Hi Cadence Never Worked for Me

[marciero]

If you read the abstract, you see that there is nothing like the sweeping conclusion made in the title of the road cc article. I think the results of the study are of interest-well, not to me personally right now but perhaps to other researchers- and invite further inquiry. The small sample size is notable but lots of medical studies involving humans have small sample sizes. As long as the experimental design is sound one interprets the results in that light, rather than dismissing them. I would bet that one of the co-authors is a statistician who did the design and analysis.

[Heisenberg]

Originally Posted by Ti Designs

I'm not saying that learning how to pedal faster will make you more efficient, but there's always going to be a trade-off between muscle tension and the number of times the muscle is fired. In other words, being able to spin faster is never going to harm your performance. Motor skills don't weigh anything, and here's the amazing thing - learning another motor skill isn't going to cause one you already have to fall out of your head.

this.

being comfortable riding between 60-110rpm and being able to make power anywhere in that range is what high cadence/leg speed is all about. and even enormous legs that "shouldn't" spin that fast, can. the ability, for me, came from a few years of really boring leg speed drills, as well as big gear workouts.

that's what you're after - being versatile and able to effectively change gears (within your own body) without diminishing horsepower. leg speed is a good skill to learn for racing. casual riding? maybe not.

it has nothing to do with how many double centuries one has completed. at all.

[MoparPorsche]

Sample size small, but corresponds to my experience. Thank You!!! One day I may reach professional status and get efficient at +100 rpm. But on second thought I am 57 now, so I probably won't never reach professional status. Oh Well!!!

[paredown]

What I remember from BITD was doing spring training and our sometime coach forcing us (often by setting our derailleur screws in) to stay in low gears at speed--and then do impromptu sprints where it felt like your knee caps were going to fly off. That, and motor pacing in seriously low gears--again with the knee caps at risk. Typically that was early spring...

I suppose the idea was to train your body to a new standard--and it certainly seemed to help to have the ability to spin and especially accelerate at a high cadence--it added (for the lack of a better word) a kind of elasticity to one's riding, and it really paid of on the track where you were really winding up for sprints. It also seemed like a critical skill when the pack was surging.

Now that I'm old and slow I don't notice so much, but a few years ago while touring with a group of older riders, one of the guys who was (and been doing) far more riding than me commented on my relatively high cadence, so the training must have stuck, although now it is a survival skill--of not pounding myself and getting home in one piece.

[redir]

Originally Posted by msl819

Having just picked up zwifting this winter too, I’d be curious what FTP you are working off of. 4 mins at 330 sounds like a doozy of a workout

I'm doing the programmed Zwift workout called FTP builder. I chose it not so much because I care about building my FTP but because it looked good and fit my time with about 5 one hour sessions per week.

But anyway it starts off with doing an FTP test and then uses that number to schedule workouts. Starting off my FTP was 3.9 watt/kg

We'll see what happens at the end of the 6 week term

Riding 4 minutes at 330 is just enough to push it. I think that workout has you do that 6 times with 2 minute rests, I'm quite happy when the 6th time is over and I don't have to do it again.

[Gummee]

Originally Posted by Clean39T

I am intrigued by this. How do I entrain better motor skills so I'm not fighting myself? Kick, pull? Work on releasing tension in my body (hands, etc.)? Better core strength?

I've been riding for almost 30 years, but that doesn't mean I haven't been doing it wrong the whole time.

Though I do still think I'm at a disadvantage with being tall, with a northern-european bone structure, and gigantic feet. At least I'm part Welsh, so I know how to suffer.. Me and G. It's what makes us good climbers. Lolz.

Easy way to learn to spin faster: ride a fixed gear in somewhat hilly terrain.

The downhills'll learn ya to spin. Quick!

The uphills'll make ya stronger!

