|
|
|
| Q&A: Slalom Pro Mike Maysey (2489 Posts)
|
| Topic |
Info |
|
Speed?
|
|
On 2/20/2003 Farid
wrote in from
(209.86.nnn.nnn)
The smaller guy can wear a Mollica outfit and gain the advantage over Joe Baggy Clothes. Aerodynamics is only being used by Kenny. Smart guy.
The tighter flatter course (and uphill) again will suit the person that has the highest watts per kilogram. That is why Lance Armstrong can outclimb guys that are tiny. That is why Robbie McEwan can outsprint guys with peak wattage #'s that are higher. They know that it's all about watts per kilogram and they have some of the highest numbers ever recorded. Wattage training is so new to the general public, most people don't know about it. It makes heart rate monitors antiquated. It also benifits in aerodynamics when you combine highest wattage with lowest heart rate for a specific position. In cycling, changing your handle bar height a half inch can make the differnce between maximum power and efficincy to putting you over your AT and losing 10% of your average wattage output.
Wattage is not just being used in endurance sports, it's being used in all sports. The slalom racer that adapts the wattage approach to his fitness training is going to be ahead of the game.
|
|
|
|
|
weight
|
|
On 2/20/2003 Farid
wrote in from
(209.86.nnn.nnn)
Couple things:
A- I said if all things are equal and I'm not talking about extremes, like cones 30ft apart down a 15% grade. I'm talking a typical course that was set at the FCR races - hybrid. And they might be hitting top speed for the course, not the equipment. F1 is probably not the best comparison.
B- We have funny things for downforce - legs and feet. Also we are talking wattage not horsepower.
I'm a big guy and I understand that part of the traction advantage is because wheel deflection. But I also know that if I don't hit the apex properly I scrub huge amounts of speed. Also being big, when my wheels let go........
I was talking about the force of pumping and the benifits of watts per kilo, not pure gravity (or downhill skiing/skating, or coasting down a hill on a bike.) Slalom is not point and shoot. If you have a pump that is as forcefull as a heavier guy, you will accelerate out of the corner faster. Now if you do it through 30 cones, you surpass any advantage of gravity (again, we are not at Signal Hill.)
Also, The book by Ed Burke should talk about wattage and watts per kilogram.
To recap - I was talking about the complete action and technique of slalom not downhill or coasting. And the fact (again, all things equal) is that you don't have to be huge to go fast, just strong for your weight. Brad Edwards isn't big and he is fast. Paul Dunn is on the light side of the top 10 and he won more than anyone (then again, how strong are you Paul?) Except for a few, most of the top guys are probably around 5'10" and 175lbs. Maybe that is the ideal size for slalom?
Yes gravity is a factor but not the only factor.
|
|
|
|
|
farid's oversight.
|
|
On 2/20/2003
john airey
wrote in from
(63.198.nnn.nnn)
farid overlooks that the skinny guy spends more
of his watts overcoming proportionally more air
resistance than the heavy guy because of drag (thanks hc).
the slower the races (flatter and tighter), the more
the lightweight has the advantage. brady, your
only chance against maysey is the 1000 cones uphill
but I am still betting on mike in that one. you could
probably beat ARAB tho.
|
|
|
|
|
Weight, etc.
|
|
On 2/20/2003
Chuck
wrote in from
(63.62.nnn.nnn)
Mmmmmm...Krispy Kreme!
JG's device = SlimStep.
On the whole more weight = more traction thing...it may be true, but in thinking off the top of my head I would tend to believe the extra sideload of a heavier skater hitting a turn would offset the extra traction his weight would deliver. Maybe...maybe not...food for thought.
Did someone say food?
|
|
|
|
|
more
|
|
On 2/20/2003 hc
wrote in from
(67.120.nnn.nnn)
repost
On 2/1/2002 hc wrote in from 65.184.xxx.xxx:
thx hugh for the weight thing.
i found in my book "high tech cycling" have reference to this for cyclist descending. The equation was in some other physiology book done in 1979.
It gave an example of a 140lb cyclist descending/freewheeling a 10%grade at 42mph, whereas a 175lb cyclist would descend at 44 mph.
compPoofle to standup
|
|
|
|
|
effect of weight on downhill
|
|
On 2/20/2003 hc
wrote in from
(67.120.nnn.nnn)
there is a formula for calculating this, i have to dig it up. But heavier guys do have an advantage when the hills get steeper. This is why you don't see light guys winning downhill skiing.
farad, not sure how you arrive at your conclusion, but i think there are some errors in there.
john airey said,
"a heavier, compact person is going to have
less air resistance than a lighter guy because the
ratio of weight to frontal area is greater."
john, you have the right idea, but wrong on the description.
