Extremely high cadence

Raptor said:

I like your point though. Suggestions for spin class routines that will promote efficient power
production WHILE maintaining all the inefficient cram-work-into-a-short-time aspects? Sounds
self-defeating to me, so whoever comes up with good ideas wins a prize.

It occurs to me though that in many cases, training is supposed to be inefficient. Racing should be
efficient.

--
--
Lynn Wallace xmission.com~lawallOpen ↗ "I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we
could to protect our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security." --Microsoft VP in
charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
| Dave <[email hidden]> wrote:
| : Actually I have never spent day one in a lab studying power output, I
have been connected to various
| : power measuring devices in the real world, and I have logged thousands
of miles on a fixed gear.
|
| A good lab could be useful for studying effects of cadence training, because you can eliminate
| random variables in a lab setup. Then again "good technique" develops over years, and you
| generally can't run lab experiments for years on an end.
|
| : make-up of the individual asking the question. But in general high
cadence work does not improve
| : your power output UNLESS the high cadence is being done in big
gear/overgear training situation.
| : Which is what I stated is one of the benefits of overgeared motorpacing
at a high speed/high
| : cadence.
|
| Whoa, whoa, makes sense but is a bit confusing. Does "power output" really mean power output at a
| given effort level, or power output at the maximum effort level (ie. for just a few seconds if
| even that)?
|
| Your statement seems to be supported by the age-old thing called the echo phenomenon of training:
| turning big gears at a high cadence improves power output at a high effort level, because, duh, it
| essentially is training at a high effort level.
|
| Then again we can make the statement more specific by pointing out that highest power is produced
| by turning big gears at a high cadence, and in addition, the most effective way to train for this
| is by training in those specific conditions: turning big gears at a high cadence. In other words,
| there is different neural, metabolic, muscular etc stuff involved under these conditions, which
| makes it different from just turning big gears or pedalling at a high cadence - your legs and body
| will adapt to the workload differently in each case.
|
| : Dave
|
| --
| Risto Varanka | helsinki.fi~rvarankaOpen ↗ varis at no spam please iki fi

The hour record has always been done at a cadence of 98 to 100 rpm with one exception.

Marty

"Blind Freddy" <[email hidden](spam)> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The hour record has always been done at a cadence of 98 to 100 rpm

with one

Quoted message said:

exception.

Not so.............. ida1.physik.uni-siegen.dehourrec.htmOpen ↗

Phil Holman

"Phil Holman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
|
| "Blind Freddy" <[email hidden](spam)> wrote in message
| "]news:[email hidden]...
| >
| > The hour record has always been done at a cadence of 98 to 100 rpm
| with one
| > exception.
|
| Not so.............. ida1.physik.uni-siegen.dehourrec.htmOpen ↗
|
| Phil Holman
|
|

Ok, I was a bit out, but in general the average is in that range.

Marty

"Phil Holman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Blind Freddy" <[email hidden](spam)> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The hour record has always been done at a cadence of 98 to 100 rpm

with one

Quoted message said:

exception.

Not so.............. ida1.physik.uni-siegen.dehourrec.htmOpen ↗

More to the point, what does the cadence used in a one hour non-steady-state TT have to do with the
notion that it is helpful to train at very high cadences (e.g., 150 rpm)?

Andy Coggan

Raptor <[email hidden]> wrote:
: Heh. That sounds about right. An hour is way too short for a bike ride IMO, either indoors or out.
: But you do what you've got time for, and in my case, what they'll pay me for.

My fast rides have been about an hour. If you do interval training, you could do with even less.
Then again, a proper warmup and cooldown in an hour? No way...

: I like your point though. Suggestions for spin class routines that will promote efficient power
: production WHILE maintaining all the inefficient cram-work-into-a-short-time aspects? Sounds
: self-defeating to me, so whoever comes up with good ideas wins a prize.

