that people have to travel to, so it needs to be that way, but it's not ideal.

I have 5 fittings lined up for tomorrow. I'm given 90 minutes to do a fitting, most of my clients were sent my way by other people I've worked with. I have three simple goals for a fitting: Put people within their range of motion in all directions (that's way more complicated than you probably think) and teach them how to get their body weight on the pedals. Beyond that it's dealing with asymmetries, which there are a lot of. I've gotten pretty good at understanding what I'm looking at with a single variable asymmetry (I can tell the difference between a femur length difference and a tibia length difference), but complex cases take more time. That's where I think measuring devices used by fitters need a little work. If I had power pedals in all the different cleat types that showed force vectors (including lateral), I would be able to tell the difference between a femur length discrepancy and FAI in a second...

The one thing I love about all of Steve's students is that they never say they'll put you in the perfect position or that they can solve any fitting problem. Honesty in marketing is so rare these days...

Interesting thoughts. Thanks for sharing. I haven't seen Scherrit in going on ten years now, but when I did, I'd only been riding for three years and I really didn't know how I was supposed to feel on a bike, what my feet were supposed to be doing etc etc. The time with Scherrit was as much a school day learning about my own physiology as it was a bike fit. I'd like to go and see him again just based on how interesting of a day it was and that it's been almost ten years since I saw him last... but he's 6000 miles away now rather than down the road.

[callmeishmael]

I really enjoyed TiDesigns video about falling on the pedals; it makes great sense and is a good way of sorting out your own setback.

What's interesting is that I've had 4 fittings in the last couple of years in an effort to sort out ongoing (rhs) back pain and recurring left hamstring issue. While all had some success, it's only by doing some of my own thinking and research and putting bits of all of the fits together that has largely fixed the problem.

One fitter correctly identified a leg length discrepancy and installed a shim; one recommended an SMP to aid pelvic rotation; another suggested shorter cranks; another reduced reach. While I wouldn't say the position is perfect, I can now ride hard for 3 hours before the back pain kicks in (mildly).

The one remaining oddity is how low my apparently correct saddle height is for my leg length, but it works for me.

Good bike fitters are rare and worth paying for, but be prepared to put in some time and thought yourself as well.

[Ti Designs]

Originally Posted by sleepyfelix

How much of what you do on a fitting is transferable to a remote session? As in, if I sent you a video of me on a trainer in set position/s and from angles that you dictate, how much could you tell? I get that we wouldn't be able to ride together, but I've noticed there are lots of remote offerings springing up. Everything from AI based analysis, to 'send a guy a video' level, and wondering how effective this would be vs a face to face session (assuming a level playing field of having the same competent fitter for both).

I've tried a few remote fittings with people from this forum. It doesn't work. It made me more aware of how much information I have to gather when doing a fitting. I move all over the place, every measurement has it's own vantage point. Lots of people have tried it, most assume it's the video quality, it's not.

I am aware of how many AI or video based fitting systems have popped up. They frighten me. People don't understand bike fitting. They make the bold assumption that people know how to pedal a bike, so bike fitting is just putting the saddle at the right height and then putting the handlebars where they can reach them - right??? Then along comes the high tech method of bike fitting and lots of people throw lots of money at it because they don't know any better.

AI bike fitting systems don't know anything about you. Unless you're a clone or you have a twin who somehow has the same injury history that you have, you are unique. There is no way a system that finds a few points on your body and simplifies you down to a stick figure can fit you on a bike. They are counting on two things here: First, they baffle you with BS. Retul claims they have done over a quarter million fittings. That's a lot of data. None of it is about you... Second, they know that most people can't tell the difference between the best fitting and the worst.

[RobbieTunes]

Originally Posted by truth

Great insights.

How would you recommend that people get their body weight on the pedals?

From the top.