Air resistance, aka drag force, is
(drag coefficient)(cross sectional area)(velocity square)(air density)/2
Given two objects with similar shape, the heavier one will roll down the hill faster. Why? Because the lighter object has a greater ratio of surface area to weight. Remember both objects are accelerated by gravity with a force that is proportional to their mass. Also both objects are decelerated by drag that is proportional to their surface area and square of their speed.
If you guys have furthur interest, check out High Tech Cycling by Edmund Burke.
|
|
|
|
|
typo
|
|
On 2/20/2003 Brady
wrote in from
(66.21.nnn.nnn)
"you either stick it (OR) slide and scrub speed"
|
|
|
|
|
mass = XxY...
|
|
On 2/20/2003
Brady
wrote in from
(66.21.nnn.nnn)
I beg to differ Farid.
On slalom, traction is paramount. In longer drawn out courses on a steep hill, and when you hit offsets at speed, your traction is a big factor.
Take a look at auto racing, they have these funny things called spoilers on the rear to add down force on the rear wheels which translates to more traction.
On a fast drawn out course where you`re at your top speed, when you hit those offsets, you either stick it a slide and scrub speed. A lighter racer can drop his weight on the rear for more downforce and added traction but a heavier racer doing the same will have more downforce and thus more traction.
On tighter or flatter courses, this matters less.
So Mikey, how do you compenste for this factor since you are at the bottom of the scale of the top racers?
|
|
|
|
|
Power
|
|
On 2/20/2003
Farid
wrote in from
(165.247.nnn.nnn)
The bike anology almost works, but this is the bottom line:
If all things are equal - watts per kilogram of body mass will be the fastest, ALWAYS! Uphill, downhill, flat, sideways, whatever.
So, if there are two people that put out the same wattage (your body energy, or power, into the board), the lighter guy will be faster every time.
Guy A: 400 watts (output) @ 70 kilos (154lbs)= 5.71watts per Kilo.
Guy B: 400 watts (output) @ 80 kilos (176lbs)= 5.00watts per kilo.
.71 watts does not seem like much, but the efficiency of the lighter guy puts less stress on the cardiovascular system and is also able to propel his body faster, quicker, and longer.
According to a basic formula: a race at 30 seconds in lenghth, the lighter rider, Guy A, would be almost .3 of a second faster!
So don't be concerned about absolute weight. Just get stronger and lean out. Technique is another factor all together..............
.
|
|
|
|
|
Xtra weight
|
|
On 2/20/2003 Brady
wrote in from
(66.21.nnn.nnn)
Wesley,
The weight belt was a joke. Though for practicing and conditioning, it may help. Especially the long walk back up hill.
JG had this funny contraption that measured body fat. I can`y explain how it works but suposedly I`m super lean for a guy my age abd weight, And I can`t stop eating. My goal is to not add fat but more muscle...and it`s working. Will I be faster? Time will tell.
Though I do feel added weight, whether muscle or fat, translates to better traction, which in turn, could mean more speed. A lighter person has to work harder to maintain traction.
Again, using a course style I can only assume, and use podium wins with riders weights as a factor. Big iffy.
And I would also assume that a lighter skater on a flat or tighter course might have an advantage over someone of more weight....assuming skills are equal...agin, iffy.
|
|
|
|
|
Don't wait for weight
|
|
On 2/20/2003
Wesley Tucker
wrote in from
(205.188.nnn.nnn)
Y'all, I gotta say something. This whole weight thing is a silly dog barking up an imaginary tree. Trust me, a taut, lightweight muscular guy is always going to beat a blubbery fat guy. Anyone ever looked at Michael Dong's physique? Trust me, he ain't winning with lard. Same is true with Siali.
What about Vlad Popov? The muscles of a steel rail with a BMI that probably is below 20. No fat, no weight, no "gravitational advantage." All these guys have going for them is MUSCLE. It's muscle that matters. It can't be forgotten that muscle weighs more than fat with an equal volume of tissue, but rarely outside of Muscle Beach do you see guys whose muscle weight starts to be an issue.
Are there guys carrying too much fat who win slalom races? Sure. Are there heavy guys who aren't fat that win slalom races? Of course. What do all the winners have in common? STRENGTH. I'd be willing that under that extra insulation is more than enough muscle to carry not only the weight, but push the board faster than the next guy.
