Low cadence question - Page 2

Not bad for "troll bait."

First off the closer to reallity your training usually the better. On a trainer we can only get as close as posibble.

So if you can't get perfect crank inertia with flywheel matching and such are you saying we should sit on the couch?

Close is better than nothing.

Second, Riding on a trainer is not valid because the Crank inertia is incorrect but I should't try to match the Cadence/torque/power to a given instance?

Stated another way

You need correct Crank inertia to be specific to a particular situation, but any cadence will due?

Are you just trying to make me type a lot

Maybe I am daft or the point was only eluded to.

Some times I need it spelled out. Still think it supports what I say.

There is still that line about raising the front wheel on a trainer, with no mention of increasing torque or power or crank inertia either.

Outside a hill act as an exogenous stimulus to lower cadence and increase torque.

Also my dad likes to fish. I don't, but I know enough to throw out a line with bait on it and slowy move through the water waiting to see what bite to enjoy the fight and maybe a dinner.

Stating a point is more like feeding the fish, for the well being of the fish.

Point Stated in the initial link:

"What's the point? The actual point isn't about cadence and wattage--the point is about analyzing your data unthinkingly. The analytical programs included with your power meter may be convenient and pretty, but you have to be careful in interpreting what they show you."

Ultimately the OP wanted to be "feed" the knowledge whether his low cadence training idea would hurt his endurance now and in the future.

He is looking for ways to interpet his data. Ya know, "This is how I interpet my data, what do you guys think?" He got "Here is what you need to know" and the next thing the he knows he is a filet in a frying pan.

Apparently I push the OP aside and swallowed the bait, hook, line and sinker.

Hope I was a good fight and taste good

Nope. I'm saying that even if you used a trainer to find "optimal" cadence, you won't be able to generalize that to outdoor real-world conditions. [/quote] Nope, again. Here's what I mean: if you want to produce high power under a spectrum of cadence and torque, you need to practice producing high power under a spectrum of cadence and torque. Practicing by producing high power at a fixed cadence under a spectrum of torques won't generalize. That's why it doesn't make sense to seek your "best" cadence and then increase torque at that particular cadence. Those three plots at the bottom of the page show the same rider but different types of races on different terrain: you can see different patterns of cadence and torque. Look at Coggan's QA analysis for a similar take.

That's cuz cadence is a red herring.

The OP should do what he needs to do to produce the power he needs to have to attain his goals. He started off trying to emulate LANCE, probably because some cadence nazi told him he was pedaling too slowly. So he exogenously raised his cadence, and it sounds like it wasn't working for him. I'm not going to tell him his cadence is too high, too low, or just right. I'm saying he should focus on power, not cadence.

[/quote] Nope, again. Here's what I mean: if you want to produce high power under a spectrum of cadence and torque, you need to practice producing high power under a spectrum of cadence and torque. Practicing by producing high power at a fixed cadence under a spectrum of torques won't generalize. That's why it doesn't make sense to seek your "best" cadence and then increase torque at that particular cadence. [/QUOTE]
Of course that makes sense for most things in cycling.

The "best" Cadence was refering to getting and training to get your best steady state such as in a TT. And which may offer more enurance benefits.

We are usually changing the velocity of our cranks all the time in the real world and you are right we can not ignore that from a neuromuscular view point. From an endurance point of view our muscles main concern is sustained energy supply. Where am I getting it, how much I have left how it is being produced.

And while there is a optimal Cadence for a Steady state effort (Max Watts for a duration), I still mentioned that one should train above and below that.

But even that would not take into account the constant changing on the road.

LOL

I totally agree with this last paragraph.

Power should be the main focus. But if you can train your self to make that power more aerobically with less use of the low oxidative fibers, you will be able to do it longer, hence have more "Endurance".

OP did mention Endurance, did he not?

I basically agree with you (and almost completely ignore cadence in my training). However, I do think there is an awful lot of data coming in for a rider to optimize against. Assuming that there is an optimal cadence for each situation, I would not be surprised if many riders are not riding at their optimal cadence in every situation. Doing some testing (in different situations) might help them figure it out.

Yeah if a rider thinks they are best at 72 RPMs and then always rides, thinking he will be fastest, will not fit the optimum cadence for a different situation.

I do think that most of the time self selected cadence is best.

But I found without bio feed back I will find myself grinding away at 62 RPM during a 15 minute FTP interval to keep the power up and this strategy leads to non completion for longer intervals As I go for a higher and higher gear to hold the Watts. Not to mention grinding on the knee for that long.

Just another point of view:

http://53x12.com/do/show?page=article&id=27

http://53x12.com/do/show?page=article&id=15

"A very long training as well as specific sessions are needed in order to learn how to pedal comfortably and profitably at high cadences, particularly during climbs: but that is a different story."

I agree with the premise.

But not "By ideal pedaling cadence we mean the rate that requires the least consumption of oxygen and/or the lowest cardiac frequency. "

First, I wouldn't concer myself with HR.

But the main thin is the more oxygen base our metabolism is for a given power output the longer our Muscle glycogen will last.

Lower peak forces mean more relience on Slow twitch fibers and less on fast twitch. Using more oxidative fibers means using more Oxygen and thus stretcing out your Glycogen stores. A Definition of endurance.

And I thought 80rpm is low cadence...At 70 or under your legs barely move.

__________________
Pain is just weakness leaving the body.

It all depends what gears you run, and what terrain.

Take a 39x25 up Mont Ventoux and you would need to be putting out 5.5 w/kg for at least 10km. That's why I took a 34x25, and it required 4 w/kg to keep in the 70-75 rpm range for the steep 10km section.