In Reply To:
"I was merely pointing out that several studies have directly examined the effects of cadence on performance, with that being just an example. You, OTOH, made it sounds as if no such studies had ever been performed."
you didn't read the entire thread (and who could blame you? it's pretty long).
Actually, I did.
In Reply To:
higher up in the thread you'd note that i acknowledge (and own a copy of) dozens of such studies.
Actually, your 1st reference to science in this thread was where you strongly (and wrongly) implied that Alquist et al.'s results made it "case closed". Your 2nd reference was a few posts later, when you alluded to studies of efficiency. You didn't, though, talk about studies of actual performance until that post to which I responded (and I'm still not convinced that you have actually read the studies in question).
In Reply To:
if a study shows that cyclists in a 12min performance do best at 83rpm, they're about at the cadence used by the best male triathletes on an 8hr event. there just seems to be this 20 beat variance between what academia suggests is best for a performance versus what is actually used by the sport's elite.
Two differences:
1. Ergometer vs. outdoor cycling.
2. Non-elite vs. elite.