low or high cadence I'm a bit confused

[masking_agent]

How do you build speed with high cadence ? I find when I push my cadence up to 95-100 , my speed drops about 2kmh ?

I was out for a ride with a very respected senior and was doing 90-100 cadence trying to stay on some wheels and the coach came up and said "use a bigger gear" I was stunned ?

I see Contador and LA footage in TT's and they're leg speed is phenomenal.

Is is just put in more miles ? More tempo ? Less tempo ?

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Martin318is]

following is personal opinion only - NOT fact and I am happy to be contradicted:

it partly depends upon how smooth your cadence is and partly on what you are trying to do.

Dealing with the second part first. If you were trying to sit in the bunch at speed then you may well find that it is easier and conserves more energy to 'roll' a higher gear than usual. But if you are aiming to hold a pace for a long time and you are not able to hide then you might find a higher cadence on a slightly lower gear works better over the longer term.

Regarding the first part - the actual cadences involved are dependant upon you and not any 'system'. If you naturally grind lower cadences and you dont feel comfortable over 100rpm then the numbers in both cases above will be lower for you. If however you naturally sit around 100+ and are able to get up over 140+ for short periods when you want to then the numbers are going to probably be higher.

If you are finding your speed drops as cadence rises then that suggests to me that you need to consider high cadence drills to get the smootheness back. there are a heap of articles on the subject but what I usually do is alternating 1min on 2 min off very high intervals at very low resistance where I hold my cadence above a certain level. Levels tend to be 120 then 130 then 140, etc until I can get myself smooth over 170-180. If I'm not smooth at a level I drop back to the previous one. I follow this session by getting out onto the road and (again riding at low resistance) ride for half an hour to an hour at 105-110+. I follow that process a couple of times a week at the start of a training phase and then drop it once race season kicks in.

interested to hear othe opinions

 

[JayKosta]

To prevent 'bouncing' on the saddle at high rpm, I push myself slightly rearward on the saddle.

Also, at high rpm, I try to 'turn the cranks in circles',
but each person has their own pedal technique that works best for them.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

 

[elapid]

Pedal at a cadence that is comfortable for you and that works for you. Simple as that. Contador and Armstrong pedal at a high cadence, others do not (Ullrich and Cancellara immediately come to mind). There is no right cadence. There is a wrong cadence, however. Too low and you'll get into muscle fatigue (guessing, but < 80 rpm would probably be reasonable) after a certain period of time, and too high and you lose efficiency and speed (individual, but for you this seems like > 95 rpm). However, training for prolonged periods at 75-85 rpm at tempo power/speed will also strengthen your legs and allow you to hold at a higher pace for longer.

 

[FrankDay]

How do you build speed with high cadence ? I find when I push my cadence up to 95-100 , my speed drops about 2kmh ?

I was out for a ride with a very respected senior and was doing 90-100 cadence trying to stay on some wheels and the coach came up and said "use a bigger gear" I was stunned ?

I see Contador and LA footage in TT's and they're leg speed is phenomenal.

Is is just put in more miles ? More tempo ? Less tempo ?

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

IMHO, your optimum cadence depends upon how many watts you are putting out and for how long you want to ride. Higher watts, higher cadence, longer ride, lower cadence.

If you want to ride like Lance then I suggest you train like Lance. Otherwise, find and do what is best for you.

 

[usedtobefast]

the faster you can spin,the faster you will go. sounds easy but it does take practice.no one best way to ride a bike, but higher leg speed in any given gear
is less fatigue in the long run. and you need to be able push the big gear when
needed. have fun.too.

 

[twothirds]

I used to ride lots of track when I was racing (it was my main form of riding at the time). Some of the best advice I got was from an old Italian coach who told me to pick a day each week when I would only ride for an hour, and ride one gear lower than what I was comfortable with. Spin and coast the whole ride. Spin for about a minute, coast 30-40 seconds. Do this the whole ride. I went from being a masher to having a comfortable cruising cadence between 100-110 rpm. When things heated up in the pack, 110-115 was where I would naturally pedal.

