cadence

tonyzackery said:

bump, as apparently some did not quite understand the first time through. Allow me to expound - optimal cadence is specific to the individual, specific to the particular course, and specific to the power output demanded.

It's more likely that some just don't read Pez.

[IMG]/img/vbsmilies/smilies/biggrin.gif[/IMG]

Doesn't take much, does it? LOL!
Now you got the other one of the three taking my very simple demonstration totally out of context in order to create a strawman. Seriously???

Obfuscation, or just plain dumb - take your pick...
I can see the flies buzzing...

Simple...

... that you are.

Add a few more ????? and !!!!! maybe even spice it up with a bunch of ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!!?! to complement the dash of [IMG]/img/vbsmilies/smilies/biggrin.gif[/IMG]

^ Childish teasing - and he/she calls me simple??? Seriously???
Hopelessly deflated ego. Sad. Give it a rest already - it's been 41/2yrs now of your tired act.
Face it - you can't win.
Get over your grudge and go ride your bike - for your own health's sake.[IMG]/img/vbsmilies/smilies/wink.gif[/IMG]

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by tonyzackery [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

Felt compelled to correct your contribution. [IMG]/img/vbsmilies/smilies/wink.gif[/IMG]

Fact: 300w @ 70rpm - my average heart rate: 144bpm
300w @ 90rpm - average heart rate: 154bpm

There is some research indicating that higher cadence correlates to lower pedaling efficiencey (higher O2 consumption/heart rate at the same power output). The researchers attributed the lower efficiency to poor pedaling form. Doing poor circles.

Your facts indicate that you have poor pedaling form. A bit of training might correct your form.

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by An old Guy [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

Your facts indicate that you have poor pedaling form. A bit of training might correct your form.

Heads up! Troll alert!

No worries A.O.G. - it's quite apparent (because you made the remark in an internet forum) your heart rate doesn't rise with an increase in cadence because you can pedal in perfect circles.

When I get old, I wanna be just like you.[IMG]/img/vbsmilies/smilies/wink.gif[/IMG]

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by Dave Cutter [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

THX! This thread (or at least part of it) proved very helpful to me. Since Lance seemed to show that a faster cadence was preferred... everyone I've talked to have advocated a cadence of 90. It always seemed like I was just barely able to keep that high of a rate of rpms. On today's ride I changed gearing and cadence.... down to about 80. The speed has never come so easily.

Admittedly... because all of today's ride was urban... I did do a bit more shifting than say... yesterday (when I was still spinning for 90). But after years of smoking (I quit 4+ years ago)... I think I have a lot more leg... than lung.

Cycle at your own cadence initially : don't try to cycle at someone else's cadence.
You need to get your system accustomed to pedalling so ride at your own pace.
As you become more adjusted to riding for longer at your cadence, then try to increase from say 80rpm to 85rpm to 90rpm.

This is a marathon not a sprint!

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by limerickman [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

Cycle at your own cadence initially : don't try to cycle at someone else's cadence.
You need to get your system accustomed to pedalling so ride at your own pace.
As you become more adjusted to riding for longer at your cadence, then try to increase from say 80rpm to 85rpm to 90rpm.

This is a marathon not a sprint!

...and make absolute certain you pedal in perfect circles, otherwise your heart rate will increase with the higher cadence and obviously poor pedaling form that accompanies it.

I wish I could take credit for this nugget of genius, but in actuality this is just a very small sample of the wisdom that comes exclusively from the one and only: 'An Old Guy'.

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by limerickman [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

Cycle at your own cadence initially :........
......... As you become more adjusted to riding for longer at your cadence, then try to increase from say 80rpm to 85rpm to 90rpm.

Initially... when I got my Schwinn Varsity, 80 [rpms] was considered to be the norm... or at least that is what I thought back in the 1960's when I was in my teens. Now as a senior and on my 2nd return to cycling [as I cycled again briefly about 20-25 years ago]. I've spent a couple years at well over 1000 miles a year trying to achieve the acceptable 90 rpms. We had an unusually mild winter here so there wasn't much of a winter break, and I haven't had to devote time to reconditioning myself.

When I returned to cycling this last time [this is the 3rd season], my first stop was with my doctor. I wore a heart monitor every ride the first year. At first, I found that making a sandwich in the kitchen could get my heart rate high enough to burn fat [at least theoretically]. But by seasons end, I had to work to get my heart rate up. My at-rest heart rate is now in the 50's.

