Bike Cadence Goal for IM

Jonathan Olson

Rich,

Not sure what my IM cadence goal is for the bike. Also when doing Trainer Road intervals should I be training at lower cadence to build power or my IM cadence?

Thanks.

 

Coach Rich

Posted By Jonathan Olson on 18 Feb 2016 04:02 PM

Rich,

Not sure what my IM cadence goal is for the bike. Also when doing Trainer Road intervals should I be training at lower cadence to build power or my IM cadence?

Thanks.

 

We generally recommend a cycling cadence of about 85-93rpm. There's no need to do intervals at a lower cadence, other than to become more comfortable at a wide range of cadences, both low and high. Bottomline is you should be looking much more at power (or virtual power, I suppose, with TrainerRoad) vs cadence, and always be trying to meet power goals regardless of cadence. 

Moving this thread to the General Discussion Forum where it will get more input from the Team. Good luck!

Paul Hough

I track cadence on my trainer and train across the RPM spectrum. Outdoors I never use a cadence meter and go strictly by feel. Recently I read an article by Bret Sutton who argues that age groupers should not try to develop high spin cadence. While the conventional wisdom teaches that a low cadence imposes deeper fatigue and doesn't set you up for the run, Sutton argues that the higher cadence comes at a steep aerobic cost. The attached article by Aussie coach Matt Koorey outlines the reasoning behind the Sutton approach. I will be pushing my training cadence lower this year. http://www.oztri.com.au/Features/THE_CADENCE_CONUNDRUM.htm

Paul Hough

Here is another cadence blog - direct from Sutto - on how and why proper cadence differs for people.
http://trisutto.com/cadence-debate-continued/

Al Truscott

My avg cadence for my best IMs was in the range of 82-86. When doing high intensity intervals or an Olympic distance race, I strive for 90 rpm. As to lower cadence in OS-type training, I'd rather use the weight room to build pure leg strength. Grinding away at a low cadence, lower than I might have on race day, does not seem like "sport-specific" training to me.

Paul Hough

More from the defunct TTB -

"Advice:
Train on different cadences. Look for your weak cadence spots.
For the short races you need more high cadence training because of the short burst after corners, escapes etc. The long races need more low cadence training so you get off the bike less fatigued and have a great run after the bike leg.
The key is the mixture of low and high cadence trainings for your race specific needs, talent and training that you've already done. So, give it a good thought before you start your preparation for the next season.

coach Ferdinand Mulder
TeamTBBNL

morpheus

You guys think that hi force/low cadence increases the fatigue more so than lower force/hi cadence? Makes sense that hi cadence means more blood flow which might increase getting the good in and the bad out of the muscles.

Read up on that? Any experience comparing the two styles?

robin sarner

I have been experimenting with the Brett Sutton thing.     rpms into the 70s.        training and racing.   my sense is it works for me as a big man.

morpheus

to continue hijacking this thread...
I posted this in the JOS in regards to my recent focus on cadence in the aero position vs cadence in the roadie position..

This was my first week back riding after having both the road bike and the tri bike in the shop for 2 weeks.

I didn't test like you guys. Going to ride for about 2 weeks to get back into it and then test if I feel it's needed.

I am starting to switch a few things that will cost me watts. Felt really good about where my watts were on the road bike before the stoppage. Now, I'm starting to work on some intervals on the tri bike and with a different power meter (Stages) that runs about 10 w lower than what I was using (Quarq). Also, I'm going to kick around some focus on higher cadence intervals. Been doing that this week on the trainer/aero and it seems to be harder than I expected. HR higher.

So, questions for you guys....When we talk higher cadence, I understand the benefits, do you try to spin as high as your roadie position or does the aero tuck hinder that high cadence a little bit? And, do you have any thoughts on why HR is def higher with aero intervals as opposed to sitting up?

Thanks, feedback welcomed.

Sincerely,
That guy who seems to have gone rogue b/c his silly little sessions don't look like the rest of JOS playpen.



Any thoughts?

Paul Hough

@ Chris - I can only speculate that the aero position prevents full expansion of the lungs, so the heart beat is a little faster to get the same amount of O2 to the legs for the same amount of work.

morpheus

Been doing intervals in the cave and out on the road with cadence goals of 95-105. HR shoots up but watts look really good. RPE seems to be coming down now that I've been doing this a few weeks. Don't have the confidence at this point to say that I could hold this CAD/HR/RPE over 56 or 112 but I sure as hell find 85 rpms a walk in the park and that's about 10-15 rpms higher than I usually ride.

Bottom line, good results at this point so I see no reason to stop trying to master this. At least, for this year.

tim cronk

@Chris- Recently I've done 7 weeks of trainer work all TR and almost all of the RPM's on the intervals ranging from 2min to 18min and 122%-95% have been in the 88-92 range.... So I go outside last week and race an 11 min 4 miler with avg cad of 80 , then a 33 min 12 miler with avg cad of 82 , next day climb Mt. Lemmon in 2:15 with avg cad of 82.... So all that higher cadence work I have done on the trainer stayed right on the trainer and I resorted to what felt right outside.... FWIW I still believe in working the cadence ranges that are not natural to us (higher and lower than normal ranges)... Also of note is when riding outside the cadence is not displayed like indoors comps! Carry on there is no downside :-) Just dont worry about it on race day when all that matters is getting from Point A to Point B faster than everybody else !

morpheus

@Tim- Took some getting used to. Still getting used to it. Used to ride at 70-75 rpms, both tri and road. Am sold on the value of getting that cadence WAY up from those former numbers, ESPECIALLY for my roadie stuff this year. Blood flow, clearance, etc. So, a few weeks into this process of doing intervals that are as focused on rpms as they are on watts (in reality, been driving by rpms and just letting watts fall where they may), I'm seeing some boost. My HR is running a bit higher but it is either coming down a bit as I get used to it or I'm getting used to the higher HR, period. Maybe, I'm just working a bit harder and driving myself harder to keep the cadence up, dunno.



