Leg Speed

[rayhuang]

I do leg speed training 2 times a week even though I already have a naturally fast cadence on the road (95 to 104). I believe that this trains the brain and legs to have to peddle smoother(less bounce on saddle) at high cadences. LIke anything else with cycling-its a skills training and this is the best time of the year to train. Theres also no reason to not combine them within other training rides because they are usually done in Z2 or Z3 in a light gear so not very taxing. I used to start bouncing in the saddle at 114 rpm and now can pedal pretty smoothly at 122.

I didnt know hitting 200 wasnt possible for everyone. I thought it was something that could be trained. My first attempt I hit 180 and the second attempt I hit 193 and held it for about 5 seconds and then legs tightened up. This was of course on a stationary trainer in a light gear. I"ll never hit 200 rpm on a raod sprint (No tracks close to me), but I figure if I can train myseklf to spin over 200, it should improve my ability to hit 150 in a sprint which I see as doable and an advantage in racing.

 

[frenchyge]

I am curious about that very same question. The goal or idea anyway, would be to get the muscles to contract faster consistently, under a load that increases. Intuitively, I would guess, and it isn't much more than that right now, that there is some correlation between this ability and one's mix of type I & type IIa/b fibers.

I think one's fiber mix is pretty much genetically determined, and not really trainable. Strength training to produce hypertrophy increases the size of individual fibers, but still doesn't significantly change the number of fibers or the type distribution.

Also, is this question of 'leg speed' improvement an old-school belief ala SE training or does it have some validity? Yes I know many people do it, but is there something other than experience and tradition to show that it works?

I was thinking about this further during a quiet moment, and I think Alex's comments really illuminated something for me (thanks, Alex). Certainly one can increase their peak cadence through technique, but cadence only limits speed when one doesn't have multiple gears to choose from (ie, a higher peak cadence doesn't really produce a sprint performance improvement for roadies). What benefits a roadie is high power produced at sprint speeds, which means higher *force* being produced at the cadences typically used during sprints (120-130 rpm, not 170-200). IOW, since neuromuscular adaptations are specific to joint angles and velocities, the goal of sprint training is to improve the force being produced at the velocity (cadence) which will be used during the event. For some reason, Alex's comments about increasing gearing only after one is able to spin out the current gear is what finally brought this to light for me, and now downhill sprinting, motorpacing, and all the other ways to artificially increase sprint workout speed seem to make more sense. It's rather pointless to develop NM adaptations which aren't specific the conditions present during targetted events. Now I'm not sure what benefit standing starts, low-speed jumps, stomps, etc. would be to a roadie, except maybe to yield 5-sec power values for plugging into their power profile.

Dare I say it? Leg speed is a red herring (for roadies, at least).

(Lucy, thanks for digging up those posts from FGF -- good stuff )

 

[RapDaddyo]

I think one's fiber mix is pretty much genetically determined, and not really trainable. Strength training to produce hypertrophy increases the size of individual fibers, but still doesn't significantly change the number of fibers or the type distribution.

I was thinking about this further during a quiet moment, and I think Alex's comments really illuminated something for me (thanks, Alex). Certainly one can increase their peak cadence through technique, but cadence only limits speed when one doesn't have multiple gears to choose from (ie, a higher peak cadence doesn't really produce a sprint performance improvement for roadies). What benefits a roadie is high power produced at sprint speeds, which means higher *force* being produced at the cadences typically used during sprints (120-130 rpm, not 170-200). IOW, since neuromuscular adaptations are specific to joint angles and velocities, the goal of sprint training is to improve the force being produced at the velocity (cadence) which will be used during the event. For some reason, Alex's comments about increasing gearing only after one is able to spin out the current gear is what finally brought this to light for me, and now downhill sprinting, motorpacing, and all the other ways to artificially increase sprint workout speed seem to make more sense. It's rather pointless to develop NM adaptations which aren't specific the conditions present during targetted events. Now I'm not sure what benefit standing starts, low-speed jumps, stomps, etc. would be to a roadie, except maybe to yield 5-sec power values for plugging into their power profile.

Dare I say it? Leg speed is a red herring (for roadies, at least).

(Lucy, thanks for digging up those posts from FGF -- good stuff )

But, let's say that my peak power (pre-training) is produced at 120rpm. Is it possible through sprint training at higher cadences that I can both increase my peak power cadence to, say, 130rpm and increase my peak power (because my peak power was torque limited)?

