Cyclists are known for power and endurance, but the sport does little or nothing to strengthen one crucial part of the anatomy.
“We have weak feet,” says Phil Cavell, director at London’s Cyclefit.
Our feet account for a third of the points of contact between human and bicycle, and, as the final transmitters of power from legs to pedals, are arguably the most important.
Modern life, however, and modern footwear, means that most of us have weaker feet than our early ancestors. Additionally, cycling utilises the foot in a manner far outside the function it has evolved to perform. Fixed in position by shoe and cleat, it is prevented from fulfilling its full phase of motion. A pedal stroke, how ever well developed, is unlikely to strengthen arch or toe.
“I could tell you to run barefoot on a beach for a year and then come back and see me,” Cavell continues, “but we both know that isn’t going to happen.”
How then do we compensate for weakness in such a vital area? Footbeds are becoming an increasingly popular method. Those supplied by eSoles are colour-coded, with red offering the least intrusive and black the greatest support. It’s not uncommon for the support to be increased over time as the rider becomes used to its presence. Tolerance is variable and there’s no right or wrong response. Cavell estimates the failure rate for orthotics at between 20 and 30 per cent. “There’s no point in arguing. You just say, ‘It’s fine. We’ll rip that up and start again.’”
Fitting begins with a measurement, sat down, with the weight literally taken off the feet.
Cavell places the foot into a position he describes as “subtalar neutral” – a relaxed position in which the sole of my foot is flat to the floor, and in which my knee and ankle joints are aligned. The position exaggerates the height and shape of the arch, allowing him to measure its “navicular height” by placing a small wedge beneath.
He then measures the length of the foot, its width, and the distance to the first metatarsal. By standing, the foot is brought from the subtalar neutral position. Cavell takes new measurements, assessing the differences between weight bearing and neutral stances. Those whose arch collapses a significant distance more than 5mm are likely to enjoy the greatest benefit, a scenario Cavell summaries as “correcting rather than reflecting”.
In my case, Cavell will use the eSole to adjust my foot position as far as possible to the subtalar neutral position. To do so will require the use quite an aggressive insert: one he’s not certain will be tolerable. “If it isn’t, we can always roll back to a lower arch compensation.”
He trims the synthetic base of the E-Sole, and inserts a blue arch support and met dome, a small bump in the footbed to gently spread the transverse arch (the curve across the top of the foot). The arch support is immediately noticeable and I’m not certain how it will feel on the bike.
He describes cycling shoes as a “huge factor”, but suffice to say here that the eSole can be used with any. The pair I’m fitted for fit snugly in my Dromarti Race shoe, one Cavell notes has a large off-set (the difference in height between the heel and toe).
Six weeks later, I’ve grown accustomed to the eSoles. They’ve done much to correct my tendency to roll onto the outside of the left foot, though haven’t stopped it entirely. Additionally, I believe my pedal stroke has improved and feel as if my knees and ankles are now in greater alignment. Placebo? Perhaps. Analysis of power output with and without the footbeds would provide a more scientific analysis, but I’m comfortable on the bike and post-ride and would be reluctant now to ride without them.
