“It’s noticeable that Pogačar is breaking away more in a seated position this season. He’s looking even stronger than before…” Just when you thought (arguably) the best (rider of all time) couldn’t get any better, he blows away the opposition at the race formerly known as the Critérium du Dauphiné from the comfort of his 3D-printed, customised-for-his-Slovenian-glutes-only Fizik. Where in the past Pogacar accelerated from the competition with a devastating out-of-the-saddle attack, now it seems he frequently remains planted.

Look back at Strade Bianche, Flanders, Flèche Wallonne and Liège-Bastogne-Liège for further evidence. It’s added an insouciant edge to Pogačar’s repertoire, akin to Ronnie O’Sullivan clearing up with his left hand or Antonín Panenka winning the 1976 European Championships with a genre-creating lobbed penalty. When you thought his mastery over his rivals had peaked at 10, it’s now cranked up to 11. It’s got us thinking: what’s the rationale behind Pog’s seated omnipresence (if there is one at all)? And what can we amateur riders learn from the eternal sitting versus seated debate? Eighties’ pop goddess Yazz might have sung “The only way is up”, but how exactly…?

More efficient, more comfortable?

Eagle-eyed commentators weren’t alone in spotting Pogačar’s seated trend at the Dauphiné. “Everyone says I sit a lot, even when delivering a lot of power,” the 26-year-old answered to a race journalist’s observation. “But that’s the way I always ride. If you want to give an extra punch, you have to stand on the pedals. But yesterday [stage six], the pace was already very high for the real attack. Then you don’t have to stand up to pedal a few more watts and accelerate. It depends on the course. But I like to stay seated.”

(Photo: ASO/Billy Ceusters)

For Pogačar, then, it’s a non-story. A speculative narrative built on little substance. That’s not the view of UAE Team Emirates-XRG’s head of performance, Jeroen Swart, who soon after the Dauphiné revealed that Pogacar had spent the off-season working on off-the-bike and on-the-bike strength that would naturally have reduced the need to ease off the saddle for race-winning breaks. “Crank length could be a reason, too,” Swart continued. Curious. 

We’ll come back to the climbing equation ‘greater strength + shorter crank length = greater devastation’ shortly. But we’re getting ahead of ourselves. Firstly, what would the rationale be behind Pogačar, Demi Vollering and all of us staying seated as the land tips up?

“Sitting down and climbing is more efficient and more comfortable, as that’s the position most of us spend the majority of climbs, even the professionals,” says Alpecin-Deceuninck data scientist Dr Jonathan Baker. “When you’re standing up, you enjoy greater leverage from your arms and greater power through the pedals, but there’s a metabolic trade-off in that you fatigue more quickly. When you’re planted in the saddle, everything’s pretty fixed. Your pedal action’s the same, nothing really changes in the hip angles, and it’s all set from spending thousands of hours riding in that position. Over an entire ride, you might stand for 1% of the time, if that. Naturally, it’s less efficient.”

What does the science say?

Key words pop their head above the peloton here: “greater power” and “metabolic trade-off”. In essence, that’s all of us, every ride, whether the parcours is flat or hilly, and whether length is minimal or maximal. We all have a limited number of matches and once we burn through them, the result can be dizziness, confusion and a hearty chuckle from your cycling companions. Peak performance is all about calculating effort and reward, via internal feelings and/or your technology of choice (power meter, heart rate monitor…). Is my cadence standing up to the gradient? Is this pace sustainable? When should I sit and when should I stand? These and many more questions flow through your subconscious or conscious mind, of which many scientists have tried to answer.

A 2008 study by Professor Ernst Hansen showed that road cyclists were more efficient when seated until the gradient tipped over 10%. After that, standing became more efficient. That’s because standing opens up many of the body’s angles, which results in activating more muscles, including the glutes and more of the calves. 

