cadence

richiemack

Guys can anyone tell me how beneficial it would be to train using a cadence sensor, and how to go about it (do you need to test fitness, speed, or anything like that)
Cheers

Lumen

They're useful if you have a cadence problem (often not enough cadence in the case of newbie cyclists) but otherwise a bit of a novelty.

Once you learn to cycle within an appropriate cadence range it's not really something you have to think about.

IMO.

Raam

My cadence sensor went on the blink a few months ago. Can't say that I've missed it.

DirkVoodoo

A handy feature to have, but just a feature like Average speed, maximum speed, distance, etc. and not really something I would have thought you could build a training plan around.

Heart rate is much more useful.

Usually, you will find your "natural cadence" through experience. Some people prefer grinding and some prefer spinning. Like Lumen says, unless there is a problem and you feel you are constantly in the wrong gear, a cadence sensor is just a useful addition to the masses of data you get from your computer.

Hungrycol

On a flat stretch of road I normally count my revolutions over 20 or 30 seconds and multiply by 3 or 2. If I'm up around 90 per minute I'm happy enough and try to keep that rhythm.

Dr_Colossus

What kind of cadence would you guys maintain when climbing a nice extended 8% gradient hill, I find myself stuck around the 50-55 range without really being able to spin much faster. If I go up a gear I find myself going no where with the speed dropping back further.

mloc123

If your following any kind of trainging plan that involves speed work then it is pretty essential.

Home:Ballyhoura

I aim for 100rpm as my cadence, but when I'm really drilling it or time trialling its usually around 110rpm if that helps? Even on the climbs when most people settle into a grinding rhythm (can be anywhere around 70-80) I still like to keep it upwards of 90+. As you can see, I like a high cadence. Look at Lance who likes a high cadence, especially in the TT's, Contador in the mountains etc. Cancellara is an even better example...in the World TT Champs he was running 177.5mm cranks and averaged 120rpm...thats just amazing! I suppose its all down to your muscle fibers, slow of fast twitch as well as flexibility - rumour has it Cancellara can touch his toes with his elbows! On the other hand there is the likes of Bert Grabsch (last years World TT Champion) who likes to grind it out in his top gear, usually around 80rpm if even that. This just shows that is is actually all down to personal preference, but the majority of people will aim for the area between 90-100!

For the winter months of training they say that it is recommended to drop down into the small ring on the front to work on your cadence and pedaling style! Hope this helps somewhat, best of luck! You can use this to work out gearing ratios and cadences at various speeds etc. Very handy in my opinion and I am getting a new cassette for the winter bike to help with this!

Dr_Colossus

Thanks for the informative reply Ballyhoura, all makes sense. I think I must prefer a slower cadence as even on the flat I find myself averaging up to 90 and tend to end up hopping on the saddle when I reach around the 100 mark. I can do up to 120 on the exercise bikes in the gym but need to nearly lock myself down to the bike with a strong arm grip to prevent the hopping on the saddle tendancy.

blorg

Dr_Colossus wrote: »

What kind of cadence would you guys maintain when climbing a nice extended 8% gradient hill, I find myself stuck around the 50-55 range without really being able to spin much faster. If I go up a gear I find myself going no where with the speed dropping back further.

I would generally be in my lowest gear at the highest cadence I could support whatever that was. I wouldn't keep up 100 average on my normal gearing but that would be a limitation of my gearing rather than my cadence. Probably 80-90. I can certainly climb at 100 with different gearing, or indeed for shorter hills than "extended."

If you can do it on the flat and you have the gears no reason you shouldn't be able to do it on the climbs. Just a matter of practice (and gearing.)

Lumen

mloc123 wrote: »

If your following any kind of trainging plan that involves speed work then it is pretty essential.

Why?

Lumen

Dr_Colossus wrote: »

I think I must prefer a slower cadence as even on the flat I find myself averaging up to 90 and tend to end up hopping on the saddle when I reach around the 100 mark. I can do up to 120 on the exercise bikes in the gym but need to nearly lock myself down to the bike with a strong arm grip to prevent the hopping on the saddle tendancy.

This may be an indicator of incorrect saddle height.

niceonetom

Most training plans I've read involve spinning at artificially high cadences, at least for interval length efforts and sometimes for much longer (all winter, for instance). Chris Carmichael is a big proponent on using leg-speed to generate power rather than using strength. I shouldn't need to point out his most successful student.

Lumen is right in that higher cadences can reveal improper bike set-up, i.e. saddle height issues, but spinning smoothly at 120 rpm requires very good technique even with a perfect bike set-up, so I wouldn't immediately get out the tape measure and allen keys. Developing a smooth efficient stroke is a good reason in itself to pay attention to cadence IMO.

I've used a cadence sensor since last winter and have found it very useful. My inclination, and it's one that's common to a lot of untrained novice riders, was to try to push a bigger gear, but that never made me faster - I only began to see improvements when I got used to the idea that spinning is more effective that shifting to a smaller cog.

There's no good reason not to use a cadence sensor, is there?

