RChung wrote:
Slowman wrote:
Not only do I not remember that, I participated and still don’t remember it. Thank you. It took me 2 years to catch up to just a little of your thinking in that thread.
In one of the posts in that thread I showed three plots. Two of those plots came from something I wrote in around 2003 about power, cadence, and crank torque. http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/...ents/components.html
you're way ahead of the game.
stipulating that i'm ignorant slut, and know basically nothing more than what i glean from saturday morning TV cartoons, it occurred to me to ride - as a thought experiment - according to fiber recruitment during the power phase of the pedal stroke. or as close to fiber recruitment as i could get to it.
cadence is sort of the inverse of that. torque speaks directly that.
it's not that i think this is the magic bullet; that now i know how to ride. it's that with the move indoors, and indoors with purpose, with metrics, rather than by videos of greg's '89 tour, there is the capacity to experiment. if there is a workout whereby, for example, there is a step progression, say, 1min @ 80, 90, 100, 110, 120 percent of FTP for a minute each then 4min @ 60 percent, repeat it, what if that workout was done while trying to keep torque constant, except that you don't exceed an unsustainable cadence (as regards efficiency), which i think jim martin and others have decided is around 115? so, maybe, you step your cadence up to 105 and then you just let the torque build if that's what's required, otherwise, anything between, say, 65 and 105 is fair game, but torque rules how you do the workout. what would you learn? anything? i don't know.
Dan Empfield
aka Slowman