Pardon my being obtuse, especially since I’ve been viewing/posting for 2-3 years here, but I still don’t get what you steep angle FIST gurus say about the right cadence. By way of background, I race all distances from sprint to IM. I’m usually in the top 10% of my bracket on the bike (all distances), but my run plain sucks. I tend to mash the gears. My optimum - or should I say comfortable - cadence is about 82-85. I ride a QR with the seat rails relatively forward. I’m extremely comfortable in this aero position - much more comfortable than my road bike.
The last couple of weeks I’ve been playing with higher cadences on my road bike. Today I tried to ride my easy loop at 95. That takes work.
What is the benefit of elevating the cadence? Is there an optimum cadence that I should be shooting for? And can a higher cadence play a role in a faster leg turnover on the run? Lastly, in elevating my cadence, if I ride 3-4 weekly, how frequently, and in what way, should I work on this issue?
Your run probably sucks because you have poor running form. It is clear your bad run is not because you are out of shape. Further, I believe it is probably unrelated to cycling cadence even though some may opine such. If you bring your cadence up just to do so you may find both your bike and run suffering if you do not pay any attention to your running form and efficiency.
Get a running coach to look at your form. Or, others may make some other running improvement suggestions.
“I’m usually in the top 10% of my bracket on the bike (all distances)”
That may be the problem right there. Are you going too hard on the bike (and paying for it on the run)? What are your non-triathlon running times compared to your triathlon running times (I’m trying to get a feel for whether your poor running is caused by over-doing it on the bike or if you run poorly with the bike removed from the equation)?
Part of the idea with using a higher cadence is that it relies more on your cardiovascular system than on your muscular system. This helps spare muscle glycogen as it requires far less glycogen to support your cardiovascular system. Also, riding with a higher cadence forces you to have better technique which in turn uses less energy.
“And can a higher cadence play a role in a faster leg turnover on the run?”
Do you know that your running is limited by slow leg turnover? If it’s not, then I wouldn’t worry about it. If so, then I’d look into your running form as a whole and make sure you’re moving efficiently. Slow running times could be caused by many things other than slow leg turnover. Out of curiosity, what is your weekly training ratio for biking/running (could it be that you’re just not putting in the running miles)?
How much are you running a week. If onl 20-30 miles your mot going to make much gains in your running. You may have to go to a 3 month focus on your run put in 6-8 runs a week, throw in some tempo/track work and just plain run.
I have found that I run the best in multisport races when I’m running the fastest for 5 and 10k’s. Sometimes it takes 4-6 weeks of 6-8 runs and 45-60 miles to get to that point.
Check your form, throw out the HRM if you listen to that at the track, sometimes you have to punish yourself in a zone that is extremely less than pleasant to break through those hurdles. Couple that with running consistency and you’ll get faster.
“What is the benefit of elevating the cadence? Is there an optimum cadence that I should be shooting for? And can a higher cadence play a role in a faster leg turnover on the run?”
85 isn’t bad. 95 is better. but it depends on the distance. averaging 85 over an IM would be good. 85 over a sprint would be, in my view, slow. but certain people find that 85 is a good cadence over a sub-1-hr ride. i believe i heard bostick’s optimal cadence was 84.
on average, the higher your cadence throughout the ride (within reason) the less your fatigue later in the ride, and then into the run. now, a certain percentage of people will answer back to this, and say, “so-and-so rides a cadence of 42 and he got 3rd in the springfield swim-bike-paddle,” and of course that’ll be true. they will have skipped over the first two words of this paragraph. there are always exceptions.
but what the other people have written might be right. it might not be a cadence issue with you. how fast are you afoot just generally? if you run a 10k in 40 minutes just flat out, and you run it in 42 minutes off a strong bike ride, then i don’t think you have any issue with how you’re riding the bike. but if the difference is 3 or 4 minutes, then yes, you’re making a mistake on the bike.
i believe i’ve addressed running technique issues on slowtwitch (we have a running section). cadence is also addressed there.