 

[elapid]

A PubMed search for "cycling and cadence" showed over 150 scientific studies have been published on cadence. The main issues with cadence are economy and efficiency (which usually occur at lower rpms) and muscle fatigue (which is usually less at higher rpms). While there are some contradictory papers, most studies show that performance is decreased and cardiovascular workload is increased at higher cadences. A sample of the results is provided below:

- "higher forces during the low-cadence intervals are potentially beneficial to improve performance" in Effects of low and high cadence interval training on power output in flat and uphill cycling Eur J Appl Physiol 2011.

- "The energetically optimal cadence decreased after prolonged cycling exercise at a high as well as at a low fixed cadence (P < 0.01). According to the generalized muscle equations of Hill, this indicates that most likely more type I muscle fibres contribute to muscular power output after fatiguing cycling exercise compared to cycling in the beginning of an exercise bout." in The energetically optimal cadence decreases after prolonged cycling exercise Eur J Appl Physiol 2010.

- "increase in cadence (from 60 rpm to 90 rpm) improves the efficiency of pedalling and the recruitment in both groups (non-cyclists and cyclists)" in The efficiency of pedalling and the muscular recruitment are improved with increase of the cadence in cyclists and non-cyclists Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 2009.

- "Low-cadence interval training (60-70 rpm) is probably more effective than high-cadence training (110-120 rpm) in improving performance of well-trained competitive cyclists. The effects on performance may be related to training-associated effects on testosterone and to effects on maximum oxygen uptake." in Effects of low- vs. high-cadence interval training on cycling performance in J Strength Cond Res 2009.

- "At a given work rate, very similar efficiency values were obtained at highly different cadences. The discrepancy in the freely chosen pedal rate (FCC)-work rate relationship between the ergometer cycling group and the free cycling group may be related to the manner in which one can regulate work rate. FCC depends not only on work rate but is also affected considerably by the manner in which the work rate can be controlled by cadence." in Freely chosen pedal rate during free cycling on a roller and ergometer cycling Eur J Appl Physiol 2009

- "Freely chosen pedal rate was found to be approximately 80 rpm at all workloads and was significantly higher than the most economical cadence (50 rpm)." in Factors associated with the selection of the freely chosen cadence in non-cyclists Eur J Appl Physiol 2009

- "Within the past 10 years, a number of papers have been published that have brought novel insight into the subject. For example, under the influence of spinal central pattern generators, a robust innate voluntary motor rhythm has been suggested as the primary basis for freely chosen cadence in cycling. This might clarify the cadence paradox in which the freely chosen cadence during low-to-moderate submaximal cycling is considerably higher and thereby less economical than the energetically optimal cadence. A number of factors, including age, power output, and road gradient, have been shown to affect the choice of cadence to some extent. During high-intensity cycling, close to the maximal aerobic power output, cyclists choose an energetically economical cadence that is also favorable for performance. In contrast, the choice of a relatively high cadence during cycling at low-to-moderate intensity is uneconomical and could compromise performance during prolonged cycling." in Factors affecting cadence choice during suboptimal cycling and cadence influence performance Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2009

- "During cycle bouts of short duration (<15 min), it has been well argued that experienced cyclists, trained runners and triathletes adopt high cadences (80-100 rpm) systematically above the energetically optimal cadence (EOC) at which the oxygen uptake is minimal (55-65 rpm). The choice of a high cadence has been shown to be dependent upon several factors, such as the aerobic fitness level, the reduction in forces applied to the cranks, the lower extremity net joint moments and minimal neuromuscular fatigue. However, with increasing exercise duration the FCC has been reported to be close to the EOC exclusively in endurance athletes practising a variety of activities ..." in Which factors determine the freely chosen cadence during submaximal cycling J Sci Med Sport 2010

- "Lower cadences were more effective during the recovery phase for both intensities and freely chosen pedal rate was the best technique during the propulsive phase." in Cadence and workload effects on pedaling technique of well-trained cyclists Int J Sports Med 2008