But, in my roundabout way, I'm trying to say that this 95ish cadence will be much more important to me for the roadie stuff. What I've noticed is that my tri riding is benefitting from it. Now, I don't know if it's my position or crank arm length or whatever but I do have a hard time hitting the same rpms tucked aero than in a road position. When my intervals are in the aero position, my HR gets up into that "I Prob Can't Hold This Very Long" range when I try to get high watts with high (95-100) cadence. But, when I slow those rpms down to 85+ (remember, that's still 10-15 more than the way I was riding), I am comfortable, feel in control, watts are up, and I'm moving quick enough to bring a smile. Now, these have just been intervals. Haven't put together a long TT to see if I can hold up.....yet !



So, my drive to improve my road cadence is reaping rewards for this tri stuff!

Tom Glynn

Here is the Sutton article giving his thoughts, which are much lower cadence for IM athletes is better (in general)

http://trisutto.com/the-great-cadence-debate/

morpheus

Hey Tom,



thanks for the article. I understand what he (great name for anything velo...Cameron WATT) is trying to get across.



[Think of it as a see-saw, on one end is your heart and a lung, the other end is your legs. The higher the cadence the more effort is required by your heart and lungs. The lower the cadence the more effort is required by your legs. Choosing an ideal cadence is about tipping that see-saw so that it will give you the best balance for YOUR chosen event and YOUR specific needs.



The higher the power, the higher the cadence needs to be. Raising your cadence is all about spreading out the load (pedal force – newtons) into more revolutions for a given power output (watts). In long distance triathlon, the force levels are so low that there is no need to break it down into so many revolutions as it comes at a cardiovascular cost and with that an elevated heart rate that will cost you by the end of the bike leg, or most definitely the run leg.]



This ^^^ is EXACTLY what I've gone through for the last 6 weeks.



So, how might I adapt my plans moving forward?



1. I will continue to work on the 95-105 cadence intervals on my shorter (6min -20min) intervals to work that aerobic system mentioned. This won't stray from the EN workouts at all, falls right in line. Plus, it will help my roadie side just like I was shooting for in the beginning.



2. I will not blindly pursue some Holy Grail of improving my 3-5hr ride cadence. I understand Mr. Watt's pacing examples. Don't know him but my gut feeling says that he knows a bit more than me about this stuff. Long rides with road bike will be treated differently than long rides with tri bike, obviously. Road- more hi cadence stuff during 'on' time. Tri- work the watts with a more comfortable cadence during the 'on' time.

Spot on with what Tim mentioned, also.

  

It's another example that the two styles of riding are so different. To be efficient at both, you need to understand the nuances that make each style unique.



Much of my season will be trying to hang with the local big boys on the road scene. But, for the one or two tri's that I show up to, I look forward to seeing a boost in the speed that will cross over.

morpheus

a couple of days, and a ton of reading, later, I might be changing my perspective.

sounds like I can't have it both ways. I need to either choose to be a stronger triathlete or a stronger roadie. apparently, one style truly gets in the way of the other.

Al Truscott

Posted By Chris Hardbeck on 10 Mar 2016 07:17 AM


...sounds like I can't have it both way. I need to either choose to be a stronger triathlete or a stronger roadie. apparently, one style truly gets in the way of the other.

I think that's true, but for a different reason, Training for a triathlon like a roadie is not necessarily a bad choice - strong surges, long pulls, breaking away, powering up hills will all make you a stronger cyclist, which can help you be a better triathlete.

BUT... to truly become a stronger cyclist, you kinda need to give up any real training in running and swimming; no time or energy for that. That;s what will pull you down as a triathlete, not the style of training you do. And to truly become a stronger triathlete, you have to be a balanced athlete. Getting really good at one of the three sports is not a route to success as a triathlete.

Taking two or three months a year, each year, to get really good at each sport is a good plan, IMO. It helps to work on whichever sport is your weakest with a close focus. But it only goes so far. At some point though, if you want to achieve your potential in multisport, you need to devote a few years to just training as a triathlete. Which means you'll never have enough time to get really good at one sport.

So, yeah, you gotta choose. But IMO, it;'s more of a time and energy thing, then a training style thing. For tri, you must be very careful with how you parcel out your time and energy in order to get "good enough" at all three, and that precludes training like a single sport athlete, where they have what seems to us like luxurious amounts of time to work on all sorts of energy systems and volumes. Instead of being able to do six cycling workouts a week, we have to pick which 3 or 4 will do us the most good on race day.

morpheus

let me try this...instead of 'one style truly gets in the way of the other.', let me put it this way 'one APPROACH (purpose of workout) MIGHT sabotage maximal gains in both styles of riding'.

Al, your point about time is huge. That is probably the best reality check you could've thrown out there. The more I bounce my focus around from year to year, the longer it'll take me to become the LC triathlete I want to be.

Ultimately, my IM goals outweigh my roadie hammer world champs goals. I think I know what I need to do.