Don't try to compensate for slow times by thinking pounds are going to pull you down the hill. The answer is muscle, conditioning, improved stamina and respiratory performance. You gotta breathe, you got look for resistance and you have to exert yourself beyond tolerable limits. That's what makes you faster, not pasta, cheese and all-you-can-eat restaurants.
Trust me: Muscles are the engines that makes a racer win. The more engine, the more power. More power, more speed. Remember: there ain't no substitute for cubic inches - especially trying to substitute it with ballast.
|
|
|
|
|
Dive Weights
|
|
On 2/20/2003
Mike Maysey
wrote in from
(67.121.nnn.nnn)
Brady,
Funny you say that...I've mentioned to Dylan Gordon before that we should strap some weights to his waist so he can go faster. But then again, if we did that...he'd beat us all!
|
|
|
|
|
weihjt belts?
|
|
On 2/20/2003
Brady
wrote in from
(66.21.nnn.nnn)
I have a dive belt and extra weights...hmmm?
|
|
|
|
|
ideal body types.
|
|
On 2/20/2003
john airey
wrote in from
(63.113.nnn.nnn)
mike, here's my comment on brady's weight issues:
certain sports or disciplines therein do favor different
body types, no question.
maybe the best analogue to slalom skating is cycling.
a heavier, compact person is going to have
less air resistance than a lighter guy because the
ratio of weight to frontal area is greater.
air resistance goes as the cube of speed? certainly
ast least the square.
this means size and aerodynamics
becomes a factor quickly once you get up to speed.
in the tour de france, super light guys usually climb
better and medium guys time trial best when air resistance
is more of a factor than in slower speed climbing.
sprinters are the heaviest and most muscular.
in the future, flatland tight slalom could
easily be dominated by a 150lb guy since top speeds
are less than 20mph and reaction time matters more.
fast downhill where areodynamic forces matter
will favor a heavier guy. FCR has been wider cones and
faster courses.
mollica had an aero helmet a litte weight
and some aero clothes at la costa right?
If there is ever a 1000 cone uphill, it will be won by a
130lb guy, like in cycling.
12ft cones at 20mph will continue to be won by heavier guys.
mike is a pretty compact 178lbs, which could be ideal for
a lot of slalom racing.
fighting your body type is usually a losing battle.
|
|
|
|
|
lighter riders
|
|
On 2/20/2003
hg
wrote in from
(208.14.nnn.nnn)
We used the rubber stoppers for truck cushions when Dylan was just starting, but he's using the white Tracker cushions with Trackers or TTCs, and some extra light springs that Dan Gesmer ran for the Seismics.
In regards to wheels, the kids now almost exclusively run production 78a or 82a Cambrias - the Avalons have some much rolling mass that they're a lot harder for lighter riders to control, and the smaller wheels actually have better traction.
|
|
|
|
|
Weights and Measures
|
|
On 2/20/2003
Mike Maysey
wrote in from
(67.121.nnn.nnn)
I weigh 80.74 kilos or 12.71 stone...
|
|
|
|
|
weight vs. stance
|
|
On 2/20/2003
Mike Maysey
wrote in from
(67.121.nnn.nnn)
Brady,
I just weighed myself the other night and I was a whooping 178lbs. I can't beleive it. I must have ate a few to many Krispy Kremes or something. Or was it the few extra helpings of turkey at Christmas and Thanksgiving? Whatever...anyway, my front truck configuration is Tracker RT-X with Blue Bones Hardcore Bushings, semi-loose. Depending on the course, but as a rule...I keep my front truck fairly loose and my back truck fairly tight.
Yeah, you know. Brady, I think you're right about the FCR guys being in the 170-210 range. I don't know if it's because that's what it takes to go fast or if it's a coincidence or what. Set up are a lot tougher for lighter riders. If you are interested, I think Howard Gordon may have some pointers he could share about setting boards up for Dylan and Loren. Something just occured to me. Something I've seen a lot of lighter riders do is get some beaker stoppers with holes in them. They are very soft rubber. Also, HG had some softer wheels poured in the Avalon mold. I think there was a batch of 78's and 75's or maybe it was just the 75's...whatever. Anyway, the point is he may still have some.
|
|
|
|
|
Stance
|
|
On 2/20/2003
Mike Maysey
wrote in from
(67.121.nnn.nnn)
Sam,
Don't try to skate a certain way because I said or someone else said it works for them. You, me, everyone has to find the way to do things that suits them. Two very contrasting skaters in stance and style are Paul Dunn and Chicken. PD with his semi-parallel stance and Chicken with his surf stance...both skate extremely well.
|
|
|
|
|
Halber Mensch
|
|
On 2/20/2003
Sam G
wrote in from
(193.203.nnn.nnn)
Brady, try this. It converts most things except for the base metals/ gold partnership, dagenabbit.
http://www.onlineconversion.com/weight.htm
I seem to be at the 150lb mark. I find that a sturdy surf leash stops me from floating away from my deck mid course.
