Each person has an optimum, most powerful cadence. In general, the better you are the higher that cadence will be, hence Lance will ride at higher sustained cadence than you and your grandmother will ride a lower cadence than you (unless she wins her age group at Fawaii). If you try to copy Lance then you will not be riding optimally for you.

Some think you should ride at a hihg cadence to get the legs ready for the run but that would only be necessary (if it works) for the last 5 or 10 minutes of the ride, not the entire ride.

Frank

---

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks

The problem is not as simple as you have been led to believe. So many factors go into the equation, that for someone to suggest that you would have been faster at lower RPMs is highly suspect. Your experience level has a lot to do with your pedaling style and speed. Beginning cyclists tend to turn lower RPMs, relying more on leg strength than cardiovascular output to drive the train. As they become better trained they tend to creep up in RPM because their cardiovascular system can handle the turnover for longer periods of time. In reality, the RPM issue is highly individualistic. Are your legs strong? You'll probably find that you can train up to pushing a bigger gear slower RPMs for your best performance. Are you more aerobically fit than strong? You'll probably find that you'll do better at high RPMs. That said, different RPMs place different demands on your body, so over a longer distance, a mix of high and low RPM riding will distribute the overall demand between your strength and aerobic capacity.

Now talking about hills, the advice you received to "power up" is contrary to the usual advice. The big mistake many inexperienced riders make is to spike their power output at the bottom of the hill and try to power over the hill. The problem with that is that they are blown at the top and have to recover at the top of the hill, not taking advantage of the hill and ultimately this results in slower overall time, especially over a steady effort in a TT or tri. The smart way is to maintain a steady watts output, spinning your normal RPMs (which means you'll need to shift to keep your power and RPMs steady), and continue over the top. You'll fall off at the bottom of the hill, draw even toward the top, and blast off the "power up" guys over the top. A power meter will demonstrate this in detail.

The issue of shifting often can present a problem if you are riding aero bars but shifting from STI. If you are riding a course that requires frequent shifts, the constant movement from aero to STI can cost you time. How much depends on how aero you can remain while doing so. In that case you might want to find a balance that will keep you close to your normal RPM but require less shifting. If you have aero bar mounted shifters, this isn't a problem because you never have to leave the aero position to shift. In that case there is nothing to be gained by pushing lower than normal cadence just to reduce shifting.

On the balance I'd say that all cyclists need to develop their spinning ability as part and parcel of their cycling repertoire. But you also need to develop leg strength to push big gears at lower RPMs. Develop all elements of cycling fitness, and soon enough you'll be able to determine YOUR optimum cadence. And that optimum cadence may vary with the character of the course.

Thanks TryBryGuy. It will keep me from making the same mistake twice..I guess I will be experimenting and just plain spending a lot of time in the saddle.Learning is half the fun,I just want to optimze the learning.By the way I have a Klein Q-Pro Carbon road bike with C2 clip ons.I am putting on the C2's on this week.

Very nice post. Clear and concise, as usual. Thanks.

Dan's latest article How tri geometry bikes ought to be ridden talks about cadence. You should also check out the article titled Neuromuscular versus aerobic fatigue in the training section. This reiforces what TriBriGuy said.