For the physics inclined amongst you, when you rise from seated to standing, your hip angles change from 42.8 degrees to 68.8 degrees; your knees open from 28.7 to 73 degrees; and your ankle increases from 25.7 degrees to 40.5 degrees. These angles are similar to those of running, which is why, in theory, you generate more power during the downward phase of the pedal stroke.

As we all know, gradient is key, with a further study revealing that at shallower gradients of around 4%, ascending at 19kph requires 10% less oxygen seated than completing the same distance at the same speed when standing. That’s primarily because seated, submaximal uphill cycling sees the body’s centre of mass supported by the saddle, thus conserving energy.

(Photo: Zac Williams/SWpix.com)

Broadly, the literature shows that for the elites, efficiency is higher when seated until around 7%. Between 8% and 10%, a mix of short out-of-the-saddle bursts and longer in-saddle efforts is the norm; over that – and certainly when the gradient tips over 15% – standing begins to dominate. It comes down to what’s going on down below.

“Ultimately, it’s all about torque,” says cycling coach and performance consultant Alex Welburn. “The force you can deliver through your crank arms that drives the chain to project you forward has to be high enough to maintain momentum. That changes as the gradient rises, albeit it’s not quite as simple as the hill rises and you ease out of the saddle. You’re naturally less smooth on the pedals, so if your cadence is low, any dead spot is exacerbated. That can lead to stuttering accelerations and decelerations, whereby you slow down and haemorrhage energy.” 

“You’ve also got to remember that speed is crucial,” adds Welburn. “I know that sounds obvious, but we’ve analysed many hill climbs where the numbers churning out of the power meter when standing are higher, but speed is actually slower. That’s down to aerodynamic resistance.”

Overcome resistance

There are three key forces acting on Pogačar, Jonas Vingegaard, your mate and you when you climb. The first is rolling resistance, which takes into account the friction between your tyre and the tarmac. This is minimal and can cost you around two to five watts, depending on the rubber compound and tyre pressure. Then there’s gravity, which is 9.8m per second. The force is greater depending on the gradient and rider size. And finally, you have aerodynamic resistance – a rider and their bike’s frontal area – as well as the temperature, humidity and speed of air (wind).

You might associate air resistance with downhill speeds or stretches on the flat and not ascending, which, for many of us, is true. But for the elites and top amateurs, the speed they ascend drags into the equation. Take the 2022 Tour de France ascent of Alpe d’Huez, where the leading riders averaged around 22kph climbing the 13.8km (7.8%) hairpin festival. At those speeds, a rider is looking at over 20% of drag from air resistance. Which is why Welburn’s analysis resulted in greater power output for no extra speed, and is why all of us must be judicious when standing on the pedals.

“We don't have a lot of specialist climbers,” says Baker, “but if you look at guys like Mathieu [van der Poel], he actually spends a reasonable amount of time out of the saddle, albeit for short periods of high-intensity riding. That’s to accelerate from a rider or on steep climbs. Maybe it’s because of his cyclocross past, where you have numerous pitchy climbs. He is certainly a punchy, aggressive rider. But if he stood too long, he’d become a mast.” 

(Photo: ASO/Tony Esnault)

Welburn suggests the likes of van der Poel are a, if not dying breed, than certainly a threatened species at the elite level, where the likes of Alberto Contador dancing on the pedals for long stretches of time were once common. “I recall an image where Lance Armstrong, the Schleck brothers and Contador were all out of the saddle, delivering attack after attack. Now, it’s a little more seated, smooth and conservative. Contador used to purposely spend 30 minutes climbing out of the saddle in training.”

