I say leave it - that's plenty high already. (Just as Bjorn!)

Some folk are spinners, and some are mashers. You seem to be kind of in-between a "smasher". Do what works for you.

---

<If you're gonna be dumb, you gotta be tough>
Get Fitter!
Proud member of the Smartasscrew, MONSTER CLUB
Get your FIX today?

I have found that higher cadences (as recommended by Joe Friel/Computrainer stuff) dont work for me because I have longer legs than the average bear. More to the point, it is a personal thing based more on physiology than can be answered without any other information.

However, high cadence training can be part of your bicycle intervals so that you do not get stuck only being able to pedal at 83.62 rpm.

From what I understand, there are natural mashers and spinners. I always ride at 90+, often around 100 or so spinning on my compact cranks. Anything else seems strange to me. My riding buddy mashes along beside me at around 70-75 in the big gears and it works for him.

Don't try to spin like Lance if it isn't natural to you. Optimize the rpm zone in which you feel most comfortable.

PB, my recommendation is to train some above your "preferred cadence" as well as below it. Of course, the majority of the time, train at your preferred cadence. Over time, your preference may change (mine certainly has, both up and down, and now back up!), plus, there are times when you might have a situation that requires you to be in a slightly less-than-optimal cadence...having practiced at higher and lower than your preference could come in handy in those cases.

---

Quid quid latine dictum sit altum videtur
(That which is said in Latin sounds profound)

I kind of disagree with the other posters, b/c from my experiments with the computrainer wattage, higher rpms give me the highest average and most sustainable (in terms of time) wattage numbers than lower rpms. Riding with a new group has improved my rpm from 90s to 105-110 in 7 weeks, so I am riding a higher pace with the same gearing. Now the caveat is I have no idea how this will translate to running after the ride, only the races will tell that story.

---

__________________________________________________
Simple Simon
Where's the Fried Chicken??

SimpleS wrote:Riding with a new group has improved my rpm from 90s to 105-110 in 7 weeks, so I am riding a higher pace with the same gearing. Now the caveat is I have no idea how this will translate to running after the ride

My GUESS would be higher rpms on the bike will result in better running times. BUT, only if you aren't wasting too much energy in performing the less energy-efficient higher rpms. I'll go another step and say in an IM or 1/2 IM distance race, you'll do better at the lower end of whatever your "normal good rpm range" is. For shorter races, the higher rpm riding may result in a better run...but, you'll have to test to find out.

You should periodically experiment to see what is better for you at the moment. I used to be a road racer with comfortable rpms 105-110. Worked great for road racing....not so good for time trialing. Dropped to about 80 on TT's and had very good improvement. Over the period of several years, and more improvement, my rpms now tend to give the best power in the upper 80's-lower 90's.

Our muscles are so inefficient, limiting the number of times per minute we perform the motion (and, limiting the speed at which the motion must be performed), is more energy-efficient. However, when you get too slow, the combination of physical tension in the muscle (this decreases blood flow throught the capillary bed) as well as more recruitment of the glycogen-thirsty "fast-twitch fibers, and your performance decreases. That's why I recommend training some above and below your "proven" best rpm...and periodically test to see if your best rpm is changing.

---

Quid quid latine dictum sit altum videtur
(That which is said in Latin sounds profound)

Stay where you are. The Lance-inspired school of high cadence isn't for everyone. I had some testing done recently and my optimum power/efficiencey rpm was 87..not the 95-100 that seems to have become all the rage.
Keep crankin'
Frank

How did you define or measure 'efficiency' and how much power were you putting out when this cadence was established?

I think a periodic switch to a higher rpm for a few minutes to increase blood flow is a good thing for us low cadence guys. It seems to allow me to stay in that lower "sweet spot" longer.

This may help... This is why I asked the two questions in my previous post.


http://www.me.utexas.edu/...Papers/msse32(7).pdf



Conclusions:

1) The more power you're putting to the pedals, the faster you should pedal (not surprising).

2) Using a HR monitor or O2 testing to predict 'optimum' cadences at various power levels will probably lead one to pedal too slowly. Pedalling faster at most power levels than the cadence with the lowest HR may raise HR/O2 consumption, but will save glycogen, delay recruitment of non-oxidative muscle fibers, and delay the onset of fatigue (not intuitively obvious).

3) Cadences are highly variable from person to person... The best pedalling style/cadence for me will probably be different from someone else (again, not surprising).

In the above study, the 'optimum' cadences make intuitive sense. But if you look at the standard error of their 'optimum' cadence of 86 rpm at 300 watts, it's over 7 rpm. I would guess we could then assume that statistically, we'd expect one or two of a group of 20 riders to have an 'optimum' cadence that varies by up to 20 rpm from the average at that power level. I guess that says there's a lot of individual variability - we all ride differently. Kind of like those mathematical formulas folks use for predicting maximum heartrate. The best formula may be able to reasonably predict averages, but is pretty much worthless for predicting an individual maximum. '220 - Age' or whatever is totally worthless in predicting the MHR for a specific person.

