Average speeds?

[Nikolai]

Linky.

Can't fight genetics.

Muscle fiber type and cadence is apples and oranges. One is a property of genetics while the other is a property of training, i.e. the latter can be trained while the former remains more or less the same. In other words, your muscle fiber make up has no bearing on your cadence.

Actually the former can change and does as a result of training but there is physiological limits on it.

I did write "more or less", didn't I? At any rate, this area of human physiology, as many others, is not well understood yet, not to mention that the fiber type division (type 1, type 2 etc) is a bit of a misnomer. Consider, for example, this:

"It is now generally recognized that skeletal muscle fibers do not exist in three discrete forms at the subcellular level, but rather in a continuum based on the multitude of combinations of myosin heavy and light chain isoforms, polymorphic expression of protein isoforms, metabolic potential, and Ca2+ handling characteristics."

Source: http://jap.physiology.org/content/97/5/1591.full" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Nikolai]

I find high cadences exhausting, my HR goes up for the same power.

The HR's supposed to go up. Who cares though. HR is not what limits your performance in road cycling. The amount of sustained power is. This amount can be produced at one HR on Monday and at a different one on Friday.

And I'm not seeing many TT guys running 53/12, it's all 54 or 55/11.

That's just not true. Most top end TT specialists race at high cadence. Martin, Gonchar are the only two I can think of from the recent times who love their big dog gears. Even then, just because Martin had a 56x11 on his bike at the World's, doesn't mean he was sitting on it at all times.

As to 53x12 and so on, these and lower gears are actually used. 100 + - 5 rpm is what a lot of TT specialists sit on. This will give you between 52-58 km/h (on 95-105 rpm cadence), enough to win any mid distance TT.

[wurtulla wabbit]

I hate high cadence riding, I am much happier loading the legs up and spinning slower.
I naturally seem to drop into the same gear every time I am on a relatively flat road.
Big cog at front and 4th from bottom on the 11sp rear.(never looked o see what tooth it is ) .
Just seems to fit me and comfortable resistance/cadence.

Mates who are much bigger(95/105kg) both have 1 or 2 gears up at same time while riding aside.

Is this wrong ? Is there an ideal cadence ? Weight related ? Skill? Cardio ?

I'd much rather get my ass out of the seat and push a taller gear up hill too, hate sitting and spinning like hell and getting nowhere...

[foo on patrol]

Spin and grind need to be combined together for the optimum performance as far as I'm concerned.

Answer me this question truthfully. What happens when your legs become really fatigued..do you keep grinding or do you start to spin a bit?

Foo

[mikesbytes]

Can anyone here average 40ish on the flat, say over 40kms?

I'm another who can average 40 in ideal conditions. It won't be long before you can do that.

nic, you would probably benefit from training yourself for a higher cadence.

The two figures I quoted, do not demonstrate what cadences I do ride at on a road bike.
On my race bike, if I am commuting or riding in a bunch my cadence is usually in the 85 to 95 range
If I am working hard, interval training or on the front of the bunch my cadence is usually in the 95 to 105 range
If I am attacking, sprinting etc my cadence may start as low as 60 and will top out at 120, but I once I get going my cadence in usually in 105 to 115 range..

If I ride my 53/16 singlespeed I am usually around 80 to 85rpm aka 32 to 35kph. Last time took I it out on a group ride, was close to 44kph for a 1.5km "sprint" and maxed out at 48kph

My TT bike is quite different, I will use a decent 90+ cadence to get up to speed, then settle in around 80 for the duration of the TT. That what is working for me at the moment, consistently improving and best performing TT rider in my grade.

Give me a flat, smooth and well maintained road surface, high temperatures (30C+) and no wind, In one hour I would cover 35km on my road/race bike at a cadence of 100 and 38km on my TT bike at a cadence of 80.

Sounds like a plan Nic. When you are ready you should convert your singlespeed to fixed and lower the gearing. I run 48*17 fixed on my commuter. I use to run a taller gear, but as I got use to higher cadence I lowered the gearing.

[twizzle]

I find high cadences exhausting, my HR goes up for the same power.

The HR's supposed to go up. Who cares though. HR is not what limits your performance in road cycling. The amount of sustained power is. This amount can be produced at one HR on Monday and at a different one on Friday.

Thanks - as a completely ignorant person, that's hugely enlightening.

And I'm not seeing many TT guys running 53/12, it's all 54 or 55/11.

That's just not true. Most top end TT specialists race at high cadence. Martin, Gonchar are the only two I can think of from the recent times who love their big dog gears. Even then, just because Martin had a 56x11 on his bike at the World's, doesn't mean he was sitting on it at all times.

As to 53x12 and so on, these and lower gears are actually used. 100 + - 5 rpm is what a lot of TT specialists sit on. This will give you between 52-58 km/h (on 95-105 rpm cadence), enough to win any mid distance TT.