I played with high and low cadences last summer and this is what I found works for me. I come from a cycling background, not running.
First I rode normally for me, 90 to 95 rpm, 30 miles for a few days while running afterward for 10K.
The next week I rode 80 to 85 rpm, same rides and ran 10k afterward. Felt really drained on the run compared to the week before.
The next week I went back to 95 and running seemed better. Not winded, drained or slow. I felt much like I did the first week.
So I thought that maybe I just had a bad week of running so I did it again, only this time I spun slow for two weeks and still felt drained on the run. Kind of like I didn’t have enough energy.
Then for a week I went back to spinning 95 again and the runs felt stronger. After that I went up to 100 rpm on the bike for 1 ride and the run afterward felt about the same as the 95’s.
This is just some testing I did on my own. I was told later that my slow spinning uses different types of muscle fibers that use a lot of fuel and maybe that is why I felt drained. I won’t include HR data cuz I know some people don’t believe in it. I am also only 5’4" and my running turnover is 190 steps per min. A little faster that most cuz of my short steps.
My 2 cents
jaretj
How many of you believe in telekinesis? Raise MY hand!
As a distinguished member of that great fraternity being named The Brotherhood of Those Whose Runs Suck, I came to a similar crossroads a few years back. Enjoying both RR/crit cycling and triathlon, I quickly found that the mashing style, while speedy in the tri forum, was a detriment to my bike racing ‘career’. A few seasons ago I decided to do all my rides in a relatively high cadence. I would mash for fun every now and then but all rides were to be kept at about 95 rpm or higher.
It was a difficult adaptation at first, like you said. But the adaptation did gradually occur, and the benefits were twofold. Not only was I more agile in crits, my run off the bike (in tri’s. Not in crits) was 'easier too without losing much speed at all. I found tht I was fresher and… this is the point… sucked less. I still suck, mind you, but sucking is such a relative term anyway, don’t you think?
there are several cadence articles on slowtwitch, and we mention this fact in most of them. getting cadence up to the appropriate level is generally an activity learned over time, and that’s true in both sports. it’s not just that a very good runner will have a cycling cadence slower than his running cadence (if he’s a newbie cyclist). i’ve seen top cyclists get off their bikes and commence loping along in the run like giraffes.
As some of the previous post mentioned running technique may be a problem it has been somewhat for me. Raising your RPM’s on your bike is something that needs to be worked on, if you are used to riding around a 80-85 cadence and have done this for years, yet decide to bring it up to 90-95 it may tax your aerobic system, it is something most have to work at. You may have reserved more “muscle” yet your aerobic system will be run down a little more. Dan’s articles are great give them try.
I’ll take a path different from all the other posts except Frank Day’s: get someone to help you with your running form.
I have the same race stats and the same problem. I’ve gotten more interested in the form issue over the last year and believe there is wisdom in it. We all agonize over that 0.1 centimeter of saddle height, but I for one couldn’t converse about my footstrike with the same precision. After years and years of listening to the low heart rate people and the “shufflers” from 20 years ago, I’m trying hard to get off my heels and onto AT LEAST the mid-foot.
As for the cadence thing, it has had a positive effect on my running. I like to pedal in the 100-105 range, and this year I did an awful lot of bricks. At some point my run cadence began to come up on its own, and eventually the 90 rpm run cadence that many attest to came naturally.
My advice is to get some help with your form, and believe me: don’t wait until you’re 50.
You will adapt to the higher candence. I’ve been forced by my back pain to spin it up. It was very hard at first and it still elevates the HR, but now I’m just as fast and my legs are less dead after the spin.
Thanks for the input folks. Most of you are right on point. In my delusion I perhaps misread a point and lurched on higher bike cadence being the panacea to my running woes. My running woes, as most of you guessed, is really more a by-product of low run miles (25-30 being a very heavy run week). I’m fairly certain that I do not cook myself on the bike.
