Low cadence question




[/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.
 
RChung said:
That's cuz cadence is a red herring.
LOL

RChung said:
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.
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?
 
RChung said:
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.
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.
 
lanierb said:
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.
 
Watoni said:
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.
 
holli said:
And I thought 80rpm is low cadence...At 70 or under your legs barely move.

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.