Ankling was recommended in the '50s and early '60s, particularly for cruising and touring --- debated by many during the following decade --- and dismissed by most racers sometime during the '70s in favor of peddling with a low heel.
The change of flavor occurred apparently from accumulated anecdotal comments and by simple observation of successful racers on the road and track, but the debate went on for many years. More recently I believe that ergometric studies (a la Lance Armstrong) have shown that low heel is more efficient in producing a smoother power stroke and thus increases total power output. With a low heel, at the bottom its easier to pull back, and at the top to "kick" up --- now if I can only remember that when I ride tomorrow!
Dion Dyer, San Diego
radios
> Yes, for for the last 20 years or so ;^)
>
> Doug Van Cleve
> Chandler, AZ
>
>
> On 8/17/05, Ken Freeeman <freesound@comcast.net> wrote:
>> I must have missed a memo: ankling is now bad?
>>
>> Ken Freeman
>> Ann Arbor, MI
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: classicrendezvous-bounces@bikelist.org
>> [mailto:classicrendezvous-bounces@bikelist.org] On Behalf
>> Of dgdyer@cox.n
> et
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 12:44 AM
>> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>> Subject: [CR]Re: Pacing with your toes down & radios
>>
>> Looks like he's ankling -- like many of us learned in the
>> 50's and 60's -
> -
>> extending the foot on the downstroke and lifting on the
>> back side.
>>
>> And, yes, I still have some trouble unlearning it.
>>
>> Dion Dyer
>> San Diego