Hmm inefficient in what respect? 🙂 Interval training would be efficient, afaik, but you need a
fitness base of regular cycling for that, so it's best suited for racers 😉 Fitness professions seem
to be so much based on myths, but of course there are people who try to sell the progressive
paradigms too, before all of us realize they are also based just on some kind of myth/mistake...

Maybe you can combine entertainment and effective training in spinning by viewing it as a fartlek
(speedplay) type exercise. The participants can try out different effort levels and cadences. It's
up to each participant to set one's real effort level, but perhaps they are in the class because of
all the different forms of guidance... :-)

--
Risto Varanka | helsinki.fi~rvarankaOpen ↗ varis at no spam please iki fi

Andy Coggan <[email hidden]> wrote:
: More to the point, what does the cadence used in a one hour non-steady-state TT have to do with
: the notion that it is helpful to train at very high cadences (e.g., 150 rpm)?

Maybe it's an attempt to prove that Real Pros don't ride at 150 rpm.

But I think it's supposed to imply that riding at a high cadence is not useful for high power
output. This goes into semantics, but:

1) If you think of 80-90 rpm as a normal cadence, then 100 rpm can be seen as a high cadence.
2) A one hour record doesn't involve high power output, because the effort is sustained over a
fairly long period. The power output in a short sprint is much higher.

--
Risto Varanka | helsinki.fi~rvarankaOpen ↗ varis at no spam please iki fi

"Andy Coggan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
| "Phil Holman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
| "]news:[email hidden]...
| >
| > "Blind Freddy" <[email hidden](spam)> wrote in message
| > "]news:[email hidden]...
| > >
| > > The hour record has always been done at a cadence of 98 to 100 rpm
| > with one
| > > exception.
| >
| > Not so.............. ida1.physik.uni-siegen.dehourrec.htmOpen ↗
|
| More to the point, what does the cadence used in a one hour
non-steady-state
| TT have to do with the notion that it is helpful to train at very high cadences (e.g., 150 rpm)?
|
| Andy Coggan

The point I was trying to make is that training at a cadence of 150 rpm is probably not very useful,
whereas a cadence of around 100 RPM is probably a better target to aim for as it has been derived by
scientific testing. (Better if you're training for an event of an hour duration anyway.)

I did read somewhere that maximum power is developed at an RPM of about half your maximum
pulse rate.

In any case, there is plenty of information available based on scientific research already
available. To base ones training on opinions gathered from the internet is probably not a wise
thing to do.

Marty

"Blind Freddy" <[email hidden](spam)> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Andy Coggan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
| "Phil Holman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
| "]news:[email hidden]...
| >
| > "Blind Freddy" <[email hidden](spam)> wrote in message
| > "]news:[email hidden]...
| > >
| > > The hour record has always been done at a cadence of 98 to 100 rpm
| > with one
| > > exception.
| >
| > Not so.............. ida1.physik.uni-siegen.dehourrec.htmOpen ↗
|
| More to the point, what does the cadence used in a one hour
non-steady-state
| TT have to do with the notion that it is helpful to train at very high cadences (e.g., 150 rpm)?
|
| Andy Coggan

The point I was trying to make is that training at a cadence of 150 rpm is probably not very
useful, whereas a cadence of around 100 RPM is probably

a

Quoted message said:

better target to aim for as it has been derived by scientific testing. (Better if you're training
for an event of an hour duration anyway.)

Ah - makes more sense now.

Quoted message said:

I did read somewhere that maximum power is developed at an RPM of about

half

Quoted message said:

your maximum pulse rate.

Maximum power output by a muscle occurs at about one-third of maximal contraction velocity - so for
the multi-muscle, multi-joint activity of cycling, maximum power occurs at around 120-140 rpm. You'd
have to have an inordinately high maximum heart rate for the rule you suggest to be true!

Andy Coggan

Andy Coggan said:

Maximum power output by a muscle occurs at about one-third of maximal contraction velocity -

Why? Just curious, and stuck at home this morning. And is maximal muscle velocity achieved at a
contraction rate of pprox 1/6 second? And what is the relation of this to the cyclic nature of
pedaling (as opposed to, say, powerlifting)?