M

[nooneline]

Originally Posted by Heisenberg

this.

being comfortable riding between 60-110rpm and being able to make power anywhere in that range is what high cadence/leg speed is all about. and even enormous legs that "shouldn't" spin that fast, can. the ability, for me, came from a few years of really boring leg speed drills, as well as big gear workouts.

that's what you're after - being versatile and able to effectively change gears (within your own body) without diminishing horsepower. leg speed is a good skill to learn for racing. casual riding? maybe not.

it has nothing to do with how many double centuries one has completed. at all.

There are some studies that show that limiting training to certain cadence zones is less effective than self-selecting a comfortable cadence. So, I'd say that you're right.

But I also think that the element that's missing from the study in the OP (as well as a few related ones that I dug up) is what happens when fatigue is introduced. Low cadence, high force (aka muscular power production) is more fatiguing - this power-production system can't last as long as the aerobic one, which kicks in under lower force, higher cadence. Low cadence might be more efficient initially, but cycling isn't only about efficiency.

[msl819]

Originally Posted by redir

I'm doing the programmed Zwift workout called FTP builder. I chose it not so much because I care about building my FTP but because it looked good and fit my time with about 5 one hour sessions per week.

But anyway it starts off with doing an FTP test and then uses that number to schedule workouts. Starting off my FTP was 3.9 watt/kg

We'll see what happens at the end of the 6 week term

Riding 4 minutes at 330 is just enough to push it. I think that workout has you do that 6 times with 2 minute rests, I'm quite happy when the 6th time is over and I don't have to do it again.

I am doing the 4 week FTP booster program as well. Like you, not because I really care about my FTP, but because I want to get on, do the next workout, and just do what it tells me to do. I brought my FTP info over from a Peloton so I’ll be interested to see what the FTP test shows at the end. 3.9 w/kg is dang good though, kudos to you. This is also pretty much my first foray into training with power so I am still figuring out all the data.

[summilux]

I just had a quick read of the full paper. It is a reasonably good journal and seems to be decently performed. The small sample size (6 men, 3 women) is fairly typical of exercise physiology studies because you have to pay people to do this and unless you are doing a Nike or Red Bull funded study there just isn't enough $$ floating around in the academic world. The participants are likely to be all Japanese (the senior author on the paper is Japanese): thin and shortish by North American/European standards. They are youngish, reasonably fit but are not putting out huge power numbers.

As a heavy cyclist, I like to mash.

[benb]

I was typically pretty high cadence... although before I had a PM I did more high cadence drills. After getting the PM I have done more intervals.

I used to spend a lot of time keeping my cadence above 90... now I would find in those intervals I seem to self select something like 85rpm.

I think you need to keep practicing spinning at higher speed or you lose it pretty fast.

Also it seems like fit things can affect it.. lower my seat a little and my self-selected cadence goes up.

That interval progression workout on Zwift sounds good... I have such a problem overheating on the trainer but that's the kind of workout I like/should be doing more of.

[benb]

Originally Posted by summilux

I just had a quick read of the full paper. It seems to be decently performed. The small sample size (6 men, 3 women) is fairly typical of exercise physiology studies because you have to pay people to do this and unless you are doing a Nike or Red Bull funded study there just isn't enough $$ floating around in the academic world. The participants are likely to be all Japanese (the senior author on the paper is Japanese): thin and shortish by North American/European standards. They are youngish, reasonably fit but are not putting out huge power numbers.

As a heavy cyclist, I like to mash.

Those #s kind of imply it's not trained cyclists in the study.. the power #s are way too low if the upper range is 200W at ventilatory threshold, which is probably around FTP. They are short/small but the #s are still low.

169w @ 72kg is roughly listed as the peak which is only 2.3W/kg.

[redir]

Originally Posted by msl819

I am doing the 4 week FTP booster program as well. Like you, not because I really care about my FTP, but because I want to get on, do the next workout, and just do what it tells me to do. I brought my FTP info over from a Peloton so I’ll be interested to see what the FTP test shows at the end. 3.9 w/kg is dang good though, kudos to you. This is also pretty much my first foray into training with power so I am still figuring out all the data.