Ryder

+1 on that. On my fixed, know roughly the cadence from my speed. On my road bike i often find the rate drifting down to the 80's when not concentrating. Not an essential tool, but very useful to have

ROK ON

I am curious about cadence and fitness/weight. When I am climbing my cadence drops considerably. I presume this is down to overall fitness or weight issues.
Even though my cadence falls it is much higher than last year when I was heavier or simply less fit.
Not really an issue apart from climbing, so I am curious when Blorg says he can climb at same cadence as on the flat.
Was it always this way? Or has your cadence improved with fitness?

Also does anyone else just like the sensation of grinding a big gear on the flat. The post cycle leg tiredness seems an attractive reward/reminder for a hard days effort.

mloc123

Lumen wrote: »

Why?

As Tom mentioned most training plans involve intervals of very high cadence as part of speed skills work outs. Without a cadence sensor its guess work.... imo

blorg

In my meagre experience of road racing you need to be able to up the cadence massively in a sprint or if attempting a break. Gearing is all very well but you need to have a good cadence range too. It is not so much about continuing along at a set speed but acceleration away from whoever you are with, preferably before they notice.

As regards cadence on climbs, I have always tended to low gearing so have always had the option. I then got faster. If you never had the gears could be different. Also got used to high cadence on the fixed gear (although downhill in that case.) I used be around 60-80, this increased to 80-100 after a winter on the fixie. Above 120 is the point where I start to wobble although I imagine it becomes inefficient before then.

Higher cadence climbing in particular for me does reduce that burning/tired sensation in your legs. While arguably this doesn't matter so much after if you are not going out the next day it does impact on your performance while still on the cycle so worth considering.

Lumen

mloc123 wrote: »

As Tom mentioned most training plans involve intervals of very high cadence as part of speed skills work outs. Without a cadence sensor its guess work.... imo

What's "very high cadence"?

I find when I'm hammering along (i.e. riding at threshold) my cadence naturally rises from about 95rpm (my normal cadence) to about 110rpm.

Should I be doing specific training above 110rpm?

mloc123

No expert and only basing this on Friels examples in the triathletes training bible but he recommends intervals of an 'uncomfortably high' cadence.. and if I remember correctly 120 is the target. Obviously you can do this without a cadence sensor but your relying on feel which is pretty hard to judge from night to night depending on how tired you are... again imo

Lumen

mloc123 wrote: »

No expert and only basing this on Friels examples in the triathletes training bible but he recommends intervals of an 'uncomfortably high' cadence.. and if I remember correctly 120 is the target. Obviously you can do this without a cadence sensor but your relying on feel which is pretty hard to judge from night to night depending on how tired you are... again imo

Interesting. Perhaps aiming for "uncomfortable" will do much the same as aiming for a specific cadence, since usually doing something uncomfortable repeatedly makes it less so, which is presumably the objective.

Perhaps if you're training properly for road racing (rather than triathlon) you'd be achieving high cadences as part of sprint intervals anyway.

FWIW, I found that my legs were really screwed the next day after the Goldsprints pukefest (180rpm or thereabout), to the extent that I couldn't lift my legs properly. Must be something about high cadences and very low resistance which uses muscles differently.

mloc123

Sprint intervals are also part of tri training. Also based on the OPs posts over in A/R/T I presume he is training for next years tri season.

Lumen

mloc123 wrote: »

Sprint intervals are also part of tri training.

That runs counter to the "training is specific" idea, though I claim zero expertise and haven't studied my Bible enough recently.

This is interesting, discussed here.

niceonetom

Lumen wrote: »

Must be something about high cadences and very low resistance which uses muscles differently.

Hip flexors. High speed spinning really seems to target mine, and the abs and obliques too, presumably to keep my arse in the right place as I flail.

I'm surprised by your scepticism on the usefulness of cadence measurement. Doing something "uncomfortably" hard is no substitute for doing it as hard as your supposed to, and being able to compare efforts from one day to the next to track progress or simply keep your efforts honest. Given your power obsession it's not as if you're a fan of training in a data-impoverished ("by feel") kinda way.

Have you not come across trainers recommending [X]watts @ [Y]rpm type instructions?

Lumen

niceonetom wrote: »

I'm surprised by your scepticism on the usefulness of cadence measurement. Doing something "uncomfortably" hard is no substitute for doing it as hard as your supposed to, and being able to compare efforts from one day to the next to track progress or simply keep your efforts honest. Given your power obsession it's not as if you're a fan of training in a data-impoverished ("by feel") kinda way.

Have you not come across trainers recommending [X]watts @ [Y]rpm type instructions?

No.

My understanding of cadence is that there is trade-off between energy efficiency and fatigue - it is more energy efficient to cycle with low cadence, but more tiring. So you pick a happy medium and largely stick to it, with a bit of variation to make yourself more adaptable and avoid getting stuck in a rut.

Doing disciplined HR or wattage-targetting training is hard (so hard that I rarely do it). I'd rather focus on HR/watts and vary cadence based on feel, depending on how my joints and muscles feel on a given day. If everything feels good I'll use the opportunity to drop the cadence, if I'm feeling a bit fragile I'll keep spinning to reduce chances of injury.

