Often, athletes, even professionals, change their habits and technical solutions by imitation or hearsay. And these choices often pay off due to a placebo effect. Specifically, let's talk about cranks court, which, according to the data, have brought benefits. But is this really the case for everyone? And how much does it really affect?
These questions were asked by a high-level professional, addressing the MapeiSport Center from Olgiate Olona to conduct in-depth testing. This athlete wanted to scientifically evaluate how his performance changed by varying the length of the lever.
While respecting the rider's privacy and his choice to turn to a service external to the team where it runs, the topic remains valid and interesting. A topic that we analyze with Dr. Andrea Morelli, a key figure at the Mapei Center, to understand the real impact of short cranksets.
Short cranks and science
The topic of short cranks is very current, even if controversial. In recent years some top athletes have declared that they use shorter ones than the standard ones, transforming this technical choice into a fashion.
"However," explains Morelli, "it's not easy to generalise: every athlete has different characteristics and specific studies should be conducted to identify the optimal solution. In the past, longer ones were used for time trial bikes compared to road bikes., focusing on a greater lever arm to obtain greater power. Shorter ones, on the other hand, favor agility and a higher cadence, but reduce peripheral speed.
«Studies seem to show that Standard cranks, with a range of +/- 5mm around 170mm, are effective for most athletes. However, the final choice depends on the specific needs of each cyclist."
A pro at the Mapei Center
The professional in question showed up at the Mapei Center of his own free will with a clear question: scientifically demonstrate whether short cranks are really advantageousIt must be said that he had already used them and was inclined towards this thesis.
Morelli again: «He wanted to know if short, very short, 155mm cranks were better for him. This athlete has achieved significant results on climbs and mixed routes, despite not being a pure climber or long-distance racer. However, when he changed teams, he found himself having to give up those cranks, which were no longer available from his new technical sponsor.
To answer your question, the Mapei Center developed a personalized study protocol, simulating different scenarios and cranks of varying lengths, also taking into account the necessary changes to the riding position.
«It was a real single case studyFor example – explains Morelli – shortening the crank requires raising the saddle to keep the joint angles constant, an operation that can have significant effects on comfort and biomechanics."
The test methodology
«The protocol – explains Morelli – included double-blind tests, that is to say that they alternated long and short cranks without the athlete knowing which one he was usingEssentially, this was to avoid a "placebo" effect. Although the athlete could certainly sense his condition when he got on the bike, he still got off the cycle ergometer with his back turned each time.
"Everything is fine The session included five-minute sessions with precise measurements: oxygen consumption, blood lactate, muscle electromyography, and perception of fatigue. The tests were conducted at two load levels: a low one, similar to the aerobic zone, and a high one, close to the anaerobic threshold."
The fact that it was not a maximal test is very important, as was not influenced by the athlete's desire to push himself "further", to perform, as in an "all-out" test. "It was, in any case, a way to try to maintain objectivity," Morelli was keen to emphasize.
Furthermore, they were collected biomechanical data such as knee, ankle and hip joint angles, along with physiological parametersThe goal was to understand if and how crank length influenced performance, especially at high loads.
Results and implications
Tests have shown that, At the highest load, the athlete produced slightly less lactic acid – with a statistically significant difference – with the short cranks. Perception of fatigue was also slightly lower. However, at low loads, the differences were negligible. These results suggest that short cranks may offer a specific advantage in high-intensity situations.
"One possible explanation," says Morelli, "lies in biomechanics: short cranks reduce joint travel, improving energy efficiency. However, scientific literature emphasizes that Variations of 5-10mm in crank length have little impact on performance parameters. The choice of the optimal crankset therefore remains highly individual."
The path taken by this professional is correct: rely on science to optimize your performance. Test wider, perhaps with the use of three crank lengths, could provide further useful data for an even deeper understanding.
IN PREVIOUS ARTICLES
Evenepoel Cyclone: thanks (also) to the very short cranks
Evenepoel uses super short cranks: 165mm even on the road
Malori: "Short cranks are ideal for short, agile riders."
Short cranks: Colò takes a lesson from Pogacar's consultant.
Shorter cranks: according to FSA, the wave has already begun.