But back in the real world where most of us live, when we are not talking about .00001 percent of the cycling population, the general rule of thumb is that trackies spin and TT'ers grind, and when I say grinding I mean cadences of around 85-90. People who lack fast twitch cannot make power at high foot velocities. There's about 13 pages discussing cadence under the training forum, I can't see the point of revisiting the topic here again.

[vander]

Muscle fiber type and cadence is apples and oranges. One is a property of genetics while the other is a property of training, i.e. the latter can be trained while the former remains more or less the same. In other words, your muscle fiber make up has no bearing on your cadence.

Actually the former can change and does as a result of training but there is physiological limits on it.

I agree that the latter (cadence) is more of a motor pattern issue.

Did you read Part II? The bit about power-velocity. I find high cadences exhausting, my HR goes up for the same power. And I'm not seeing many TT guys running 53/12, it's all 54 or 55/11. There are no hard/fast rules for self selected cadences, but as a rule of thumb the track specialists like to spin, the TT specialists prefer to grind.


Sent from my iThingy...

Cant say I read the link, lots of personal preference to cadence. My point is it is trainable, you can spend time doing high cadences and you will get better at it. Agree there are no hard and fast rules and mechanically between about 70-110 or so it is much of a muchness.

[vander]

I find high cadences exhausting, my HR goes up for the same power.

The HR's supposed to go up. Who cares though. HR is not what limits your performance in road cycling. The amount of sustained power is. This amount can be produced at one HR on Monday and at a different one on Friday.

And I'm not seeing many TT guys running 53/12, it's all 54 or 55/11.

That's just not true. Most top end TT specialists race at high cadence. Martin, Gonchar are the only two I can think of from the recent times who love their big dog gears. Even then, just because Martin had a 56x11 on his bike at the World's, doesn't mean he was sitting on it at all times.

As to 53x12 and so on, these and lower gears are actually used. 100 + - 5 rpm is what a lot of TT specialists sit on. This will give you between 52-58 km/h (on 95-105 rpm cadence), enough to win any mid distance TT.

To your first point, HR matters a lot, HR is your input, power is your output, increasing input for the same output is not good, this is trainable.

To your second point, didnt you hear that Wiggans won the olympic TT cause he dropped his cadence........

[vander]

Spin and grind need to be combined together for the optimum performance as far as I'm concerned.

Answer me this question truthfully. What happens when your legs become really fatigued..do you keep grinding or do you start to spin a bit?

Foo

Personally I grind big time. That is when I am tired I tend to drop my cadence not that I drop cadence and that causes me to get tired.

[foo on patrol]

So if I read that right Vander, you stay in the same gear at a lower cadence and make your legs work even hard, therefore fatiguing them even more.

Foo

[vander]

So if I read that right Vander, you stay in the same gear at a lower cadence and make your legs work even hard, therefore fatiguing them even more.

Foo

Not what I meant. Lets say I am doing a 4 hour ride, first 3 hours I am good I have an avg cadence of 80, then the last hour I am tired I have a avg cadence of 70. So when I am tired I drop my cadence. I was saying I dont feel like dropping the cadence fatigues me more, for me personally when I am fatigued its what I do, I dont spin.

[twizzle]

Vander is a sprinter. And has similar 20 min W/kg numbers to me. Me, jealous? Never...

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[Walsh95]

Hey dude, just in case you're not in racing yet, I can tell u that you're in my age bracket, U17s and that whatever speed you ride on the big chainring is pretty much 100% irrelevant as I discovered when I started riding seriously. We can only ride in the small chainring, meaning that we have to ride at a constant cadence of 120-150 rpm constantly. My coach says that this sort of cadence riding is how top end pro riders are able to ride at 50km/h for so long.
Good luck mate

[vander]

Vander is a sprinter. And has similar 20 min W/kg numbers to me. Me, jealous? Never...

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

I do work hard for the 20min power numbers they do not come easy at all! Although never seem to work on my sprint even after a long time off and no sprint effort I still put out 1350W for 5 sec and not even 100% because at the moment I am still nervous about crashing again.

[nickobec]

When you are ready you should convert your singlespeed to fixed and lower the gearing.

Highly unlikely to change it to fixed, I don't like riding fixed + my commute is over 40kms one way. Also unlikely to change the gearing, distance and regularly get good tailwinds so riding at 36 to 40 kph over long distances at high cadence will not work for me given age (50+), physiology, current level of training etc.

When I do high cadence training and I am talking 100 to 105 range, I just do my commute in the little ring and watch my cadence instead of my power meter. Need to do that a little more often been concentrating on 20 minute power lately.

