Lower cadence is better?
I found this article while reading some posts on Brett Sutton's blog.
Pretty interesting in that it recommends LOWER cadences for those not from a competitive cycling background.
What do you guys make of it?
My view is that if an athlete has not had the advantage of a competitive cycling background then the ability to learn how to ‘feel’ the pedal stroke, which enables a rider to spin effectively, is lost to all but an exceptional few.
Indeed, many professional cyclists who train between 750km to 1200 km a week never acquire the ability to use the high-cadence technique effectively. So if professional riders spending 6-days a week training a minimum of 4-5 hours a day are not able to find it, then what hope does someone with no cycling background putting in a maximum of 200km have of mastering the ‘Lance Armstrong high cadence’ model? In my experience very little.
Yes, there will be exceptions, but how many do you think? I tend to train not for the exception, but instead make adjustments when they come along every generation or so.
Many field and lab tests have attempted to show that high cadence spinning is more efficient to the newcomer than just stomping the big gear. Yet the results in nearly all cases only serve to prove that the exact opposite is true.
In fact most tests show that subjects from a non-cycling background produced more power and sustainable speed at cadences between 60 (yes, 60!) and 70 cadence. Any higher and the efficiency was lost. I’ve seen studies from USA, Australia, England and even France that all come with the same conclusion. Over 70 cadence and the subject’s watts-to-power endurance was significantly less than those under 70 cadence.
So how does this knowledge inform my opinion on using low cadence work?
In triathlon we have to train not one, but three disciplines and our actual bike hours are limited for training compared to cyclists.
Most, if not all triathletes are not ex-professional cyclists with an innate feel of the pedals. Thus the style of spinning may be detrimental to them riding to the best of their ability.
In triathlon the race is not over once the bike leg is finished. Riding with an elevated heart rate close to one’s anaerobic threshold is not advisable if one wants to jump off and run at an optimal pace.
Hence the reason I advocate using high gear, low cadence training. Over the years experience and results have proven my judgement correct as all age-group athletes I have worked with have gone on to make rapid and sustainable gains on the bike.
At trisutto.com we’re about function over form. What works for the individual is what is right.
Watching a 100kg athlete spinning down the road at 100 cadence makes me want to cry. As does watching certified level coaches teaching 50kg, 5’2 females how to swim like Michael Phelps for their upcoming tri races. It is not right. Phelps is 6’6 and has the wingspan of a small jet. What works for the top 1% of athletes at the top 1% of their sports is not the model that is going to improve your triathlon.
So take my tip: If you want to run to the best of your ability off the bike and get the most out of it while you’re on it, then lower cadences will produce for you.
http://trisutto.com/wp-content/uplo..._Study.png
Comments
I don't agree with all of this, but I think the line above is telling and I would completely agree the what works for the individual is what is right.
I know I a lot guys preach 90/rpm for a better run, but for me that have not been my experience. Mashing the gears on purpose has not worked either. When I shut out all the noise, expert opinions, etc. and just ride my bike, my body finds the cadence that works best for me at that moment. I cross check that with my powermeter and feel good about the choices I am making.
I agree with Dino. Our bodies are naturally lazy. Given a target to reach, like holding a specific power level, if we (meaning our mind) get out of the way, our body will find the most efficient means to get there. For me, in an IM race, that's about 81-84 rpm average. I'm sure the number will be different for each individual, based on size, cycling history, strength, etc.
When I go back and look at my races I find that the average cadence is in the low to mid-80's. That said I know that it changes over the ride. Today when I was out doing my FTP intervals my "natural" cadence was in the low 80's to high 70's. I started to feel like a diesel if it got below 75 and I would shift and feel better. I did hit some mid to upper 90's though at times because I was on some slight rollers and it was easier to do that than shift. Plus it did feel better to have some variety.
Interesting.
low cadence with low heart rate. high cadence with high heat rate. which is better for the bike leg? which is better for the run after a bike leg? which is better for light versus heavy people? which is better for short versus tall people?
interesting questions.
Makes me want to experiment more with lower cadences I have yet to have trashed run legs. my general sense so far is that I go faster with a lower cadence/ higher gear.
would be interesting hearing from the coaches about this. Coach R higher cadence guy? Coach P lower cadence guy?
A high cadence is hard on my knee...and it doesn't make me go any faster so... I'm usually doing a lot of shifting also to stay in a 'sweet spot'. The warm-up calls for standing on the pedals. RARELY do I do that either. I think this is another one of those things where everyone has an opinion AND we are all different etc etc. So there's no right answer. Chris Carmichael CTS training has pretty good advice for people of all ages, levels etc. I tend to follow his advice pretty closely.