Yeah it's pretty cool isn't it. Honestly I could barely ever ride indoors before Zwift. The programmes keep me on my toes and paying attention and the hour goes by fast. I dare say on some days I even look forward to it.

Today I rode to work for the first time in months so the real world was refreshing. BTW I am using rollers on Zwift so I don't get that virtual in world resistance experience. The rollers do have mag resistance but they are not 'smart.' So today in the real world when I felt resistance do to hills I was almost confused!

But the rollers work well for the training program because even though I might be climbing that virtual mountain up to the snowy peak I can still maintain a cadence of 90 in what ever gear is necessary.

[msl819]

Originally Posted by redir

Yeah it's pretty cool isn't it. Honestly I could barely ever ride indoors before Zwift. The programmes keep me on my toes and paying attention and the hour goes by fast. I dare say on some days I even look forward to it.

Today I rode to work for the first time in months so the real world was refreshing. BTW I am using rollers on Zwift so I don't get that virtual in world resistance experience. The rollers do have mag resistance but they are not 'smart.' So today in the real world when I felt resistance do to hills I was almost confused!

But the rollers work well for the training program because even though I might be climbing that virtual mountain up to the snowy peak I can still maintain a cadence of 90 in what ever gear is necessary.

I am on a Kickr so it coupled with Zwift doing a workout, I am not even changing gears. I am sure there will some readjusting to the great outdoors. Spinning up some of our hills at 90 plus rpms at say 225 watts won’t cut it, I would fall over I’d go so slow. I have enjoyed the cadence as well. I can be too much of a masher being a bigger guy so spinning I feel has helped my cardio vascular endurance more than I expected.

I will say though... my avatar can be a bit of a jerk as he randomly swerves into oncoming riders for no reason!

[Heisenberg]

Originally Posted by summilux

I just had a quick read of the full paper. It is a reasonably good journal and seems to be decently performed. The small sample size (6 men, 3 women) is fairly typical of exercise physiology studies because you have to pay people to do this and unless you are doing a Nike or Red Bull funded study there just isn't enough $$ floating around in the academic world. The participants are likely to be all Japanese (the senior author on the paper is Japanese): thin and shortish by North American/European standards. They are youngish, reasonably fit but are not putting out huge power numbers.

As a heavy cyclist, I like to mash.

this alone would tell me the study is wholly irrelevant for minimally trained cyclists (eg, everyone here).

Originally Posted by nooneline

There are some studies that show that limiting training to certain cadence zones is less effective than self-selecting a comfortable cadence. So, I'd say that you're right.

But I also think that the element that's missing from the study in the OP (as well as a few related ones that I dug up) is what happens when fatigue is introduced. Low cadence, high force (aka muscular power production) is more fatiguing - this power-production system can't last as long as the aerobic one, which kicks in under lower force, higher cadence. Low cadence might be more efficient initially, but cycling isn't only about efficiency.

yes, this. while i'll often jump out of the saddle on long climbs to evenly distribute fatigue/stretch, lower cadence does fatigue muscle groups faster, and is harder to maintain power after a long time in the saddle. high torque does that, no matter the power output. it can even be evidenced in heartrate - for a given wattage, input HR is typically 5% higher at low cadence (60-75rpm) than at higher (85+).

i'll only kick into mashing when i'm fatigued in a competitive setting in order to hit muscles that haven't been "used up" yet.

[XXtwindad]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4557094/

Interesting study I came across while doing some research for a blog posting. The study shows some evidence that high cadence (tandem) cycling can mitigate the effect of Parkinson's.

There's been a growing body of evidence that high intensity activity may help combat neurological diseases like Parkinson's and Alzheimer's.

I do high intensity intervals on the exercise bike, which definitely enhances my mood and makes me a more efficient climber on the big hills near my home.