...and yes, I have to stand right over the front truck too, so partially negating the deck's natural flex.
|
|
|
|
|
weight vs stance
|
|
On 2/20/2003
Brady
wrote in from
(66.21.nnn.nnn)
Sam,
Though I may be wrong, it is my contention that weight truly matters in competitive slalom racing. Though I was not at last years FCR races, I think most of the top riders were vetween 170 and 210 lbs (not sure how many stones that is?). It could be also the courses of FCR that weight may have been the factor but again, I wasn`t there so I can`t speculate.
I can relate my own personal experiances and from your post, I have to agree. I used to weigh 152 lbs up to a month ago. Now I`m up to 162 lbs and pushing for a top end of 170. I may never reach that due to my metabolism but it`s a goal. And that`ll be lean muscle and no fat...heh heh. I can dream, right?
And I think I have a more forward stance since most steering is done on the front truck, ie; more weight needed to turn.
Mike, what is your weight and front truck configuration?
|
|
|
|
|
Stance
|
|
On 2/20/2003
Sam G
wrote in from
(193.203.nnn.nnn)
Mike,
As a comparatively lightweight rider at 10 1/2 stone or 68 kilos (although I'm supposedly the correct medical bodyweight for my age) I too have similar stance problems to Brady. This I put down to three causes:
Firstly, having only recently started skating again after a break of 25 years, my 'body memory' is ingrained with a stance that warrants a board with rear kicktail to propel one around. Gripping wheels and carving trucks were an expensive luxury to an income free nine year old.
Secondly, having cycled road bikes for the past twenty years, muscle positions in the legs tend to 'set' in positions that give the most comfort and least injury. The 'setting' effect is increased by the use of cleats or clipless pedals and so at rest the feet fall most easily to the ten-to-two position.
Thirdly, and probably the most likely cause, is that lighter riders need to generate more pump and leverage to turn the same amount as a heavier rider on an equivalent board. As far as I recall, greater turning moments are caused the further a force is from the turning point. In other words, the wider the board for a lighter rider, the better. If the board is not wide enough or the bushings are not soft enough, then a light rider will necessarily have to have more of a surf stance to generate enough leverage to emulate the same turning capacity of the feet-forward larger rider.
With skill and practice extra force can be gained through an exaggerated downward pump, but such a practice will not encourage lighter and more importantly, younger people into the sport because the returns are not immediate. Where other sports give rapid reward to the MTV generation, '(kick-flipping' for example offers lifestyle and attitude which is augmented by non-competitive skills) slalom by its very nature, is geared towards racing and winning.
Running clinics to encourage slalom racing is a good way to inject new blood, but the sport also needs softer bushings/ springs and possibly softer compound wheels (although the latter is contenscious) in order that youngsters and lightweights can be on an equal footing with their heavier peers.
Turner skateboardsfor example, produce excellent wide racing decks and wheels that offer a lot of both grip and leverage. They also have test riders of varying weights and ages. Do the lighter riders ever use special pourings of wheels and bushings not currently available that might also benefit other lighter and possibly less skilled riders?
And are there other companies such as Abec 11, PVD or Tracker addressing this situation also?
(I replaced the yellow springs in my front Seismic with a couple of KFC Twisters, but the result was poultry)
|
|
|
|
|
The thrill of victory and the agony of an empty buffet
|
|
On 2/19/2003
Wesley Tucker
wrote in from
(64.12.nnn.nnn)
Just remember the training motto that drives a champion:
"No pain . . . means no pain. What's wrong with that?"
|
|
|
|
|
Gaining Weight
|
|
On 2/19/2003
Mike Maysey
wrote in from
(67.121.nnn.nnn)
three letters...KFC
|
|
|
|
|
gaining weight/muscle
|
|
On 2/19/2003 TK
wrote in from
(24.128.nnn.nnn)
one word...SQUATS
|
|
|
|
|
Truck Width
|
|
On 2/19/2003
Mike Maysey
wrote in from
(67.121.nnn.nnn)
Hamm,
I have no idea. When I set up boards I try to make them as close to the same width as possible.
|
|
|
|
|
