Well, you've proven to me with your last post that you are intent on ignoring your very own data just to prove to yourself your own imaginary points.
It doesn't take a genius to see that in your 2nd graph, the green (cadence) curve and speed (blue) curve do not correlate, so any bets you're making on saying cadence = speed are totally off on your graphs (duh).
You can still coast on a trainer as well - if you stop pedaling, speed does not go to zero. Dead spots in the pedal stroke could account for some of the variance, although I freely admit that I'm surprised you have so much variance of speed vs cadence in your graphs, which I wouldn't expect. Regardless, it's there, and obviously contradicts any such statements you make about locking cadence to speed (or power).
I'm not the one making stuff up here - in fact, I'm agreeing with everything your graphs show.
It doesn't take a genius to see that in your 2nd graph, the green (cadence) curve and speed (blue) curve do not correlate, so any bets you're making on saying cadence = speed are totally off on your graphs (duh).
You can still coast on a trainer as well - if you stop pedaling, speed does not go to zero. Dead spots in the pedal stroke could account for some of the variance, although I freely admit that I'm surprised you have so much variance of speed vs cadence in your graphs, which I wouldn't expect. Regardless, it's there, and obviously contradicts any such statements you make about locking cadence to speed (or power).
I'm not the one making stuff up here - in fact, I'm agreeing with everything your graphs show.