The influence of cadence on time trial performance

[jmv]

Cadence: the secret to TT success or a bunch of malarkey? Ive heard claims that high cadence (90+ RPM) is the key to unlocking blistering TT performances, but Im not buying it. Isnt high cadence just a recipe for spinning your wheels and wasting energy? Dont get me wrong, a high cadence can be useful for accelerating out of corners or responding to attacks, but in a straight-up TT, where every second counts, isnt it better to focus on pushing a bigger gear and generating more power?

Ive seen pros like Tony Martin and Fabian Cancellara crushing it in TTs with cadences in the 70-80 RPM range. Were they just genetically gifted, or is there something to be said for a more measured, powerful approach to TT riding? And what about the whole high cadence reduces fatigue argument? Isnt that just a myth perpetuated by the spin-class crowd?

So, TT aficionados, am I way off base here? Is high cadence truly the holy grail of TT performance, or is it just a bunch of hype? Lets get this debate started!

 

[ForFlynLow]

Cadence, in the context of time trialing, is indeed a topic of ongoing debate. While some proponents of high cadence argue that it can lead to increased efficiency and reduced fatigue, others argue that pushing a bigger gear can generate more power, as you mentioned.

It's worth noting that successful time trialists employ a range of cadences, from the low 80s to the high 90s. What's crucial is finding the cadence that works best for you, factoring in your individual biomechanics, fitness level, and the specific demands of the course.

While it's true that a higher cadence can be beneficial for quick accelerations and responding to surges in pace, it's equally important to maintain a consistent effort throughout the time trial. Focusing on a smooth pedal stroke and avoiding excessive muscle tension can help you conserve energy and maintain a steady pace.

Ultimately, experimentation and self-discovery are key to unlocking your time trialing potential. Don't be afraid to test different cadences and gearing options during your training to determine what works best for you.

 

[TrackKingTim]

Absolutely spot-on. In a TT, it's all about power-to-weight ratio and aerodynamics. High cadence has its place, but in a straight-up TT, focusing on pushing a bigger gear and generating more power is the key. Tony Martin and Fabian Cancellara are perfect examples of this approach.

 

[radziowy]

Sticking to a high cadence in a TT, curious move or energy-wasting mistake? Cadence's role in TT success deserves a closer look. Let's dive in and explore the debate. Share your thoughts, road cyclists! ‍

 

[jmv]

In response to your exploration of cadence in time trialing, I'd like to add that consistency and efficiency are also crucial elements to consider. While a high cadence may offer some benefits, maintaining a smooth, steady rhythm could be just as important in conserving energy and maximizing power output.

Perhaps the pros you mentioned, Tony Martin and Fabian Cancellara, have refined their technique to capitalize on their strengths, favoring a more measured cadence. After all, one size doesn't fit all, and individual physiology plays a significant role in determining the most effective cadence for each rider.

As for the fatigue reduction argument, I believe it's a bit of a gray area. While a higher cadence might help delay the onset of muscle fatigue, it may also contribute to mental exhaustion due to the increased effort required to maintain that pace.

So, fellow cyclists, could it be that the secret to TT success lies not in a specific cadence but in discovering and honing the most efficient rhythm for each of us? Food for thought. ‍

 

[radziowy]

You've raised valid points on TT cadence. Consistency and efficiency, indeed, matter. Yet, it's not just about the numbers, but also the rhythm. A high cadence might delay muscle fatigue, but agreed, mental exhaustion can offset that.

Perhaps the winning formula isn't a specific cadence, but rather the most efficient rhythm for each rider, as you suggested. It's a nuanced balance, influenced by individual physiology and personal strengths. It's like finding your own unique groove in the pedal stroke. ‍

 

[jmv]

Well, well, well, look who's back to stir the TT pot again! You've all made some great points about rhythm and efficiency, and it's got me thinking: maybe high cadence isn't one-size-fits-all malarkey after all.

But wait, let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater here. Yes, finding our own groove is essential, but isn't it also true that high cadence can help develop a smoother pedal stroke? And what about those pesky hills in TTs? Doesn't a lower cadence become a tad more practical then?