 

[Spunout]

Dare I say it? Leg speed is a red herring (for roadies, at least).

For roadies, I think it still has a place. Legspeed helps in the changes of pace required in mass start racing. In training, having the ability to spin smoothly at ultra-high cadences may improve spin at regular cadences. Of course this needs to be proven.

But in designing programs with 2 months of indoor trainer time, every workout is not a intensity workout. Adding legspeed work without reducing resistance (doing legspeed +100% FT) really helps break things up and helps bridge power work to a functional sprint or jump capability.

 

[Lucy_Aspenwind]

Frenchy.....After reading the now famous AIS strength coach post at FGF, I've given it some thought and am seeing some definite correlation to on-bike training.

This is of course, a little n=1 commentary

Specifically, it was mentioned that there was a strength, power, and speed phase. For me, standing starts done uphill from virtually a standstill, are essentially the strength phase. Nowhere else can I generate as much torque, which makes sense given that I'm starting from a virtually zero cadence. While I used to do these primarly for max power numbers, now I focus more on doing them for strength. Now I can regularly hit 700+ lb-in in sprints.

Right, but what use is any of this to a roadie? Hmmm, well if your sprint is force/torque limited but leg speed is good, then standing starts might be the best thing. Unless of course, you'd rather go to a gym and lift and work on that limitation there. Then too, there is technique in a good standing start which might help people make their jumps and out of the saddle efforts more successful - whether in a sprint or an attack.

I think of lead-out and rolling sprints as more of a power phase, since cadence is higher, and thus, torque is lower. My maximal figures are now reached in these since I'm obviously more limited by leg speed than force.

It seems to me, at least in terms of what I read in this forum, that sprints are not just low-priority for many folks, but even completely ignored by some. Yes, road races are almost entirely aerobic so that should be the highest priority, however doing some sprints and learning a little technique can yield some real improvement, it doesn't take much time at all, and at least for me, is fun and breaks up the monotony of Level 4 work.

Plus, I mean really, you don't want to lose a sprint to climber types at the end of a hard-fought mountain stage do ya?

I've seen a 200+ watt increase in just one month

P.S. Stop the press! I absolutely flew by 2 riders yesterday while doing L4 intervals on a long hill. What is the world coming to?

 

[rayhuang]

Well, I'd rather be in one too small a gear and spin it out seated to 160 rpm than be in too big a gear, hit a wall and trudge to the finish line out of the saddle.

But-I am not a sprinter-so this is why I try to play to what I think my strengths are, which is leg speed over explosive power.

But-yeah-after reading this I was doing plyometrics while walking around the block with my 4 yr old daughter on my shoulders. HOpefully I'll have a sprint this summer!!

Ray

 

[rayhuang]

I dont know if this info will help anyone, but I looked at my PT file and it was 193 cadence for 10 seconds at 400 watts ave and 423 watts max. I did it in a 39/21 on a windtrainer. It will be interesting the next time if I can do it on a fluid trainer (it has more resistance) and hit 200 rpm. Maybe I'll have to do it in a 23.


But-as far as I know-theres no such thing as MAX cadence training!

 

[frenchyge]

This is of course, a little n=1 commentary

As is mine, certainly -- just some musings from many, many hours behind the wheel this weekend. Glad we're on the same page.

Right, but what use is any of this to a roadie? Hmmm, well if your sprint is force/torque limited but leg speed is good, then standing starts might be the best thing.

But my point is that if we're hoping for neuromuscular adaptations (as opposed to hypertrophy -- remember we're talking about roadies), then those adaptations are specific to the joint angles and velocities achieved in training. I'm not sure there's any reason to believe that improvements in standing start torque are going to translate to higher torques at 120-130rpm (although standing starts themselves are very important to trackies, which would justify their use in my mind).

Then too, there is technique in a good standing start which might help people make their jumps and out of the saddle efforts more successful - whether in a sprint or an attack.

I've agreed that the potential for technique improvements is great.

I think of lead-out and rolling sprints as more of a power phase, since cadence is higher, and thus, torque is lower. My maximal figures are now reached in these since I'm obviously more limited by leg speed than force.

But, let's say that my peak power (pre-training) is produced at 120rpm. Is it possible through sprint training at higher cadences that I can both increase my peak power cadence to, say, 130rpm and increase my peak power (because my peak power was torque limited)?