Trying to maintain a given (high) HR/power whilst also attempting to pedal at an unnatural cadence seems like a recipe for injury.

mloc123

The cadence work outs are part of endurance works out, so something like a few 4-6 mins of 'speed work' spread out over the length of a normal aerobic endurance workout. Sprint intervals should also be part of a longer work out and only last 10-15 seconds each... again as recommended in the tri bible.

thebouldwhacker

I'm gonna jump in here and swim around as if I know what I'm talking about....

I never really took much notice of my cadence until recently, for me it was all about getting from point A to point B in a certain time, this winter though I am trying to improve my cycling ability this for me involves being able to put down more power per revolution and churning out more revolutions. For this I will probably get a cadence monitor (if anyone has one they don't need I'll take it).

A few posters here said that they pay no real head to such measurements but yet know their rpm output and cadence utilisation techniques off hand, hows this if such figures are no more than a curiosity ?:D

blorg

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

A few posters here said that they pay no real head to such measurements but yet know their rpm output and cadence utilisation techniques off hand, hows this if such figures are no more than a curiosity ?:D

Maybe people who looked at it in more detail in the past and now have a better idea of cadance by feel, or indeed who might have a record of it on post-ride logs but don't pay a lot of attention on the actual bike itself.

ROK ON

I used to look at cadence, but now rarely do. Particularly when climbing I focus on Heart Rate. As I have lost a little bit of weight it has been easier to climb at a controlled heart rate.
This improved fitness has lead to improved climbing cadence without ever consciously trying to improve cadence.
I don't think this is a happy coincidence. Improved fitness leads to improved cadence?

blorg

Higher cadence is generally held to tax your heart more while lower cadence taxes your leg muscles more. So I imagine improvements in your general aerobic fitness would enable higher cadence, yes. Higher cadence also easier to recover from whether within a cycle or next day.

scottreynolds

As already said knowing your cadence can be useful. I was doing climbs last year a progressively lower cadences 90 - 80 - 70 - 60 as a workout to build force (power applied to the pedals). I did this work out as well on the turbo and found it an awesome way to gain strength.

niceonetom

Lumen wrote: »

No.

Well that is odd. Just about every turbo/interval vid I've done (not a comprehensive collection, ok) stipulates intensity@rpm; low rpm @ high bpm (or watts if you're fancy) climbing intervals for brute strength; high rpm @ low intensity for technique and recovery; high rpm @ high bpm sprints; cadence always seems to be a factor in these workouts. Spinervals, the trainright stuff, sufferfest, random workouts culled from torrents, they all reference cadence.

Lumen wrote: »

Trying to maintain a given (high) HR/power whilst also attempting to pedal at an unnatural cadence seems like a recipe for injury.

You cannot improve fitness without some risk of injury - fitness is gained by applying stress to the body. Yes, very high or low rpm can place new stresses on joints, but so does beginning cycling in the first place.

Lumen

niceonetom wrote: »

Well that is odd. Just about every turbo/interval vid I've done (not a comprehensive collection, ok) stipulates intensity@rpm; low rpm @ high bpm (or watts if you're fancy) climbing intervals for brute strength; high rpm @ low intensity for technique and recovery; high rpm @ high bpm sprints; cadence always seems to be a factor in these workouts. Spinervals, the trainright stuff, sufferfest, random workouts culled from torrents, they all reference cadence.

You're right. I appear to be spouting complete nonsense.

thebouldwhacker

@Scott, I'm doing the same atm, any tips? Were you maintaining or increasing HR, gearing, speed, time etc?

Billy Whizz

Cadence is a red herring, pay no attention to it. The more watts you put out, the more your optimal cadence to achieve that output increases.

richiemack

WOw thats great lads thanks for all the info, plenty to swallow now. I am training for next years tri season, but am wanting to spend the next few months getting a better base on the bike. I feel strong and fit on the bike in any TT, tris Ive done, but want to develop a more structured, and rewarding method of bike training. It seems from what Ive read from all the posts that cadence is important for the the intermediate cyclist like myself, and good to gauge progress.
Woudl anyone suggest a 1 hour program for midweek training, to add to the weekend club spins?

mloc123

richiemack wrote: »

WOw thats great lads thanks for all the info, plenty to swallow now. I am training for next years tri season, but am wanting to spend the next few months getting a better base on the bike. I feel strong and fit on the bike in any TT, tris Ive done, but want to develop a more structured, and rewarding method of bike training. It seems from what Ive read from all the posts that cadence is important for the the intermediate cyclist like myself, and good to gauge progress.
Woudl anyone suggest a 1 hour program for midweek training, to add to the weekend club spins?

Have you a year plan laid out? base, build, peak etc..? A and B races picked out and marked on the calander? This is a good place to start (don't want to sound like I'm pushing it too much, afterall I know very little myself). Your Base period on the bike should be built on aerobic endurance and speed skills... so lots of low heart rate long cycles.

richiemack

Ive no plan as of yet just getting in some long spins when I can, but my goal is to start tri specific training in Feb/March which gives me a good 4 months of build up