- "Cardiac output (CO) was higher at 100 rpm ... VO2 at both workloads was greater at 100 than 80 rpm as was HR. Results suggest that increases in O2 demand during low submaximal cycling (50 % VO2max) at high cadences are met by HR-induced increases in CO. At higher workloads (65 % VO2max), inability of higher cadences to increase CO and O2 delivery is offset by greater O2 extraction." in Cardiovascular effects of cadence and workload Int J Sports Med 2008

- "A high pedaling cadence (i.e., 120 rpm) reduces performance (i.e., W(max)) and anaerobic threshold during an incremental test in well-trained cyclists." in Med Sci Sports Exerc 2006

Here are some general articles on cadence from the web:

http://www.mybetterhealthforums.com/optimal-pedaling-cadence-what-is-best-and-why/index.html

http://jon-sparks.suite101.com/cadence-for-better-pedalling-a12791

http://www.slowtwitch.com/mainheadings/coachcorn/cadence.html

http://beginnertriathlete.com/cms/article-detail.asp?articleid=433

 

[oldborn]

Nice work elapid!

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Cadence (per se) is a red herring.

Without reference to power/effort and other factors (e.g. environmental, terrain, event scenario), it's not something to be all that concerned with, provided you are not pedaling outside of a (fairly wide) range that is typically effective for most riding.

For the vast majority:

Focus on effort (power) and choose a gear that feels right.

Occasionally mix it up by choosing one one gear higher/lower for periods of time.

If you have specific cadence requirements (e.g. track racing), then train accordingly.

 

[Martin318is]

One that has not been covered in the conversation so far: when a surge or attack goes in the bunch, do you react more easily after an hour of spinning a 90+ cadence or after an hour of sub 80 cadence? Most people will find it easier to accelerate on the lower gearing.

Bike racing isn't the same as TT'ing. Not saying those studies are not valid, just saying that there are other factors in a variable racing environment

 

[FrankDay]

One that has not been covered in the conversation so far: when a surge or attack goes in the bunch, do you react more easily after an hour of spinning a 90+ cadence or after an hour of sub 80 cadence? Most people will find it easier to accelerate on the lower gearing.

Bike racing isn't the same as TT'ing. Not saying those studies are not valid, just saying that there are other factors in a variable racing environment

I simply don't understand this argument. If there is a surge or attack and a cyclist needs a higher cadence in order to achieve a rapid, big power boost to answer same, it seems to me that a simple flick of the shifting levers and within about 0.5 seconds the athlete can be at the needed cadence and power without needing to be at an inefficient cadence for long periods waiting for something to happen.

What you describe may be what many actually do (or how they justify what they actually do) but it doesn't seem that is the only way to skin this cat.

 

[Tapeworm]

Unless you're on the track of course.

 

[Martin318is]

I simply don't understand this argument. If there is a surge or attack and a cyclist needs a higher cadence in order to achieve a rapid, big power boost to answer same, it seems to me that a simple flick of the shifting levers and within about 0.5 seconds the athlete can be at the needed cadence and power without needing to be at an inefficient cadence for long periods waiting for something to happen.

What you describe may be what many actually do (or how they justify what they actually do) but it doesn't seem that is the only way to skin this cat.

Try that concept in a criterium and see how far you get, frank...

Your definition of an 'inefficient cadence' is a broad generalisation and not particularly useful. The point I was raising is that theory is great for a one person against the clock effort, but the rules change when the effort is modulated by working in a group with others and the general 'efficiency' theories are blown out of the water by the need to react to others or be ready to react to others. eg - try riding for an extended period at say 60rpm and then suddenly need to up your power by 4 or 500W (or worse). If this was included in the above stuides then I must have missed it.

Regardless, I am not interested in skinning cats, I am interested in winning mass start road races.

 

[Martin318is]

Unless you're on the track of course.

exactly. track nd bmx are two places where some of the world's best sprinters have come from.