Kirby.

----- Original Message ----- From: "Andy Coggan" <[email hidden]> Newsgroups:
rec.bicycles.racing Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 9:04 AM Subject: Re: Extremely high cadence

[Snip!]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I did read somewhere that maximum power is developed at an RPM of about

half

Quoted message said:

your maximum pulse rate.

Maximum power output by a muscle occurs at about one-third of maximal contraction velocity - so
for the multi-muscle, multi-joint activity of cycling, maximum power occurs at around 120-140 rpm.
You'd have to have an inordinately high maximum heart rate for the rule you suggest to be true!

Andy Coggan

"Kirby Krieger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Andy Coggan said:

Maximum power output by a muscle occurs at about one-third of maximal contraction velocity -

Why?

It's a function of the fact that force falls off curvilinearly as velocity increases, a relationship
that is determined at the molecular level (which is why A.V. Hill was able to write an equation
describing the force-velocity curve of isolated frog muscle based on measurements of the minute
amounts of heat that are produced during a single contraction). Since power = force x velocity, and
force is falling as velocity is riding, the power-velocity relationship describes an inverse
hyperbola - with the peak at approximately
1/3 of Vmax (maximal speed of contraction).

Quoted message said:

Just curious, and stuck at home this morning. And is maximal muscle

velocity achieved at a

Quoted message said:

contraction rate of pprox 1/6 second?

The maximal speed of contraction of a muscle depends on A) the type of myosin protein present, and
how quickly it can hydrolyze ATP, and B) the number of sarcomeres (muscle units) in series (since
each shortens from its two ends at a certain rate, having more sarcomeres in series means that the
muscle as a whole shortens more rapidly). Thus, maximal speed of contraction for muscles can vary
over an extremely wide range - but some muscles (e.g., snake rattle muscles) can contract very,
very, very rapdily).

But you're interested in cycling, not rattlesnakes - so I'll tell you that
A) the *theoretical* maximal pedaling rate (based on extrapolation of the force-cadence relationship
for cycling - which is actually linear, not curvilinear, due to the way the data are expressed -
to zero force) is typically somewhere around 250 rpm. However, you can't really achieve your
theoretical maximal pedaling rate, because force is never zero - even with no external load,
there is still internal "stiction".

Quoted message said:

And what is the relation of this to the cyclic nature of pedaling (as opposed to, say,
powerlifting)?

If you express the data appropriately, there is nothing really different about pedaling a bike vs.,
say, a vertical leap.

Andy Coggan

Andy Coggan <[email hidden]> wrote:
: A) the *theoretical* maximal pedaling rate (based on extrapolation of the force-cadence
: relationship for cycling - which is actually linear, not

Do you mean maximum force one can generate at a given cadence?

What if you draw graphs for different heart rates or effort levels? Not just maximum (?) effort?

Hehehe... can one rent a lab somewhere? =)

: curvilinear, due to the way the data are expressed - to zero force) is typically somewhere around
: 250 rpm.

So this would mean most power is output at 125 rpm.

: However, you can't really achieve your theoretical maximal pedaling rate, because force is never
: zero - even with no external load, there is still internal "stiction".

Or a bit less if you take this into account... Of course it's all theoretical dancing in the dark 😉

--
Risto Varanka | helsinki.fi~rvarankaOpen ↗ varis at no spam please iki fi

warren <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Kurgan Gringioni

Quoted message said:

"warren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Kurgan Gringioni
<[email hidden]> wrote:
>
> just started the 1200 calorie/day diet.

3 Krispy Kremes and a double latté?

Lucky for me, I don't really like donuts (unlike some of the Fatties around here).

I haven't had one in about a year-since I was at Dunkin Donuts in CT. Same for dead cow on a bun.
Ice cream however...

-WG

Warren G and Ching-Chang,

You guys are supposed to be arguing and calling each other fat, like a couple of [censored]. Please
stop with the gay love-fest.

