Consulting for cycling brands who want biomechanical reasoning in product development, athlete support, or team programmes, and education work for institutions and federations building fitter training that holds up to scrutiny.
The work I do with bike, component, and apparel brands falls into four rough shapes.
Positional studies, rider-interface work, prototype testing with measured biomechanical feedback. If you're designing something a rider has to sit on, ride in, or move with, I can tell you what the body is actually doing, and whether the story on the marketing deck matches.
Road, TT, triathlon. Full fits, race-prep sessions, the awkward cases your in-house team hasn't quite solved. I'm used to working inside a sponsorship relationship without becoming the rider's primary voice.
Pre-checking the biomechanics behind a product story before it ships. Cheaper than a retraction, and a lot less public.
Training a brand's internal fit team or retail network so the story they tell on the shop floor holds up in front of a sceptical customer. This is where I do some of my best work, and it's the piece most brands underinvest in.
The work I do stays inside the organisations I do it for, which I explain below.
If you run a bike fit education company, a cycling federation, a university programme, or an industry certification body, there are four things worth a conversation.
Fitter training programmes, certification frameworks, and assessment structures. I've designed and delivered them at the international level, most recently as the education partner for two mid-major brands, training fitters across their networks to a shared standard.
You name the topic, whatever your fitters most need to sharpen. I write the course around it, fly out, and deliver it on your terms. Most recently in Canada; happy to travel further when the work justifies it.
The International Bike Fitting Institute, which I founded in 2014, exists to push the industry toward honest credentialing. If your institution is building a fitter accreditation pathway, that's a conversation I'm here for.
Field-validated biomechanics with a practical bent. Research design, post-graduate research input, and the bridge work between lab-clean protocols and real rider populations. I've sat on both sides of that line long enough to know where the gaps usually are.
Most of the consulting I do stays inside the organisations I do it for. I don't keep a public client list, and I don't ask for permission to name names. That's not a limitation, it's part of why brands and institutions keep coming back. If you're the kind of organisation that would benefit from working with me, there's a reasonable chance you've already heard my name from someone who has.
A few principles worth naming up front.
I'd rather do one piece of well-defined work and see whether the fit is right than sign a retainer before either of us knows what we're agreeing to.
Every engagement ends with a document the team can refer back to when I'm out of the room. Verbal-only consulting doesn't compound, and the team shouldn't lose the thinking when the contract ends.
If I'm ghost-writing product content, training material, or technical positions, that's agreed in the contract. Invisible is fine; undocumented isn't.
Happy to travel for scoped work. Most consulting runs over video and document exchange, with studio time for athlete sessions when the work calls for it.
Describe what you're trying to do and where biomechanical reasoning sits in the picture.
I read everything and reply within a few days. If I'm the right person, we'll find a scoped first engagement. If I'm not, I'll usually know someone who is.
