cadence
- Thread starter salide
- Start date
There is no formula...but I recommend searching this site for a while; cadence has been a highly discussed topic so you will probably find more than you ever wanted!salide said:
Cadence is very personal. Some people do better spinning and some do better grinding. The general rule is that you will get more endurance from a higher cadence. A higher cadence will get the work out of your legs and into your upper respiratory/cardio system which is much better at endurance than legs. If you have a computer with cadence and you want a place to start try 80 and work up and down from there to see what is best for you. The pros are between 80 and 90. The two extremes are Jan Ullrich (very low cadence) and Lance Armstrong (very high cadence) both are pretty good so you will have to find what is best for you.
http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=10252&status=True&catname=Toolbox
Interesting read. Confirmation of what you already knew: specificity, specificity, specificity...
Interesting read. Confirmation of what you already knew: specificity, specificity, specificity...
Actually I will post a formula and draw rebuttal possibly, but I agree cadence is a personal thing . I also agree that the target is generally accepted to be between 80-90 rpm. The higher cadence range is generally thought to be more effecient and in ways safer as to limit leg injuries such as strains. Body geometry,weight, condition all play a part.
First question is , what are you trying to accomplish.
Ok , here is a formula more for your entertainment than practicallity.
24000 joules divided by 80 rpms divided by 2 (legs) = 150 joules required per pedal stroke
24000 joules divided by 100 rpms divided by 2(legs) = 120 joules required per pedal stroke
I have found that the best formula is to eat smart, train hard and consistently, get at least 8 hours sleep and don't worry about what the other guy is doing unless you are on his wheel in a break.
First question is , what are you trying to accomplish.
Ok , here is a formula more for your entertainment than practicallity.
24000 joules divided by 80 rpms divided by 2 (legs) = 150 joules required per pedal stroke
24000 joules divided by 100 rpms divided by 2(legs) = 120 joules required per pedal stroke
I have found that the best formula is to eat smart, train hard and consistently, get at least 8 hours sleep and don't worry about what the other guy is doing unless you are on his wheel in a break.
Increase cadence = more strain on the cardiovascular and less on the musculoskeletal system, all other things equal
Decrease cadence = more strain on the musculoskeletal and less on the cardiovascular system, all other things equal
Decrease cadence = more strain on the musculoskeletal and less on the cardiovascular system, all other things equal
My cadence on my trainer is 90-95. And my legs are sore. My cadence on the road is 80-82 (while pedaling) and my legs are never sore. My cadence is in the low 60's counting the times I am not pedaling.
There is a lof of misinformation about cadence.
Your cardiovascular system does not depend on cadence. It does depend on power output. Power output often goes up with cadence.
Your musculoskeletal does depend on your cadence, but it also depends on your power output. If you are comfortable riding at a cadence 90, you will be just as comfortable riding at 2/3's the power at 2/3's the cadence. On the other hand keeping cadence constant and reducing the power to 2/3's may feel nice.
---
For the most part if you vary your cadence and your power output, you will feel better than if you hold them constant. You will also find what works best for you.
Felt compelled to correct your contribution. /img/vbsmilies/smilies/wink.gif
Fact: 300w @ 70rpm - my average heart rate: 144bpm
300w @ 90rpm - average heart rate: 154bpm
As most folks who've riding a while know, everyone has a cadence at which their most comfortable. It's entirely incorrect to assume that things are as simple as being able to produce the same power, at multiple cadences, with the same efficiency. I'm sure that the coaches in this forum and people like Señor Coggan will agree on that point.tonyzackery said:
Occam's Razor: increase your cadence, your heart rate will also increase (all other things being equal). Inefficiency is the culprit. Thank you.
The fact remains...
Like a moth to a flame, or a fly to a pile of...
The fact remains...
Like a moth to a flame, or a fly to a pile of...
By your reasoning we should all pedal in the 30's or perhaps even below that.
Perhaps if you trained differently your heart rate would react differently.
^^ Y'ever turn the pedals with no chain on the chainrings or sprockets? No power being produced, but does your heart rate increase? Jus' wondering, 'cuz according to your (il)logic your heart rate wouldn't go up./img/vbsmilies/smilies/wink.gif
You really should try a little harder...
You really should try a little harder...
While in your rather weird and quaint analogy there is no work being done at the back wheel, your legs don't just spin around by themselves. There is work being done...
It's almost 3:30 - almost time for me to levitate to the car.
It's almost 3:30 - almost time for me to levitate to the car.
Damn, they just come out of the woodwork - don't they?
Confusing "work" with "power" now to create a strawman?! Seriously???
Saying I'm recommending <30(!!)rpm cadence to create a strawman?! Seriously???
Hopelessly deflated egos on display with axes to grind.
Do they ever quit????? /img/vbsmilies/smilies/biggrin.gif
Confusing "work" with "power" now to create a strawman?! Seriously???
Saying I'm recommending <30(!!)rpm cadence to create a strawman?! Seriously???
Hopelessly deflated egos on display with axes to grind.
Do they ever quit????? /img/vbsmilies/smilies/biggrin.gif
THX! This thread (or at least part of it) proved very helpful to me. Since Lance seemed to show that a faster cadence was preferred... everyone I've talked to have advocated a cadence of 90. It always seemed like I was just barely able to keep that high of a rate of rpms. On today's ride I changed gearing and cadence.... down to about 80. The speed has never come so easily.
Admittedly... because all of today's ride was urban... I did do a bit more shifting than say... yesterday (when I was still spinning for 90). But after years of smoking (I quit 4+ years ago)... I think I have a lot more leg... than lung.
bump, as apparently some did not quite understand the first time through.
Allow me to expound - optimal cadence is specific to the individual, specific to the particular course, and specific to the power output demanded.
LOL. Sounds awesome but I'd only be really impressed if you had the other two trained to throw rocks at dumb people...jhuskey said:Quote: Originally Posted by swampy1970 .
While in your rather weird and quaint analogy there is no work being done at the back wheel, your legs don't just spin around by themselves. There is work being done...
It's almost 3:30 - almost time for me to levitate to the car.
Magic ,invisible fairies pedal for me. I got em all on EPO so they can turn and burn. Two of em are rednecks that yell obsenities at stupid drivers. I got it all covered.
Wow. Not even close with that one. If no power were produced, the legs wouldn't turn, the heart wouldn't pump, and breathing wouldn't happen. Moreover, since friction exists in the bottom bracket and the feet, cranks, legs.....everything exterior to the bb.....all have to to deal with some modicum of aero drag, force is still required to overcome those opposing forces (bearing drag, aero drag), and thus power is produced. Sure, it's not moving the wheels in a direction correlated strongly with crank rotation, but that's only because the system as configured is nearly perfectly inefficient thermodynamically in terms of moving the bike.tonyzackery said:
Similar threads