Deez

"Deeznuts" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Warren G and Ching-Chang,

You guys are supposed to be arguing and calling each other fat, like a couple of [censored]. Please
stop with the gay love-fest.

What's this? Some more of my gay comrades are here already? Do tell. Describe the pleasure of a
titanium Flight between your cheeks, the glint of the metal, the texture of the carbon... Oh damn!
Messed myself again. Where are the tissues?

Roger.

Raptor said:

Robert Chung said:

"warren" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

You can get the students to go anaerobic (seems to be a popular thing during spin classes) while
keeping the rpm's at a more efficient 100-120 by increasing the resistance. This will be more
useful to them if they ever get on a real bike because they'll find it easier to go fast (mph)
at 100-120 rpm's than at 120+.

Perhaps, but efficient power production seems antithetical to spinning classes. The goals appear
to be to get the heart rate up quickly, to dehydrate the attendees, and secondarily to burn
calories in the shortest time, i.e., to be as inefficient as possible.

Heh. That sounds about right. An hour is way too short for a bike ride IMO, either indoors or out.
But you do what you've got time for, and in my case, what they'll pay me for.

I like your point though. Suggestions for spin class routines that will promote efficient power
production WHILE maintaining all the inefficient cram-work-into-a-short-time aspects? Sounds
self-defeating to me, so whoever comes up with good ideas wins a prize.

--

We have some spinning classes for racers in my bike club. None of the classes are less than 90
minutes. Don't ask me what they do 'cause I haven't attended any yet. I just heard from some that go
that it was very different from traditional spinning. Ie everybody wasn't spinnning the same cadence
but maybe outputting the same power or HR zone.

--
Perre

Remove the DOTs to reply

Why do 200 rpm's??

The answer is for pure speed.

Training at 200rpm or plus is meant to increase sprinters top speed.

How to train?

You need to train it when the body is well rested:
You chose a small gear ex 39*23 and spinn it as fast you can.
Very important small gear as the important thing is leg speed for the neuro muscular adaptations(the power developped is of little importance)

Only train it for very short intervals 6 to 10 sec and then rest (ride at low intensity at your normal cadence) and then do it again(repeat this several times)

Timing
Don't do this 2 days in a row or the day after a race/hard training you need to be fully recuperated. Do not do this kind of training in the 48 hours previous to a race.

Who is it for basically everybody who wants to maintain/ improve its top sprinting speed.

Who does it sprinter Cipo and other in a limited way. Who do it very often and will have the largest benefits track sprinters/keirin guys like Sean Eadie

Is this Scientific? Yes it is I checked it with Paul Ponnet(for those who do not now him, former trainer of the Belgian national cycling team now trainer of world champion and world cup winner cylo-cross Bart Wellens)

"Andy Coggan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"Raptor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Does anyone know of any other reason to do it besides to impress cute chicks on the next bike in
spin class?

So you can impress the readers of r.b.r. by your ability to spin 220 rpm on rollers.

Andy Coggan

It is impressive, isn't it?

OK, so I think I understand your position on this - basically, that very high speed spinning may
have limited training benefit, but that the benefit is not related to making power in the more
routine cadence range. Does that match what you are stating? If so, it makes sense to me.

What about using high speed spinning as a way of testing position and pedalling action? Basically,
what I am suggesting here is that riders with bad position or pedalling mechanics will not be able
to pedal very fast, and this is an indicator of inefficiencies that take place in the 'normal' range
as well, although these inefficiencies are harder to detect in the normal range.

Next time any of you are riding in a group, take a look at other racer's positions, and what they do
with the ankles and knees. It's plain amazing how many people sit way crooked on their bikes, flop
their ankles around, or ride with their knees sticking out (or one knee sticking out, or some other
horrible assymetry). This can't be good for power or efficiency, right? I know these people can't
hit the high rpms, because you can't do it if you're trying to pedal with your ankles, or flicking
your knee into the breeze at the top of every stroke.

