What a joke!
This is what I read on cyclingnews.com today:
This is just my opinion but this guy obviously doesn't know what a Wobble-naught fit really is. It is anything but "reductionist" in approach. He considers it "reductionist" because WN takes into account several precision skeletal measurements? How else do you fit the bike to an invididual's specific structure? Since I came across Wobble-naught I have viewed it as a more holistic approach to fitting a bike to a rider than any other fitting approach, and I've had numerous types of fits before this one. Not to mention, Wobble-naught doesn't go by "the eye" or "by feel". It's based on science and measurement which eliminates any guesswork and subjectivity. It does work for large numbers of people and it is shown and explained. That's exactly what Dartfish and the Myo-facts EMG do. The results are proven.
Hmmmm...let's see who else agrees? Here are all the people at one race alone (Dirt Sweat & Gears) that are on the Wobble-naught fit, and did pretty damn well (as usual)!
Pua Sawicki (1st)
Rebecca Rusch (2nd)
Carey Lowery (3rd)
Nat Ross (4th)
Rebecca Tomawicki (5th)
Ernesto Marenchin (6th)
Chris Janiszewski (11th)
Not to mention others such as Mark Hekman, Georgia Gould, and Shonny Vanlandingham.
That's a pretty impressive list if you ask me. It's sad to see someone that has no idea what Wobble-naught is about write this stuff on cyclingnews.com, but I guess everyone is allowed to have an opinion whether it is informed or not. Unfortunately for everyone, the uninformed opinions seem to come out more frequently on the internet.
The anatomy of bike position
In this article Cyclingnews' Form and Fitness panel member and renowned bike fit specialist, Steve Hogg, takes you through his thoughts on bike position. The following is a transcript of a speech Steve gave in 2007.
All modern thinking about how to fit a human to a bike is reductionist in approach. Take a complex system of interactions like a human being, quantify it somehow and fit it to a bike. Because it's a complex system, break down that complexity into bite size pieces by examining aspects of its interaction with the bike in a narrow sense. The approach might be strictly biomechanical, perhaps measurement based, statistical norm based or whatever. It may have a proprietary name; Fit Kit, Bio Racer and Wobblenaught spring to mind, though there are others. That is how the world thinks of a bike fit process. It's a succession of steps of narrow focus but without any overarching idea of holistic intent, and this is what I mean by a reductionist approach. The formula driven methods this type of approach engenders are prevalent throughout the cycling world and don't work optimally for large numbers of people in any way that can be shown or explained. I spend a large part of my working life getting results for the people that the above style of thinking has failed.
This is just my opinion but this guy obviously doesn't know what a Wobble-naught fit really is. It is anything but "reductionist" in approach. He considers it "reductionist" because WN takes into account several precision skeletal measurements? How else do you fit the bike to an invididual's specific structure? Since I came across Wobble-naught I have viewed it as a more holistic approach to fitting a bike to a rider than any other fitting approach, and I've had numerous types of fits before this one. Not to mention, Wobble-naught doesn't go by "the eye" or "by feel". It's based on science and measurement which eliminates any guesswork and subjectivity. It does work for large numbers of people and it is shown and explained. That's exactly what Dartfish and the Myo-facts EMG do. The results are proven.
Hmmmm...let's see who else agrees? Here are all the people at one race alone (Dirt Sweat & Gears) that are on the Wobble-naught fit, and did pretty damn well (as usual)!
Pua Sawicki (1st)
Rebecca Rusch (2nd)
Carey Lowery (3rd)
Nat Ross (4th)
Rebecca Tomawicki (5th)
Ernesto Marenchin (6th)
Chris Janiszewski (11th)
Not to mention others such as Mark Hekman, Georgia Gould, and Shonny Vanlandingham.
That's a pretty impressive list if you ask me. It's sad to see someone that has no idea what Wobble-naught is about write this stuff on cyclingnews.com, but I guess everyone is allowed to have an opinion whether it is informed or not. Unfortunately for everyone, the uninformed opinions seem to come out more frequently on the internet.
posted by Namrita O'Dea at
11:08 AM
8 Comments:
What is the basic approach to WN?
eg. Specific skeletal measurements >>> ??? >>> ??? >>> ???
Just curious, I have always wondered if I would benefit from such a fitting if I am comfortable with my current position.
Ok, not just curious, really interested.
Thanks.
All I have to say is this, Nam...you and I are the same height, but our bike fits are COMPLETELY different because that height is packed on totally different frames, with different bone and muscle lengths.
I've never been more comfortable on my road bike than right after the WN fit. And I was fairly happy with it beforehand.
Keep on rockin'.
b1umb0y,
there is a ton of info on the WN site: http://wobblenaught.com/whywobble.asp
if you have specific questions after reading that, please do ask. though, eddie is really the fit expert (not me) so he would probably answer them :)
I agree with you 100%. WN was the best thing I have done to improve my cycling experience in 8 years. I wish I would of done it 8 years ago.
I agree a good fit is important, but aside from having the fit, those people named in your list would kick ass on a huffy... just sayin'. :-)
Thanks Nam, I will take a peek at it.
I live in Boise, headquarters of WN, and was fit by Tom, the founder. Thanks to him I haven't ridden my road bike in 2 years. He lowered my seatpost over an inch and told me to always pedal with my heels up and push forward with my quads. He also put a longer stem and lowered it too and told me that proper hand position is always on the tops of the bars. My knees are trashed. All I wanted was to be more efficient on my bike. My PT says he is thankful for all the business he gets from him. Tom is not a scientist or even trained properly in this field. Another rider in my group ended up at the ortho for back problems after his fit. IMO, the man should be sued for medical malpractice.
Jim,
Sorry you had a bad experience. Too bad you weren't able to work through it with Tom, as fit is part of it but technique is a lot of it. The WN system is completely based on physiology and kinesiology. There is great attention to detail in every single skeletal measurement that is taken, and every single frame measurement that is taken. No one system is going to make everyone happy, but for every complaint there are probably 100 satisfied customers and even a few national and world champions! There is a reason that so many pros and elite riders use the system..including several endurance racers that spend ridiculous hours on the bike. Good luck with getting back on the road bike again.
Namrita
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home