FAQ'S PAGE 4
(cont'd from previous page)

4. While I may feel one particular problem in my riding position, for instance some lower back pain, how does the CPS ensure that the proper issue is being addressed instead of simply looking at what is evident? How do you fix the root cause of a problem without causing other problems?  The position of a cyclist must be looked at comprehensively, not in an isolated way. For example, many people try to fix hamstring pain by lowering the saddle. Indeed, hamstring myalgia (pains) are explained by a hyper tension of these muscular groups. Consequently these people think that this is explained by saddle height that is too high and which, therefore, aggravates the tightness. This can be the cause but not always. If you think in a more total way, one can also find that this hyper tension is explained by a position that is too laid-out /or with the cyclist too inclined (too long of a reach between saddle/bar and/or too large difference saddle/bar height).  Indeed, such a position stretches the hamstrings and can be the root of pains, tendonitis, myalgias. Finally the problem was not the height of the saddle but the reach from saddle to bar. If you want to regulate this problem by lowering the saddle you are likely to cause patellar tendonitis as well as ankle issues because the saddle height is now too low.

5. Does the CPS fit method take into account my opinion or feedback on my fit? After all, I'm the one riding with the position!
Yes , completely in agreement with you.  However, there is no established language to consistently describe one’s feelings on the bike. It is important to understand any physical issues/limitations that a rider may have while keeping in mind that most problems are going to be a direct result of the poor fit that they currently have. A newly-positioned rider, even one in the same position for years, may experience some initial muscle pain due to the new position. And, there will definitely be a decrease in efficiency until the muscles have become coordinated properly. But, after being properly fit (with the proper adaptation time to follow), these issues and all prior issues relative to poor fit will disappear. Guaranteed.

6. How is cleat positioning considered with the CPS? I've seen that some fitters look at the "ball of the foot", others at the area between the 1st and 5th metatarsal, and others something altogether different. What's most important to consider is the point of biomechanical interest and the cleat position that is validated scientifically. Currently, all the work of sporting podology applied to the cycling and the biomechanical unfolding of the foot indicates that the point of optimal support of the foot on the pedal corresponds to the axis of the 1st metatarsal.  This is supported in elementary plantar biomechanics.  If the cleat axis is positioned too far behind the metatarsal you are likely to create acute pains on the level of the former insertion of the aponevrotic plantar (because your zone of support under the foot will compress the plantar muscles). You will also limit your natural lever arm (needed for the proper rotation of the ankle) and, as such, the transfer of power to the pedals.  Example: breaking a nut. Try breaking it by pushing on the “ball of the foot” with your naked foot. Then try breaking it by positioning the nut behind 1st metatarsal... You will understand immediately that you will have less force and that you will have sharp pains on the level of the muscles of the plantar aponevrotic! 

7."Knee-over-pedal spindle" using a plumb-bob appears to be the rule in bicycle fit. It's used to find saddle height and set-back because of how it helps position people with different femur lengths. The CPS doesn't use this...why not? Firstly, for a given inseam, the variations in the length of the femur between individuals is tiny and negligible in the determination of the optimal saddle height and set-back.  Moreover, the length of the femur can only be measured precisely through the use of a body scanner or x-ray. All other methods are imprecise and, therefore, invalid.   Medical data specify that the length of the femur = x% height of the articulation of the collar of the femur (value which we precisely measure with the hydraulic inseam jack under constant pressure).  Using the plumb line to determine the set-back has no scientific evidence to support it or suggest that it is optimal.  It is an antiquated concept developped during the late 1970's before the advent of physiological testing, advances in the medical arena, and modern cycling equipment (including clipless pedals, carbon-soled cycling shoes, new saddle technologies, etc). It was never validated scientifically, as it was developped through a very small study looking at how pro riders were positioned WITHOUT looking at how the riders performed, if they could have performed better positioned differently, and if there were ramifications on the riders' health. Look at the incidence of tendonitis among professionals and the fact that they don't plan on performing at a high level beyond their pro career life-span and you'll see how suspect this idea is. 

Moreover, this concept is only founded on principles of mechanics (lever arms) which optimizes the transfer of force when the crank is horizontal... The human body is not a machine first of all. It is not just a simple skeletal system but is also composed of a muscular system, an articular system, a respiratory system and blood!  This entire system doesn't function in a linear method that the "Knee-Over-Pedal-Spindle" approach considers. It is much too simplistic and limited. It does not regard the human body as an ensemble of systems evolving/moving in harmony.

Some believe that the "Knee-Over-Pedal-Spindle" approach will help find the position that generates "maximum power". The “maximum power” should be required only for a track rider as it speaks only to VERY short efforts that are not based on maximum efficiencies that are demanded in road/cross/mtb/time trial/triathlon disciplines. For these disciplines, you must seek maximum OUTPUT. This requires more than just the application of levers and a mechanical view of the cyclist’s functioning.
(MORE)