I'm not sure that I understand what those bolded statements mean. Our muscles are capable of generating very large forces, or very high speeds, but not necessarily both at the same time. In any case, the peak power will never be generated anywhere near the limit of either force, or velocity, for our muscles. Assuming we all have a linear force v. velocity envelope like the one represented by the black sloping line here, mathematically the peak power will be generated near the middle of that line (ie, in the mid-ranges for both force and velocity, and not close to either limit).

I suppose we could propose improving our power through force work to try to raise the y-intercept, and then speed work to push out the x-intercept, but since the majority of the desired adaptations are neuromuscular, why not just train at the specific 'peak power' velocities and try to push the whole envelope out from the middle? Again, this is a luxury exclusive to roadies because of the ability to select sprint cadences through gear choice, and the fact that the bike does not need to be accelerated from a standing start or track-stand.

It seems to me, at least in terms of what I read in this forum, that sprints are not just low-priority for many folks, but even completely ignored by some. Yes, road races are almost entirely aerobic so that should be the highest priority, however doing some sprints and learning a little technique can yield some real improvement, it doesn't take much time at all, and at least for me, is fun and breaks up the monotony of Level 4 work.

I agree completely. Let me just say that I do not claim to *know* what I'm talking about here, nor am I trying to argue anything -- this is mostly an academic exercise for me (although I may start to take a greater interest is the weather will cooperate for a bit). If others feel they have answers, please chime in or correct me. Most of my L7 work last year was low-speed jumps, but I'm now wondering if a change of approach is in order.

Plus, I mean really, you don't want to lose a sprint to climber types at the end of a hard-fought mountain stage do ya?

Pfft.... if it comes down to a sprint, then it wasn't fought hard enough.

Besides, I always let the early overpasses wear them down, and save my biggest kick for the *final* overpass.

 

[fergie]

It seems to me, at least in terms of what I read in this forum, that sprints are not just low-priority for many folks, but even completely ignored by some. Yes, road races are almost entirely aerobic so that should be the highest priority, however doing some sprints and learning a little technique can yield some real improvement, it doesn't take much time at all, and at least for me, is fun and breaks up the monotony of Level 4 work.

Andy Coggan put an interesting presentation on fixed gear fever site and on of the examples given that for a 4000m pursuit the biggest gains would come from improving ones aerobic ability. Improving alactic had negligible impact on 4km times. So I presume it's even less important for crits or road racing.

Something I have noticed from the last year of racing and training with power is that while my peak power is 1200watts I have never come within 200watts of this in any road race. Tells me I should be improving my aerobic to get to the sprint in better shape. Now it's our track season I don't think this emphasis will change much.

 

[Lucy_Aspenwind]

Uh-huh, improving sprinting and neuromuscular power is negligible in a pursuit so why even bother working on it as a road racer?

No doubt our posters have big races to compete in and sprints only matter in token races like the ones below won by a bunch of no-names...

​

 

[Alex Simmons]

Andy Coggan put an interesting presentation on fixed gear fever site and on of the examples given that for a 4000m pursuit the biggest gains would come from improving ones aerobic ability. Improving alactic had negligible impact on 4km times.

Well given that there is only one acceleration required and that is to reach sub-maximal speeds, that's not a surprise.

So I presume it's even less important for crits or road racing.

I don't agree. In a crit/road race you are seeking to reach maximal velocity at times, something you don't come close to in a pursuit.

Something I have noticed from the last year of racing and training with power is that while my peak power is 1200watts I have never come within 200watts of this in any road race. Tells me I should be improving my aerobic to get to the sprint in better shape. Now it's our track season I don't think this emphasis will change much.

Maybe, but I'm not sure they are necessarily linked. My level of aerobic fitness is rarely a limiter of my ability to generate peak power numbers in a road race/crit.

 

[fergie]

Maybe, but I'm not sure they are necessarily linked. My level of aerobic fitness is rarely a limiter of my ability to generate peak power numbers in a road race/crit.

How do you determine peak velocity?

So during a crit or points race how often can you get within 50watts of your peak power output?

Hamish Ferguson
Cycing Coach

 

[fergie]

Uh-huh, improving sprinting and neuromuscular power is negligible in a pursuit so why even bother working on it as a road racer?

No doubt our posters have big races to compete in and sprints only matter in token races like the ones below won by a bunch of no-names...

Would be nice if you did me the courtesy of trying to understand my argument and backing up your counter point with real evidence.