I found the same thing as you. But, let me suggest that you dig a little deeper. The challenge is not to put out the most power at a given PE. The challenge is to put out the most power while still having your run legs left over. It's a slightly different thing. You'll need to continue your self-testing with race rehearsal rides with transition runs.

I found that I could put out the most power while in pure TT-mode at 81-83. But, I run better if I pedal at 88-90, at least up to half IM race distance. I have not yet tested for or raced an IM.

So keep experimenting. Like somebody else said, it is always good to train at a wide range of cadences. I also have a feeling that it is good to vary the cadence in a race. It helps me keep my legs feeling fresh for the run. Again, constant cadence might be best for a pure TT, but this is not a TT.

It's pretty funny that triathletes think they "spin" if they are between 90-100rpm.

that is not spinning. that would be in the "middle" range

80rpm is mashing, not "in between"

You are not spinning until you get closer to sustaining around abouts 115rpm without thinking giving it too much thought.

I've been doing tris (not very well) for about 12 years now.

I have worked on very few things over the years and each one has improved my speed.

1) Long slow powerful strokes while swimming (say 13 strokes per 25 metres) and a good body position. (efficiency rocks)

2) Keeping my hands low while running and moving forward and back, not side to side. Combined with this, I try not to bounce when I run, but rather keep a lowish CofG and twirl my legs under my body, and a reasonably highish (for me) cadence. Bouncing gives me the stitch really easily)

3) Spinning at nominally 95 RPM while riding on the flat and spinning as much as possible on hills.



There you have it. Words to live by :-)

---

TriDork

"Happiness is a myth. All you can hope for is to get laid once in a while, drunk once in a while and to eat chocolate every day"

"Stay where you are. The Lance-inspired school of high cadence isn't for everyone."

Point of information - Lance used to be a masher, now he is a spinner. He made a conscious effort to make that shift, and it worked out pretty well.

the subjects were not all trained cyclists or triathletes. I would take that into account when making any conclusion from this study .... interesting all the same...

Which of the study's and/or my conclusions would you consider invalid for 'trained' cyclists?

I went through the low cadence/ higher cadence drill this summer as I started doing triathlon. I did a lot of Powercrank riding to start out and found them much easier to use at lower rpm (80 or lower). However, I was able to run much esier off the bike if I was in the 95-105rpm range. After a while, I became very comfortable riding at higher rpms. I also feel like the lower force/higher rpm pedaling is easier on my knees.

I come from a running background so maybe my legs are more used to the lower stress/higher cadence activity. I'm no expert, this is just my experience in getting going on the bike and figuring out how to run afterward.

Yes....? And you're point would be what? That what's good for Lance is good for us all? My point was that no matter what may work for Lance may not work for others.
Frank

Just a question for some of you talking about "spinning" and "mashing", do you feel that these terms are defined by the rate of revolution or the muscles that are powering the revolution? (The revolution by the way, will not be televised!) In my mind, I can "mash" at 120 rpm and "spin" at 60 rpm, or vice-versa, it's a matter of how I activate my muscles.

Anyhow, as to the original poster, when you find yourself asking questions like these there is probably a good reason.

j/c,
I simply made a polite statement re the subject population and advised caution. I have no direct criticism ... other than the fact that an experienced cycling group would have allowed one to be more confident that the results would directly be comparable to 'our' group w/o any queston.

rmur

I am a firm believer that you should pedal where is feels comfortable. I find that on faster rides that I naturally pedal at a higher cadence (about 95) and when I ride long slow distance I am near 87.

In my opinion, you should train at higher cadences to become a more efficient pedaler when the workouts call for it. Ride your most efficient cadence for the type of racing you are doing.

A question for the group since I don't have the ability to train with power. When you do your tests, are you figuring out your optimal cadence for just the speed that you are riding? or is that cadence just a general one? So at different speeds, would you have different optimal cadences?

jaretj

My point? Simple. You shouldn't assume that the cadence you use today is necessarily the best one for you, and trying something different for 20 minutes on a trainer is no way to judge what is "better". If you really want to try it, you have to give yourself a long time - months - to train your body to spin.

I think you should give increasing your cadence a shot - but not in one shot by the amount typically mentioned. I found that increasing by about 5-7rpm (from 88avg to about 95rpm) I was much easier able to complete a 2x20 (with watts) on the trainer.

Now I try to spin just that wee bit faster in races and it has helped. Who knows if after a while I'll go even higher, or maybe back to 88rpm?