Oh for frucks sake, why does this shit keep coming up.
Just run, your body will find it's own natural cadence.

it's bs too, otherwise taller people will always be faster

sorry, what I meant was. What if we try to dial in the cycling cadence by using our running cadence as reference?

Why?

If you do not already have a solid reason to believe there is a relationship between the two, don't try and invent one.
Since you did not provide a reason, I don't believe you have one.
I don't think there is one.

Incidentally:
My typical cadence ranges are Run: 182-188spm. Cycling: 75-90rpm
My training buddy's ranges are Run: 158-165spm. Cycling: 85-95rpm

How is that useful?
Can you see any reason to think one of us is doing something wrong by comparing the two disciplines?

it's just food for thought. Chill man!

Just in talks with some friends there is an idea that if you have a similar cadence going from the bike into the run, it will be more beneficial, as you won't have to change the speed at which your legs turn.

For instance, a 90RPM cadence, would benefit a 180spm run, 80RPM cadence a 160spm run, etc. So, although we naturally select, one could argue that there could be a benefit trying to match the two together. rpm*2 = spm.

Actually it could be useful.

You are both doing the inverse between disciplines.
So either high run, low bike, or high bike, low run.

Which suggests that it may be optimal not to do 'high/high' or 'low/low'.

Just a thought ;-)

One COULD argue but do you actually have an argument to make?
I actually thought about this myself a few years ago at a time when my own typical cadence was extremely similar for both disciplines. I didn't see any specific reason why they should be similar. They just were. Since then my typical cadences have diverged. My run cadence has increased very slightly and my cycling cadence has reduced while at the sme time I've become faster at both. So I'm not reading anything into it.

If you've got an argument, I'd love to hear it.
Sincerely. But I don't see an obvious link or hear an argument.

My run cadence is 185-200 & bike cadence is around 84.

Not sure how those correlate, but my HR at 185spm is equal to my HR at a 84rpm cadence - @ 1.1/w to kg.

HR at 200 spm is equal to 93rpm at 2.0/w to kg

This discussion needs more Velotron.

That's an awfully small sample size to "suggest" anything.

Yes, this needs more velotron.

Also, I can tell a lot of the tri folks in here have never bike raced. There's a really really big reason those guys hold 90rpm and 100rpm when they do. If it's lost on you why they do that, then you don't need to worry about it.

Yup, that's the 'fun' thing about the internet, you can talk shit as if it has validity (or at least a lot of people do)

And 200mm cranks :)

I have noticed a correlation in sprint races. A high bike cadence leads to a higher run cadence and faster run. In fact...I just did a 30 min warm up on the bike trainer at an average cadence of 106 and then raced...and won...a 5k. Set a PR as well. Average cadence on that run was 182 with a max cadence of 210.

Over the longer haul I could see a high/low or low/high combo worker as you are doing aerobic/anaerobic balance.


Physiologists know that muscle efficiency all comes down to the speed at which your muscles can contract. If you choose a gear and cadence that allows your muscles to contract at one third of their maximum velocity, you’ll maximise your power output.
Read more at http://www.cyclingweekly.com/...#e1XUEs6OWb1zS0O2.99

This is what happens when engineers dominate a sport.

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

https://fitrecovery.wordpress.com/2014/09/19/cycling-speed-and-cadence-why-the-90-rpm-cadence-is-so-important-to-cycling-fast/


^^^
Because not worrying about it isn't for everyone.

I got a fever. And the only prescription. Is more Velotron

That's a misinterpretation of the studies.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

I concur

Clearly we must run at our natural cadence since we're unencumbered by mechanical confusion.
So of course we should ride with that same cadence.
If you run at 180spm, you should ride at 90rpm (i.e. 180 power strokes/min at the cranks, we'll call these "powercranks" for short).

So we know the correct cadence. Now we just need to identify the most efficient crank length for achieving that cadence at the desired power. We can use a velotron to ensure repeatable testing. Lets start gathering some data! We all like data right? We'll figure out what to do with it later.


Of course I already know what we're going to discover.....
I'm 1780mm tall. It's another 20mm from the sole of my foot to the pedal spindle. So 1800mm or 180cm.

I think it's safe to assume the ideal setup is as follows:

• Rider height to pedal spindle = 180cm
• Optimum run cadence = 180spm
• Optimum bike cadence = 180pc
• Crank length = 180mm
• Optimum efficiency power = 180W
• HIM bike time = 180min
• My IQ = 180

Yep, it all seems to work!


All you guys not using a velotron are sheep. Be unique just like me. We are all individuals! ;)

Oh for frucks sake, why does this shit keep coming up.
Just run, your body will find it's own natural cadence.


No, but there has to be a SYSTEM, and charts, graphs, details, numbers, metrics . . and somewhere in all of that lurks the SECRET workouts that are REALLY going to make the difference!

Good grief - just run. Run easy. Run hard. Run fast. Run slow. LOVE running.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

No, it's what happens when people think that changing a crank length makes them run faster. They have to get to Kona at all costs so why not spend more money because it makes them "faster"?

---

Make Inside Out Sports your next online tri shop! http://www.insideoutsports.com/

My running cadence is dependent on my speed. Jogging is 180ish and 5k race pace is 200ish. My bike cadence is independent of power 80-90 depending on terain. I see zero correlation between the two, interesting thought though.

I actually think cadence IS important.

The worst runners I see ALWAYS have a ridiculously slow turnover.

Maybe it is age.

Maybe they think their turnover is fast.

But they look like they are stuck in slow-mo.