Asside from anything else,the souplesse of being able to comfortably sit for minutes at a time at over 140rpm leaves you more comfortable at pretty much any rpm and able to react to events by calmly spinning up to speed rather than getting out of the saddle and thrashing. Whatever one decides to do in an actual race, it is a facet of training worth pursuing

 

[FrankDay]

Try that concept in a criterium and see how far you get, frank...

People don't shift gears in criteriums?

Your definition of an 'inefficient cadence' is a broad generalisation and not particularly useful. The point I was raising is that theory is great for a one person against the clock effort, but the rules change when the effort is modulated by working in a group with others and the general 'efficiency' theories are blown out of the water by the need to react to others or be ready to react to others. eg - try riding for an extended period at say 60rpm and then suddenly need to up your power by 4 or 500W (or worse). If this was included in the above stuides then I must have missed it.

Everyone will have a most efficienct cadence for any given power. I guess it might be the best tactic to be at a less efficient cadence waiting for the time one needs the power such that this cadence is now more efficient, even though the rider might be a little more tired than they might otherwise be.

Regardless, I am not interested in skinning cats, I am interested in winning mass start road races.

As is everyone else I presume.

 

[BroDeal]

Jeebus! What I take away from this is that FDay has never done any bike racing or even group riding.

 

[CoachFergie]

Just pedal what feels comfortable.

What I found amusing was reading one coaches advised riders to use a certain gear in sprints based off an average cadence from sprint races. They used the cadence from all three laps where the riders play cat and mouse before launching into their sprints.

Aiming for a set cadence in a criterium would show a lack of understanding of the demands of the event.

 

[elapid]

+1 with Dr. Coggan and Coach Fergie - pedal at the cadence you are comfortable with and at the cadence at which you can generate your desired power. Whether it be recovery, tempo, sprint or response to an attack, turn the pedals over at the rate that best produces the results. Cadence is kind of like a saddle, what is right for one person is not necessarily right for the next person.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

People don't shift gears in criteriums?

Ever changed gear while accelerating hard? It's not pretty.

In these races, if you have to wait the time it takes for a gear change to accelerate, then it's often too late.

 

[CoachFergie]

I would suggest that aiming for a set cadence is not appropriate for even individual timed events with different shape tracks and the variations in road surfaces, weather and gradient.

Look at some youtube clips of Cancellara and in footage from his time trials over the last 2-3 years he is grinding at times and other times has a very high cadence. Without double blind, randomised control trials published in high impact journals it would appear that he is adjusting his cadence to suit the conditions.

We do the same on the track. My rider used a bigger gear on the 333.33m with easy to ride bends Moscow track than he does on 250m Invercargill track with very tight bends.

 

[FrankDay]

Ever changed gear while accelerating hard? It's not pretty.

In these races, if you have to wait the time it takes for a gear change to accelerate, then it's often too late.

I have changed gears in anticipation of a hard acceleration. Perhaps 0.5 secs delay is too late because you are too tired to make up the difference.

Seems to me with today's electronic shifters this might be less of a problem than what you grew up with.

 

[Martin318is]

I have changed gears in anticipation of a hard acceleration. Perhaps 0.5 secs delay is too late because you are too tired to make up the difference.

Seems to me with today's electronic shifters this might be less of a problem than what you grew up with.

Frank, if you are going to be childish you will get a "time-out"

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

I have changed gears in anticipation of a hard acceleration. Perhaps 0.5 secs delay is too late because you are too tired to make up the difference.

Seems to me with today's electronic shifters this might be less of a problem than what you grew up with.

Yeah, what would I know?

 

[FrankDay]

Frank, if you are going to be childish you will get a "time-out"

Huh? We all are most comfortable with what we are most familiar with. I can see how such a racing style might have developed when shifting was done with friction shifters on the down tube. Not real easy to do quickly or with any assurance where you would end up. And, of course, there is a natural tendency for beginners, who may have access to newer technology at the beginning of their careers, to race like those who came before you and are better than you. Just because new technology comes along that might allow a change in style does not mean that it invariably occurs even though an argument can be made in its favor.