So I tried dropping/slowing my cadence after reading: Post #3 The pros are between 80 and 90. The two extremes are Jan Ullrich (very low cadence) and Lance Armstrong (very high cadence) both are pretty good. As well as: post #9 As most folks who've riding a while know, everyone has a cadence at which their most comfortable.

The very first ride at my new slower cadence was very fast. The rides since have been slightly faster than the first. I track and record such things so I know for a fact, that shifting to the bigger ring and forgetting about keeping up my cadence has made me faster. OK... fast is relevant. I am old and I smoked most of my adult life. I am NOT fast and I won't be winning [or even entering] any races. But for me.... changing cadence makes a big enough difference I can now feel comfortable enough for some group rides I've shy-ed away from.

Of course... I've only had a handful of rides trying out this grinding. So I am keeping an eye on my knees (and even ankles and hips). I may find I can increase cadence while retaining the big ring [smaller cog] settings. That would be nice. For now... I am just enjoying the increased speed.

I look at cadence the way I look at IQ points. While we all have a number we're comfortable and efficient (or stuck) with, we could all make use of a little more. High cadence promotes circulation to the legs, reduces stress to the joints, allows the leg muscles to contract and release with greater suppless (suppleness), and produces the torque necessary to handle changes in effort without strain. Reduced strain means reduced damage to tissue that allows faster and more complete recovery.

When I was unabashedly fred I thought I was pretty darned efficient around 55 rpm, but doing that all day long damaged my knees to where I wasn't good for more than a couple 20-mile rides a week. 90-100 rpm most of the time allows me to keep riding, but it took work to get there.

Normal cadence for me would be about 90, max around 120 with full power going downhill, and drops to 60 going uphill in the saddle. Any lower than that and my legs aren't strong enough.

I've tried & tried to increase my cadence, on the turbo it'll av. About 80-85, max 115ish with intervals. Out on the road it naturally averages 72-77 (tt pace), when i consiously make the effort to increase it to say 85-90 i just drop 1-2mph instantly. No doubt my legs prefer the grind, lol.

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by DanDare [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]
......when i consiously make the effort to increase it to say 85-90 i just drop 1-2mph instantly.

Before Lance showed us that 90+ was better... we actually thought 80 was right. I think there are too many factors in the non-race world... to make ether the "right way". I am not a young well trained athlete. If my body wasn't so badly damaged... I'd likely be jogging as well. But meanwhile... I'll live with a cadence of less than 90.

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by Dave Cutter [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

Before Lance showed us that 90+ was better... we actually thought 80 was right. I think there are too many factors in the non-race world... to make ether the "right way". I am not a young well trained athlete. If my body wasn't so badly damaged... I'd likely be jogging as well. But meanwhile... I'll live with a cadence of less than 90.

If you're pedalling between 80-90, I can't see the problem.

When I was racing back in the 1980's here in Ireland we used to train using the following method: select a gear say 42x15 and try to hold a steady tempo of 85 rpm throughout the entire training riding.
As our muscles became accustomed to this gear and cadence, we would increase the gear to 42x14 and try to hold the tempo at 85rpm for the next session and so on.

This helped to build our fitness and it helped adapt our system to higher and higher workloads.
Of course we would have sprint finales to those session when we'd use "the big ring" but you get the idea.

Ride a tempo for as long as you can with the highest gear that you can. When your system adapts move to a higher gear riding the same tempo for the entire session and so on

Being a recreational fitness rider I gave up paying attention to cadance 10 years ago. My normal cadence is a high tempo which I have no value or gauge to measure it to.

I am happy and healthy.

I read through the cadence thread and thought it might be helpful to throw some science on topic. I read through over a dozen research papers on the ideal cadence and produced an article on the topic entitled: "The Ideal Cadence for Competitive Bicycling". and cited over 8.

A few bullet points from the article:

1. lower cadences tend be more efficient with lower outputs (wattage or effort)
2. cadence should generally be ignored during criteriums and focus should be almost exclusively on drafting
3. elite and world class riders are generally more efficient with higher cadences (see research papers cited)
4. heart rate generally tracks with effort; the lowest heart rate of any particular cadence at a fixed output (wattage or effort) is generally the most efficient cadence
5. criteriums have large ranges of changing cadences (see gear chart and according speeds in post)
6. 120 rpm is generally the most efficient cadence for sprinting
7. Very few individuals (unless world class or elite) will benefit (go faster) from cadences exceeding 80 rpm for efficiency during time trialing
8. Higher cadences combined with higher outputs (wattage or effort) is a bit easier on the knees (tendon, joint sensitivity)

I hope this information is helpful.

Regards,
David Henderson