Crank’s impact on cadence

Van der Poel is also that rarity on the WorldTour in that he remains steadfastly clamped to 172.5mm-long cranks. It can’t have escaped your notice that there’s a crank revolution in the professional peloton. Or crank devolution with the likes of Tadej Pogačar dropping from 170mm to 165mm in 2024, while Jonas Vingegaard has been spotted using 150mm cranks. At the elite level, the reason behind the drop is arguably to improve the aerodynamic profile. But, as always, this trend’s flowed from the peak of the pyramid to the base with many recreational riders following suit due to the opening of the hips, leading to potential injury reduction. So popular has been the shrinkage that there were reports earlier in the year of retailers running out of smaller Shimano and SRAM cranks.

What has this got to do with climbing and the choice between seated and standing? Well, as Swart revealed after the Dauphiné, it could be one reason behind Pogačar’s powerful seated attacks. You see, if you cut your crank length while keeping everything else the same – we’re talking factors like gear ratio, wheel size – your cadence must increase to maintain the same speed at the same power output. That’s because shorter cranks naturally result in slightly less torque. If you’re riding 30,000km a year like the professionals, you soon become accustomed to this naturally higher cadence. And it’s this acclimatisation that could be behind Pogacar’s seated decision, said Swart, simply because it’s much easier to generate a higher cadence in the saddle than out.

It's worth a moment of reflection if you’re a crank convert to assess whether your climbing buttocks have naturally spent more time in the saddle. They may have or may not, as cadence is one factor behind position choice. The other, flagged up by Swart, comes down to strength.

It’s a point elaborated on by top bike-fitter and physio John Dennis. “Different riders have differing movement patterns where some muscle groups are stronger than others. Cyclists who are quad dominant and perhaps aren’t quite as strong through the hips and glutes will tend to stand out of the saddle sooner than riders who like to generate power through their hips. Finding a good stable position on the saddle is important as you want to generate force from the core and hips.”

To increase seated climbing strength in the gym, you’re looking at exercises that focus on specific muscles and don’t rely on bodyweight. Romanian deadlifts, squats, planks and hip thrusts are good options with around three or four sets of six to eight repetitions or around three 45-second efforts for the plank. As for on the bike…

(Photo Zac Williams/SWpix.com)

“We do plenty of 30/30s, many of which are prescribed when climbing in the saddle,” says Baker. These involve, say, 10 sets of 30-second efforts at around 130-140% of critical power [highest sustainable rate of aerobic metabolism] with 30 seconds of easy pedalling in between. 

Widen your cadence range

Baker also returns to the idea of cadence and peak performance, and that a wide range of RPM is the ideal, whether climbing or on the flat. Welburn agrees. “If you only expose yourself to a narrow range of cadences, once fatigue kicks in, you have nowhere to turn and your performance will suffer. Take a time triallist who rarely deviates from 75rpm. If you throw them into a criterium, they’ll be terrible, as you might need to reach 120rpm when accelerating out of the corners. They just won’t have it in their armoury.

“I coach many riders on the track, and that’s a good environment to forge high-end leg speed. We do a lot of cadence-specific work where we use cadence targets rather than power targets. Training across a range of cadences can benefit road riding, especially when it comes to choosing to sit or stand.”

By broadening your cadence range, you’ll be armed to sit or stand depending on the situation. That situation is individual, based on myriad factors like fitness, experience, topography, riding situation and weight. For instance, if you’re a 90kg rider, naturally, you’ll sit in the saddle more than a 60kg rider due to the greater metabolic cost of standing. Then again, if you’re in a race environment and looking to make an uphill break, it’s beneficial to ease out of the saddle on the steeper inside line of a corner than remaining seated on the shallower outside. You might also need to dance on the pedals if you’re running out of gears, albeit the wide ratios available in this day and age mean that should rarely happen. 

“Of course, you also might want to climb out of the saddle simply to shake things out and deliver yourself a mental refresh,” says Baker. “All in all, seated versus standing is an interesting topic, but the answer to the choice you make is typically cycling. It’s based on you as a rider and what you’ve practised the most.” Which for Pogačar comes down to greater strength work and shorter cranks. Tick those two off and enjoy your Tour de France debut in 2026. Allez allez…