Side note run asymmetrical chain rings on the SS & TT (big ring) bikes

When I tire/fatigue on the TT bike, I shift up a couple of gears or change to the small 44T round chainring and increase my cadence, there is a drop in power and speed. On the race/road bikes the change is more subtle, probably not 10rpm, maybe 5rpm.

Walsh95 I am not going to diagree with your coach about high cadence riding/training = ability to ride at high speed for long periods of time.

But I do know that the cadence of this old weekend warrior in a 2 hour race is similar to those of a pro rider racing 6 hours in a stage of the Paris Nice or similar. Check the rides of Ted King or Craig Lewis on Strava, they post cadence and power data for some of their training rides and races.

[Derny Driver]

Vander is a sprinter.

Arrrrrrrrggg
Trying to restrain myself and not say anything.
My 3 pet hates all in the one thread
1. Average speeds in training
2. Cadence
3. Putting oneself in a box with a label
Im logging off

[Walsh95]

Walsh95 I am not going to diagree with your coach about high cadence riding/training = ability to ride at high speed for long periods of time.

But I do know that the cadence of this old weekend warrior in a 2 hour race is similar to those of a pro rider racing 6 hours in a stage of the Paris Nice or similar. Check the rides of Ted King or Craig Lewis on Strava, they post cadence and power data for some of their training rides and races.

Cadence training as we do it probably doesn't apply as a need to anyone over the age of 17 (although my dads using it now) as by that stage you have the strength to push the massive gears 54-16-11 at 100rpm+.

[wurtulla wabbit]

So if I read that right Vander, you stay in the same gear at a lower cadence and make your legs work even hard, therefore fatiguing them even more.

Foo

This is pretty much what I do to an extent(only on hills) .

I find if I drop gears and lift cadence, I lose lots of momentum and flow.

My point is really that I'll grind a higher gear than other surrounding me (cadence is lower).

Far from being an experienced rider, I was actually asking what the proper way to learn/transfer to higher cadence as I just don't enjoy it , especially on flat, would rather take big strong strokes ( I weigh 66kg at minute, gained 3kg in 10 days but on some supplements at the minute) .

[twizzle]

Vander is a sprinter.

Arrrrrrrrggg
Trying to restrain myself and not say anything.
My 3 pet hates all in the one thread
1. Average speeds in training
2. Cadence
3. Putting oneself in a box with a label
Im logging off

O.K. I'll change that to " Vander, based on his power numbers, is genetically blessed with a larger amount of Type-II fast-twitch muscle (compared to the average) AND an awesome cardiovascular system (compared to the average)".

Sent from my iThingy...

[twizzle]

Walsh95 I am not going to diagree with your coach about high cadence riding/training = ability to ride at high speed for long periods of time.

But I do know that the cadence of this old weekend warrior in a 2 hour race is similar to those of a pro rider racing 6 hours in a stage of the Paris Nice or similar. Check the rides of Ted King or Craig Lewis on Strava, they post cadence and power data for some of their training rides and races.

Cadence training as we do it probably doesn't apply as a need to anyone over the age of 17 (although my dads using it now) as by that stage you have the strength to push the massive gears 54-16-11 at 100rpm+.

You have to think of the gear restriction as "selection" rather that "development".

The juniors are limited so that they don't damage themselves with excessive pedal forces. But assuming that the "unsuccessful" drop out of cycling along the way, you end up with a group of riders who are very good given a specific limitation.

Take the opposite extreme and lock all juniors in the big ring and require them to carry 15kg of ballast, and you would see a very different group of riders graduate at the end.

Sent from my iThingy...

[foo on patrol]

You do it the same way as any training you do. Set a gear and begin training exactly the same as normal = do all the same disciplines you do now but you will take longer and you will need to concentrate harder on your pedaling on down hill runs.

Once you become used to it, it will like all of your other training, second nature. For my line of thinking you should do two days of spin a week and these days are the days where you normally do it a little steadier as in, the day after the hard ride, where you do the muscle tears from the big efforts.

Others will disagree with what I have said here but you asked and I responded with my thoughts and help.

Foo

[Walsh95]

Walsh95 I am not going to diagree with your coach about high cadence riding/training = ability to ride at high speed for long periods of time.

But I do know that the cadence of this old weekend warrior in a 2 hour race is similar to those of a pro rider racing 6 hours in a stage of the Paris Nice or similar. Check the rides of Ted King or Craig Lewis on Strava, they post cadence and power data for some of their training rides and races.

Cadence training as we do it probably doesn't apply as a need to anyone over the age of 17 (although my dads using it now) as by that stage you have the strength to push the massive gears 54-16-11 at 100rpm+.

You have to think of the gear restriction as "selection" rather that "development".

The juniors are limited so that they don't damage themselves with excessive pedal forces. But assuming that the "unsuccessful" drop out of cycling along the way, you end up with a group of riders who are very good given a specific limitation.

