cadence?

given a training range, there are many ways to stay in it:
1) going very hard, big gear
2) going somewhat hard;
3) going "easy"
4) going fast;
5) going very fast, little gear and high PE

when I say "easy", I mean the cadence that you feel easier for that kind of effort, the one with the lowest PE. Of course, L5+ is never easy.. So you guys/girls always try to stay in the 3rd area or are you hitting (purposely) even other zone? If the latter, which ones and why?

 

L5 is the only one where I give some thought for cadence. I tend to start with a little bit undergeared and switch up after 3 minutes to what would probably be "3rd area". Reason is simply that this way I feel I can best complete the intervals and that's most probably only psychological that when I feel I do not have anything left and cannot hold the power I can still switch up and survive the last 2 mins. I do all the L5 on trainer.

Long L4/SST on trainer I switch gears just to break the boredom.

 

OP, I never intentionally ride in such a way as to create anything but a comfortable cadence, if that's what you're asking.

I do the same thing. Try to start out with a smooth spin, but gear up when I start to get ragged and grind until the end of the interval.

 

I used to push a high cadence until I started looking at watts. Now I tend to keep my cadence between 80 and 90, which seems to give me the best power output. My time trials improved by leaps and bounds when I decided to give up on the "Lance cadence" and just go with my own rpm.

I do cadence exercises sometimes, by spinning up small gears to about 150-160rpm and holding that for a while. I find that it helps my smoothness and gives me more "snap" in sprints and quick accelerations. It certainly drives my heart rate up very quickly though!

Sometimes when warming up I will choose a very big gear and pedal it at about 50rpm for a minute or so, just to get my legs used to the "full circle". This is just a warm-up thing though and I don't do it with much force.

 

yes, this is precisely what I was asking.

 

I'd go for what's comfy. Your legs are already in pain in L5. Making them change their natural frequency only makes things difficult.

 

I said L5 just as example, the same is true -I believe- even for lower training zones, except maybe for L1. There are times, however, when you'll be forced to ride at uncomfortable cadences, i.e.: very steepy hill. If you aren't able to sustain a comfortable cadence in some hard climb, won't you ride that climb?

 

If 39X25 @ 60rpm is as comfortable as you can make it - that's comfy. If you're asking if I would shift down [to a smaller cog] any further - I wouldn't.

Ultimately, we both recognize that cadence is a response and not a function of power production. There are instances [hills, sprints] where we are limited by our power and gearing - and cannot attain our natural cadence.

Are you saying that moving out of our selected cadence range is NOT difficult?

 

I'm not saying anything, I just wanted to ask if, while training on flat for example, you purposely use sub-optimal cadences (the ones with higher PE) and
1) if yes, why and which ones (higher or lower cadences);
2) if not: how do you train for races that involves hard climb where you won't be able to spin at your optimal cadence?

PS: sorry for my bad english

 

Simone: No need for apoplogies. I'm also a bad, impulsive reader/listener. Hahaha - if we were to ever chit-chat at the cafe over our bikes, we might get into a lot of discussions.

I met a local pro who was a crit specialist. He says ride all-day in the small ring using as quick-as-cadence as possible. Like 120's, 130's. He says it should help your legs to get accustomed to the accelerations out of corners. Does it really? I have my doubts. I wonder if any of the physiologists can corroborate or void that theory.

I tried that one day - I spun like 120-130 for an hour in 39-15/16/17. It's pretty hilarious watching your legs move like that while travelling 20-35 kph. My preferred cadence is 95-100 rpm. Any slower and my legs and mind freak out - it feels like I'm walking in sand. Bugs the crap out of me.

Personally, I'd worry more about power production [ala FTP] than focusing on what cadence I'd be using for hills. Strap on the 11-28 if you're worried about climbing.

Cheers mate.

 

As a certified coach I try to get my athletes to think of cadence in relation to the adaptive process: In GENERAL (but not limited to the following simple examples)

1. Higher cadence drills (over 110 for example) early in the season to develop the neuro-muscular connections and efficiency for a better peddle stroke as well as additional Cardio-pulminary efficiencey.

2. That said, (and in regard to the "Lance" cadence question) we then begin endurance training to find the "optimal individual cadence level." We try utilizing the efficiency gains to further develop the endurance related adaptations to both the cardio-pulminary and neuro muscular systems.

3. Using lower cadence / higher effort tempo drills after building on a good endurance base later in the season (during more specialized training) to increase Muscular endurance and strength, say cadences as low as 50 to 60 rpms for short high-effort intervals.

The goal is to increase both the efficiency, endurance and strength adaptations through the process. Lance spins high cadence, but he can ALSO push some pretty big gears! The problem with many athletes following their interpretation of the "Lance High cadence program" that I began coaching was that while they developed beutiful efficiency, they had real trouble accelerating on hills or out of the crit corners when attacked. For example, at the higher cadences they were maxing cardio-pulminary capacity and couldn't Spin faster to accelerate and lacked the muscular strength and endurance to shift to a harder gear. Going "nowhere fast," so to speak.

 

+1

I'd up-level it a bit and remove the reference "for hills". We're all "wired" just a bit differently. What worked for Lance, or any other elite pro, may or may not work for any of us. In fact I would argue, that for those us that are "time constrained" wrt training time, time spent on cadence drills and such that are not addressing limiters in one's power profile is an ineffective use of that valuable resource.

My 0.02,
DK