Bjorn is a masher who can sustain 370 watts at 80 cadence. In the test he could not hold 100 cadence at the same wattage. Is it he is not trained for this cadence. What wattage could he hold at 100 cadence? Should he convert to a spinner? What is your opinion?
Should he convert to a spinner? What is your opinion?
No, lower cadences are more efficient, especially for time trial type racing.
No, lower cadences are more efficient, especially for time trial type racing.
Even when one is required to run a Marathon after?
Not sure about Franks comment. Interesting that when we ran that mock test on your spinscan last year I was more efficient with a higher cadence (90rpm+) than a low one. Especially since I’m probably bigger in terms of physical frame than Bjorn is…
Just goes to show that efficiency is an individual thing and i don’t hold a lot of water when people say point blankly that one thing is better than another…
how did you measure efficiency?
i’m willing to bet that you actually measured something else.
Possibly. We were using spinscan to check geernal efficiency and balance. My point is though that sweeping statements about cadence don’t apply. In bjorns case a low one works for him.
I seriously doubt Armstrong hasn’t performed trials of lower cadences to see how he got on…
Haven’t there been numerous studies done, showing a positive correlation between higher cadence riding and faster run times?
Yes, and whilst I agree with the findings I found the number of test subjects too small (a common problem).
While I prefer to spin with my relatively smaller legs, Frank is on to something (as much as we hate to admit it). The larger your leg mass, the more energy it takes to just move it in circles to generate zero watts. So if you have huge quads (lets say Ullrich), vs small ones (lets say Lance), your natural cadence might be at the lower end of things are you generate more power per stroke, without having to overcome the baseline amount of energy required to move your larger legs around in circles. This is why perhaps extremely high cadence does not work for all.
isn’t this an example of torque vs horsepower? in engines, a long, undersquare piston stroke (think truck diesel), typically produces a lot of torque, whereas a short, oversquare piston (think ferarri), revs higher more easily and produces low torque numbers, but high hp. in the engine example, a high torque engine would typically be used for work applications, towing, long-distance cargo hauling … and the high hp engines are for sport.
Another data point, small quads, lower cadence (low to mid 80s), decent run splits – that’s my profile. That doesn’t mean that I won’t be training at a wide range of cadences (specifically 92-94) but it does mean that I’ve done OK with my choice so far. Still, we can always do better and Dave is very keen on building my power/endurance in the low 90s.
g
decent run splits???
2h46’ seems more than decent G… 
Francois, the scary thought is that Gordo will add 8-10 RPM to his bike style, and go 10% faster and still run 2:46 :-)…that would take 30 min off his Ironman time :-).
gordo’s real strength (IMHO) is his mental…when he caught Olaf in Canada last year, Olaf told me ‘he was running really hard and got to the finish and was completely wasted…I could never hurt as much as he does in a race’
G is also a really really smart guy and has been doing great at identifying what to do to go faster, working with the right people etc.
“Should he convert to a spinner? What is your opinion?”
yes and no. when gordo says he turns the low 80s, i think that’s fairly consistent with what people do in an ironman. normann, same cadence, for example.
but it’s rather brave to assert that this is the proper cadence for something like a 40k TT, because the world’s best cyclists most ALL spin much higher cadences than tha (like 10-20 beats), with VERY few exceptions.
i suspect bjorn will incrementally increase his cadence, and will end up like gordo, turning in the low 80s for an IM. the one thing i wish would change is his approach on hills.
but then, he went 48:50 up our hill, and that’s 10 minutes faster than i ever went up it… so…
yes, but the worlds best TTers have to go faster than 50km/h over 40km…
also a lot of the germans push big gears and run well off the bike.
“yes, but the worlds best TTers have to go faster than 50km/h over 40km…”
certainly. the problem we have here is that statements are being made that are unqualified. such as your statement below.
“also a lot of the germans push big gears and run well off the bike”
what does this mean? is it the gear inches you’re talking about? is it cadence? if so, what do you mean? yes, if i’m riding 40k i’m riding a different cadence than if i’m riding 140k. it’s all about effort. the higher the effort, the higher the cadence. you see that everywhere in cycling. in every kind of cycling event. no exceptions to this.
but, IM is a very low-effort event, relatively. yes, it’s high effort, but not relative to other events. it’s probably the equivalent of, i don’t know, what’s the longest one-day classic in pro cycling? so, what would george’s cadence be throughout such an effort if he left the peloton 10k into it and solo’d the whole way?
Not sure about Franks comment. Interesting that when we ran that mock test on your spinscan last year I was more efficient with a higher cadence (90rpm+) than a low one. Especially since I’m probably bigger in terms of physical frame than Bjorn is…
Just goes to show that efficiency is an individual thing and i don’t hold a lot of water when people say point blankly that one thing is better than another…
spinscan has nothing to do with efficiency. It only measures smoothness and one is naturally “smoother” at higher cadences according to spin scan which is only comparing peak torque to average torque. To measure efficiency one must compare power to the wheel to O2 uptake (HR can be used as a reasonable substitution as they correlate well).
Even when one is required to run a Marathon after?
Yes, If one wants to increase the cadence to get ready for the run it can be done the last 5-10 minutes of the bike, not necessary to do it the entire bike ride.
“Should he convert to a spinner? What is your opinion?”
the one thing i wish would change is his approach on hills.
but then, he went 48:50 up our hill, and that’s 10 minutes faster than i ever went up it… so…
That 48:50 ascent he made was probably in the 45-60rpm range, going above that only on the short downhills. I don’t think he went into the 42 until the last half mile, which is a 10%+ climb. Of course, I can’t be sure of that, because I couldn’t see him after the first 20 minutes. However, this past Sunday on his “recovery” ride (that guy has some idea of the term “recovery”) while climbing I noticed there is quite a bit of torso movement/rocking back and forth with each one of his strokes. I was almost spinning two strokes to every one of his to hang on to his wheel (56-23 for him, 30-23 for me), so knowing that he was climbing around 50 rpm at 4.5-6w/kg, I would think that torque would absolutely redrum his lower back. Of course, if he’s not having any back problems then I wouldn’t sweat it, but my back was almost getting sympathetic pain sensations just watching.
My PT tells me that my average rpm’s on rides are in the mid to high 70’s (like last Sunday for instance), over the course of the entire ride, so it’d be hard to imagine Bjorn is averaging much over the mid 60’s on his day-to-day rides.