Take the opposite extreme and lock all juniors in the big ring and require them to carry 15kg of ballast, and you would see a very different group of riders graduate at the end.
Sent from my iThingy...

I'm gonna have to disagree with you there. Using our training, What you end up with are road cyclists. Now, I have no idea about training methods used in the past, but there is definitely something wrong when the only australian climber capable of winning in the Grand Tours never rode a road bike until he was in his mid-twenties.
I'm not sure whether you're saying that using small chainrings is all that successful juniors can ever be good at, but there is definitely a reason for implementing this other than to avoid damaging juniors, which, by the way, I dont believe is valid, seeing as I rode on a large chainring for months before I started riding small, and I can still do the large, even after becoming quite good with cadence riding.

[wurtulla wabbit]

Where were all the successful climbers born, raised, lived, trained ?

Spain ad Italy are both pretty mountainous and hilly by nature.
Scotland is, England is, Ireland is flat as a pancake mostly.
Holland is mostly flat, Germany is pretty mountainous and hilly in parts.

Just trying to see if there's a pattern to tue success from the "good ones"

[RonK]

I rode restricted gearing as a junior ( a long time ago). Despite the claims about managing physical development, my coach always said it was simply an attempt to equalise the performance of kids who may be at markedly different stages of physical development for the same age. It's a bit like using weight divisions instead of age divisions in junior rugby league.
Whatever, I learned to spin and ride close gear ratios, and still mostly use the small ring.

[Derny Driver]

Vander is a sprinter.

Arrrrrrrrggg
Trying to restrain myself and not say anything.
My 3 pet hates all in the one thread
1. Average speeds in training
2. Cadence
3. Putting oneself in a box with a label
Im logging off

O.K. I'll change that to " Vander, based on his power numbers, is genetically blessed with a larger amount of Type-II fast-twitch muscle (compared to the average) AND an awesome cardiovascular system (compared to the average)".

Sent from my iThingy...

Same thing twiz, different semantics. You said earlier "you cant fight genetics" and now you are gonna take a young guy, keen, new to the sport, with obvious potential, and tell him he is a certain type of rider based on a couple of good results in bunch sprints in club races. Not based on actual genetic tests but on observation.
From what I read about vander on here, he just seems like a big strong guy who has the ability to unload his power at the end of a race. I would be very careful about calling him a sprinter or a fast twitch man especially since he admits he doesn't like high cadences.
Eddie Salas was mentioned on vanders thread as a rider to aspire to, well theres a guy who wins a lot of bunch sprints in high level races. Next time you see him, walk up and tell him he's a sprinter. Then duck. Yes he knows how to finish a race but its not because he has a certain type of muscle fibre or because his power numbers lined up that day, its because he has 25 years of experience to draw on, racing every weekend ...hilly races, flat ones, time trials, whatever. If its a race, he does it. John Forrest from Canberra is another bloke who comes to mind. Him and Eddie went to the photo in the Dinnerville 2 years ago but neither would give themselves a label. Good cyclists don't do that.
I think you place too much emphasis on genetics, and this can be self limiting for people. Ive had 15 year old kids tell me they have to break away to win a race because they cant sprint. Ive seen blokes with potential give the sport away because they've been told by someone that they will never be a good time trialler ...too heavy to be a good climber ... are an enduro who wont be able to win a sprint finish. Garbage.
You can fight genetics. Or ignore them. John Tressider was a world sprint champion who became one of the worlds best 6 day riders in the days when it was 6 days and nights of non-stop racing, the ultimate endurance event. Same with Sid Patterson. Eric Zabel.
Labels do nothing except limit peoples possibilities.

One example to finish:
Young A grade rider with obvious potential wins a lot of sprint finishes in notable races because he is nippy and fast from a track background. Gets asked by one of these silly teams to ride with the big boys so he accepts, thinking it will help his development. Gets told his job is to be the "team sprinter" and he is to just sit in the bunch and do nothing until the sprint where he will be given a lead out. So every race he sits there and watches the breaks go, come back, new breaks form, groups go off the front, and after a year of just rolling around in bunches and never having the hoped for sprint finish, he is very disillusioned.
So I put him and a couple of other guys on a plane and take them to an international 12 stage tour. He is given free rein to do whatever he wants and is encouraged to believe in himself and try a few things. At the end of the Tour he is 5th on GC, picked up most of his GC time on the big mountain climbs, realises he can time trial with international class riders, and of course he can still sprint. He got on the podium twice, once in a crit and the other a mountaintop finish. Comes home and now he's out of the box people put him in, he is starting to achieve great things including riding a couple of world level races recently.

So this is why I dislike the genetics talk and the labelling of young riders as being 'endurance', 'sprinter' or whatever. Not having a go at you either twiz, as I enjoy your posts. Just explaining myself.
cheers, DD