Average Cadence..

[J5311]

Whats everyone's average cadence? I know there are multiple variables in this for everyone, but i'm still new, only about 2 months, and only ride a few times a week. I want to know what is a good average cadence that beginners should either try to get or be at?

 

[POGATA]

Average is 73 rpm, but this is what matters:

 

[Holmz]

I'm a junior rider and because we have limited gearing in races my average is about 100-110 on the flat and 80-90 uphill. Super spin like Lance!

 

[Alex Simmons]

Average is 73 rpm, but this is what matters:

Why?

 

[Eldrack]

Average is 73 rpm, but this is what matters:

I suspect if you did a distribution that just contained cadence whilst seated then that graph would turn into an almost perfect normal distribution, which is kinda what you'd expect. That low end bulge is probably caused by the fact that most people drop their cadence when they stand up on hills (I know I do for starters, and so do most of the people i ride with).

 

[iliveonnitro]

I suspect if you did a distribution that just contained cadence whilst seated then that graph would turn into an almost perfect normal distribution, which is kinda what you'd expect. That low end bulge is probably caused by the fact that most people drop their cadence when they stand up on hills (I know I do for starters, and so do most of the people i ride with).

Delayed cadence when you stop pedaling, and ghost pedaling, aussi.

It will never be a perfect distribution as the range for lower cadence is much higher than the range for higher cadence. Eg, 90-110, but who can spin at 120-130 for long periods (>1hr)? Who can spin at 70-80 for long periods?

 

[POGATA]

Why?

are you kiddin?

 

[sogood]

Average is 73 rpm, but this is what matters:

So what's more relevant from training and physical adaptation's point of view? Average/Mean or Median? Does the SD spread also have an impact?

 

[iliveonnitro]

So what's more relevant from training and physical adaptation's point of view? Average/Mean or Median? Does the SD spread also have an impact?

It depends what your strengths, weaknesses, and goals are. For example, juniors who were previously limited with gearing can often easily spin 120rpm for hours, and can hit 200rpm. Throw them into a situation where they're forced to crank the pedals at 70-80rpm (18% hill) for a mile at his LT and strength becomes an issue.

Many people have extremely inefficient pedal strokes, but track riders rarely have to be concerned about that.

The idea is to make sure your pedal stroke while under power isn't too low to cause physical injury, or too high to cause an unnecessary increase in HR/lactic acid buildup or prevent you from responding to attacks. Cadence is highly individule. I prefer 105, others prefer 95. To each their own...for the most part.

 

[iliveonnitro]

PS, average doesn't matter as some cadence monitors record "0" cadence, or a very hilly area would see a decrease in cadence and a shift in the SD.

A realistic median or a realistic mode is what you would look for. That, or possibly the adjusted mean for things like time trials.

Come to think of it, the adjusted mean over a SD would probably be best. What spread of numbers do you spend most of your time?

 

[sogood]

Yes, median makes much more sense.

 

[RChung]

are you kiddin?

Cadence is a red herring.

 

[frenchyge]

76 rpm over the last 3 years. Hope that helps.

 

[sogood]

Cadence is a red herring.

Why?

 

[RChung]

Why?

Are you kiddin?

 

[sogood]

Are you kiddin?

But you are referring to cadence under the context of power and related analysis. But cadence by itself, you are not going to argue against the relevance of cadence to cycling technique are you?

 

[RChung]

But cadence by itself, you are not going to argue against the relevance of cadence to cycling technique are you?

Cadence by itself has no relevance to cycling technique. Focusing on cadence is a red herring. Cadence is a response. Since it's a response, exogenously changing your cadence to match some fixed target can only screw up "cycling technique."

 

[POGATA]

First image is all the cycling I have done this season(same as the one in the earlier post but incl. zeros), 538 hours, avg 73 rpm.

Second image is outdoor cycling, 449 hours, avg 69 rpm.

Third image is indoor cycling, 89 hours, avg 94 rpm.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Response to Eldrack:

The "low end bulge" is because when I ride at low intensity outside in the rolling terrain around where I live, I keep the cadence low in the short 10-20 % climbs, in order to keep the intensity low.

 

[J5311]

First image is all the cycling I have done this season(same as the one in the earlier post but incl. zeros), 538 hours, avg 73 rpm.

Second image is outdoor cycling, 449 hours, avg 69 rpm.

Third image is indoor cycling, 89 hours, avg 94 rpm.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Response to Eldrack:

The "low end bulge" is because when I ride at low intensity outside in the rolling terrain around where I live, I keep the cadence low in the short 10-20 % climbs, in order to keep the intensity low.

this is just abput the only post that makes sense.... outside i took all the values I had since all the courses are similar I rounded them out to get a total average cadence of 75.4xxx rpms... i guess thats not too bad for only cycling for 2-3 months spuradicly

 

[Alex Simmons]

The "low end bulge" is because when I ride at low intensity outside in the rolling terrain around where I live, I keep the cadence low in the short 10-20 % climbs, in order to keep the intensity low.

Intensity is a function of power, not cadence. Low cadence can still be high intensity.