So, AC, what's your take on this theory, that having a greater cadence range at one's disposal
may be indicative of better pedalling form and resulting greater efficiency at the more
mundane cadences?

RJ - admittedly not a kinesiologist

"maarten" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Why do 200 rpm's??

The answer is for pure speed.

Training at 200rpm or plus is meant to increase sprinters top speed.

How to train?

You need to train it when the body is well rested: You chose a small gear ex 39*23 and spinn it as
fast you can. Very important small gear as the important thing is leg speed for the neuro muscular
adaptations(the power developped is of little importance)

Only train it for very short intervals 6 to 10 sec and then rest (ride at low intensity at your
normal cadence) and then do it again(repeat this several times)

Timing Don't do this 2 days in a row or the day after a race/hard training you need to be fully
recuperated. Do not do this kind of training in the 48 hours previous to a race.

Who is it for basically everybody who wants to maintain/ improve its top sprinting speed.

Who does it sprinter Cipo and other in a limited way. Who do it very often and will have the
largest benefits track sprinters/keirin guys like Sean Eadie

Is this Scientific? Yes it is I checked it with Paul Ponnet(for those who do not now him, former
trainer of the Belgian national cycling team now trainer of world champion and world cup winner
cylo-cross Bart Wellens)

I'd say that you have a gross misconception of what represents science.

Andy Coggan

"Ronaldo Jeremiah" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Andy Coggan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"Raptor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Does anyone know of any other reason to do it besides to impress cute chicks on the next bike
in spin

class?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So you can impress the readers of r.b.r. by your ability to spin 220 rpm

on

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

rollers.

Andy Coggan

It is impressive, isn't it?

OK, so I think I understand your position on this - basically, that very high speed spinning may
have limited training benefit, but that the benefit is not related to making power in the more
routine cadence range. Does that match what you are stating? If so, it makes sense to me.

Glad you agree.

Quoted message said:

What about using high speed spinning as a way of testing position and pedalling action? Basically,
what I am suggesting here is that riders with bad position or pedalling mechanics will not be able
to pedal very fast, and this is an indicator of inefficiencies that take place in the 'normal'
range as well, although these inefficiencies are harder to detect in the normal range.

Next time any of you are riding in a group, take a look at other racer's positions, and what they
do with the ankles and knees. It's plain amazing how many people sit way crooked on their bikes,
flop their ankles around, or ride with their knees sticking out (or one knee sticking out, or some
other horrible assymetry). This can't be good for power or efficiency, right? I know these people
can't hit the high rpms, because you can't do it if you're trying to pedal with your ankles, or
flicking your knee into the breeze at the top of every stroke.

So, AC, what's your take on this theory, that having a greater cadence range at one's disposal may
be indicative of better pedalling form and resulting greater efficiency at the more mundane
cadences?

The biomechanics of pedaling very fast is so much different than when pedaling at "more mundane"
cadences that I don't think your proposed test would tell you much at all.

Andy Coggan

Andy Coggan said:

"Ronaldo Jeremiah" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

So, AC, what's your take on this theory, that having a greater cadence range at one's disposal may
be indicative of better pedalling form and resulting greater efficiency at the more mundane
cadences?

I would think that this technique would have a high risk of injury. A poor position "over-revved"
could lead to strains or tears of ligaments or tendons.

Quoted message said:

The biomechanics of pedaling very fast is so much different than when pedaling at "more mundane"
cadences that I don't think your proposed test would tell you much at all.

Andy Coggan

This matches my experience. When I want to top 150rpm, I need to rest more weight on my pelvis and
arms so my legs can spin more freely. This means I'm working different muscles than when normally
pedaling, which has a general exercise benefit but probably not for general riding/racing.

I am more prone to cramping with this high speed work, though I'm also prone to cramping in recent
years, especially in my calves.

--
--
Lynn Wallace xmission.com~lawallOpen ↗ "I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we
could to protect our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security." --Microsoft VP in
charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.