Can you prove that Bettini, Boonen and Vos came close to their peak power wattage or do they have such well developed aerobic capacities that their anaerobic ability is still in better nick than the opposition in the last 200m of a 3-6hr road race.

Hamish Ferguson
Cycling Coach

 

[Alex Simmons]

How do you determine peak velocity?

I did say peak power, not velocity here. But if were to measure peak velocity, I would be talking about speeds attained in sprints (not rolling down hill!) as measured by the PM, which are generally maximal compared to speeds attained in pursuits - which was my first point.

But I forgot to say before - I agree - Andy's presentation is really interesting. I have learned a lot from what he has compiled in that ppt.

So during a crit or points race how often can you get within 50watts of your peak power output?

Dunno really, I don't keep a running tally. I have set peak power PBs in several crits though over the last 12-18 months, so it can't be that infrequently. Then I beat it somewhere else (like track training), then in another crit I reset the mark etc. It doesn't mean that my peak power lasts very long though - that's a different matter where my aerobic condition does have an impact. Sometimes the way crits pan out you won't hit peak power (e.g. get boxed in, or forced to chase someone who goes real early or trying to win by break away, or you're working for a mate....).

Points racing is different - I wouldn't necessarily expect (or want) to see peak power numbers as that may not be my race strategy. But in normal scratch racing, sure plenty of times. Last night I did it 3 times in a scratch race, keirin heat and keirin final with numbers within 50W of my normal peak (for this season). These numbers regularly exceed my peak for last season.

Other races last night were a wheelrace and two enduro slugfests so not much chance to lay out peak powers (think an elimination with 40-50 riders on a 460 metre outdoor track and a 40 rider 12km scratch race at 48km/h avg after 6 other races).

But I see where you're coming from - if your are aerobically fitter, you will arrive at the pointy end fresh enough to use your punch (or have a clear enough head to know how to use it wisely).

 

[RapDaddyo]

But I see where you're coming from - if your are aerobically fitter, you will arrive at the pointy end fresh enough to use your punch (or have a clear enough head to know how to use it wisely).

Sounds like an interesting observable question. What is the relationship between one's peak power (e.g., 5s MMP) and one's cumulative fatigue (e.g., TSS)?

 

[Lucy_Aspenwind]

Andy Coggan put an interesting presentation on fixed gear fever site and on of the examples given that for a 4000m pursuit the biggest gains would come from improving ones aerobic ability. Improving alactic had negligible impact on 4km times. So I presume it's even less important for crits or road racing.
.

You said the above, that improving NM power is even less important for road races. Yet clearly, many of the biggest races in the world, i.e...world championships, spring classics, are decided by sprints.

I was clear in my original post that aerobic ability is #1 when it comes to training priorities for road races:

Yes, road races are almost entirely aerobic so that should be the highest priority....

So let's, for a minute, go with the idea that near the end of a road race, a rider sees a drop in her or his neuromuscular power. That from all the riding they've done to get to the last 250 meters of the race. You would agree with that I assume? It is sensible I think.

Well I believe it is better to have a 1500 watt sprint and lose 400 watts over the course of a race from fatigue, than start with a 900 watt sprint and lose 50 watts.
If the above were untrue, then I think Hoste & Hincapie would have won some spring classics instead of Tom Boonen beating both of them easily. You have to have the aerobic engine to get to the last 250 m in a position to win, but at that point, winning is decided by your sprint ability and smarts.

 

[fergie]

You said the above, that improving NM power is even less important for road races. Yet clearly, many of the biggest races in the world, i.e...world championships, spring classics, are decided by sprints.

I didn't say don't train sprints only that the priority for any roadie, crit or track endurance rider is aerobic. All my riders do some form of sprint or NM training all year round however bang for buck they should make sure they have the endurance to get to the finish to make the most of their sprint first!

You are assuming that NM power determines the final sprint at the end of a road race. I would counter (and have limited power files as evidence) that most people won't come close to their peak power at the end of a 3-6hour road race.

Otherwise we would see top track sprinters win more road races and crits. And we don't. They wouldn't make it to the finish to unleash their 2000+ peak wattages. Heck I don't see many of our local sprinters make it to the end of an 8000m event. We used to see sprinters win the National 15000m event but these guys couldn't crack 11sec for 200m (World Standard is 9.8-10.2sec).

