Whats the point of obsessing over cadence zone data if most of you are still stuck in the dark ages, using arbitrary zone boundaries that were set by some outdated coach or guru? Newsflash: the traditional 50-60 RPM optimal range is a myth perpetuated by the cycling establishment. I want to know, has anyone out there actually experimented with non-traditional cadence zones, pushing the limits of whats considered normal to see real performance gains? Are you still stuck on the idea that 90 RPM is the ceiling, or have you explored the benefits of 100+ RPM? Dont give me any fluff about technique or muscle memory - I want to see some real data, not just theoretical nonsense. Whos actually innovating here, and whos just regurgitating the same tired advice?