So, instead of debating whether high cadence is the be-all and end-all, shouldn't we focus on how it fits into our unique strengths and weaknesses? After all, variety is the spice of life, and a well-rounded TT repertoire couldn't hurt, right? ‍

 

[elguapo]

"Oh, spare us the naivety, mate! You think pros like Tony Martin and Fabian Cancellara got where they are by pushing 'bigger gears' and neglecting cadence? High cadence is efficiency, it's about optimization, not 'spinning your wheels'! Get educated, or get left behind!"

 

[jmv]

High cadence: optimization or overhype? It's not one-size-fits-all. While some pros thrive with 90+ RPM, others, like Tony Martin and Fabian Cancellara, dominate TTs at 70-80 RPM. It's about discovering and honing our rhythm, efficient pedal stroke, and power output. So, let's explore the question: is cadence optimization the secret to TT success or merely a myth perpetuated by the high-cadence enthusiasts? ‍

 

[radziowy]

Interesting points on cadence variation among TT pros. It's true that some, like Cancellara and Martin, dominate at lower cadences. While high cadence can delay muscle fatigue, it might not be the optimal solution for everyone, as you've mentioned.

Perhaps the focus should be on discovering and honing our unique rhythm, efficient pedal stroke, and power output, as you suggested. Maybe the secret to TT success lies not in a specific cadence, but in our ability to adapt and find the most efficient rhythm for our individual physiology and strengths.

So, is cadence optimization a myth or a crucial factor in TT success? It's probably a bit of both, depending on the rider. It's a complex interplay of many factors, and understanding this can help us unlock our true potential on the bike. ‍

 

[jmv]

So, is there a definitive answer to my initial question: is high cadence the key to TT success or mere hype? The debate continues, and I'm still not fully convinced. Let's delve deeper into the role of cadence in TTs. How much of it is genetic predisposition, and how much can be honed through training and technique?

And what about the argument that high cadence reduces fatigue? Is it a myth, or can it be a valuable strategy for certain riders? How do we strike the right balance between pushing a bigger gear and maintaining a sustainable rhythm?

Lastly, how do we determine our optimal cadence? Should we rely on heart rate, power output, or muscle sensations? I'm eager to hear your thoughts and insights on these questions.

 

[TrackKingTim]

High cadence, eh? More like high fuss! Genes play a part, sure, but it's mostly training. Pushing big gears builds power, while high cadence can indeed save your legs. It's all about balance, like a wheel's true.

Listen to your body, not just numbers. Muscle sensations matter. And remember, there's no one-size-fits-all approach. It's a personal thing, like your favorite bike saddle. So, keep exploring, keep learning, and most importantly, keep pedaling!

 

[elguapo]

Training emphasized over genetics is risky. Overconfidence in one's ability can lead to neglecting individual limits, increasing injury likelihood. High cadence has its place, but so does pushing big gears. It's not about choosing one over the other, but finding balance, a true wheel's balance. Overlooking this may result in stunted growth or even regression in performance. Muscle sensations do matter, listen to them, but don't disregard the numbers. They're pieces of the puzzle. Remember, personalization is key, but not at the expense of understanding the broader picture.

 

[TrackKingTim]

You've made valid points about balance in training. It's not one-size-fits-all, as individual limits must be respected. Numbers count, but so does heeding muscle sensations. Pushing big gears and high cadence both have merit, like a well-tuned bike's smooth roll.

But, let's not forget the thrill of the climb. Uphill battles demand power, while descents need finesse. It's a dance, a symphony of effort and grace. So, train, listen to your body, and embrace the challenge. Remember, it's the striving, not just the arriving, that truly matters.

 

[jmv]

So, here's the thing. Everyone's all about that high cadence hype, but what if it's just a load of waffle? I mean, you’ve got legends like Cancellara who crush it at lower RPMs, and we’re supposed to believe it’s all about spinning like a hamster? Does anyone even consider that maybe these guys are just built different?

What about the weight weenies who think they can pedal their way to glory with 90+ RPM? Is it just a flashy trend? And this fatigue reduction myth—seriously, is it just a way to sell more spin classes? What's the real deal here? Is high cadence really essential, or is it just a trendy excuse for not pushing harder gears?