Hamish Ferguson
Cycling Coach

 

[fergie]

Points racing is different - I wouldn't necessarily expect (or want) to see peak power numbers as that may not be my race strategy. But in normal scratch racing, sure plenty of times. Last night I did it 3 times in a scratch race, keirin heat and keirin final with numbers within 50W of my normal peak (for this season). These numbers regularly exceed my peak for last season.

This is to be expected. A Keirin is a sprint event where you try an do as little as posisble to the last moment and unleash top power. As for a scratch race it depends how it plays out. Through tactics one can get to the finish having done no turns and be in the best position to unleash their final sprint. Howver if the Endurace Riders have anything to do with it or in a road race with hills you won't have that luxury.

Other races last night were a wheelrace and two enduro slugfests so not much chance to lay out peak powers (think an elimination with 40-50 riders on a 460 metre outdoor track and a 40 rider 12km scratch race at 48km/h avg after 6 other races).

This is my point. I don't think any endurance rider expects to get an armchair ride in the World Points, Scratch and Madison events.

But I see where you're coming from - if your are aerobically fitter, you will arrive at the pointy end fresh enough to use your punch (or have a clear enough head to know how to use it wisely).

I trained my Kilo riders one year with a high number of 50m standing starts and 100m jumps and 150m flying efforts. Great NM power and lightening fast starts. All were toast by 500m and their Kilo times were hopeless. I would only prioritise 5sec power at any time in the season if I was a sprint, Keirin, 500m TT or Team Sprint rider.

Hamish Ferguson
Cycling Coach

 

[Lucy_Aspenwind]

I would counter (and have limited power files as evidence) that most people won't come close to their peak power at the end of a 3-6hour road race.

This is a strawman. Where have I said that one hits peak power when fatigued?

Otherwise we would see top track sprinters win more road races and crits. And we don't. They wouldn't make it to the finish to unleash their 2000+ peak wattages. Heck I don't see many of our local sprinters make it to the end of an 8000m event. We used to see sprinters win the National 15000m event but these guys couldn't crack 11sec for 200m (World Standard is 9.8-10.2sec).

Yet another strawman. Where have I said that track sprinters should win road races?

All my riders do some form of sprint or NM training all year round however bang for buck they should make sure they have the endurance to get to the finish to make the most of their sprint first!

I already said that several times, or did you skip over that part of my posts?

You have to have the aerobic engine to get to the last 250 m in a position to win, but at that point, winning is decided by your sprint ability and smarts.

You are assuming that NM power determines the final sprint at the end of a road race.

I believe a maximal 10-second sprint is primarly fueled by the Phosphate energy system. One best improves ATP/PCr stores by doing sprint work, and possibly weights, not aerobic work or level 4 intervals, etc.

You seem to think something else is more important than NM power in determining who wins the final 10 second sprint. So what energy system
do you propose provides the supply for and decides the maximal 10 second effort at the end of a race?

Also, you said this:

Improving alactic had negligible impact on 4km times. So I presume it's even less important for crits or road racing.

So if, as you put it, NM power is less than neglibible for road races and crits - why do you have your athletes do sprints? I would think athletes should work on things that have more than a neglible effect on their events....

You can have the last word here, I've made my point.

 

[Roadie_scum]

This is to be expected. A Keirin is a sprint event where you try an do as little as posisble to the last moment and unleash top power. As for a scratch race it depends how it plays out. Through tactics one can get to the finish having done no turns and be in the best position to unleash their final sprint. Howver if the Endurace Riders have anything to do with it or in a road race with hills you won't have that luxury.



This is my point. I don't think any endurance rider expects to get an armchair ride in the World Points, Scratch and Madison events.



I trained my Kilo riders one year with a high number of 50m standing starts and 100m jumps and 150m flying efforts. Great NM power and lightening fast starts. All were toast by 500m and their Kilo times were hopeless. I would only prioritise 5sec power at any time in the season if I was a sprint, Keirin, 500m TT or Team Sprint rider.

Hamish Ferguson
Cycling Coach

Hamish, did you coach any of the juniors at the Oceania Track Champs? I saw some great performances from some of the young NZ guys, including a fiery and fantastic bronze medal final which NZer Ed Dawkins won against Aussie Jason 'Angry Eyes' Holloway (I could watch that guy sprint all day...)

There were also some great Kilo's by NZ guys (not world class yet, but young guys with good potential), second and third.

If you did coach there are you still in town? Send me a PM...