Tri Talk HomepageTri Talk EventsTri Talk ForumsBlogsTri Talk TrainingTri TradeTriPlayerWikiTeam Tri Talk
Cadence
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    TriTalk.co.uk Forum Index -> Training
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
explorerJC




Joined: 20 Oct 2005
Posts: 15192
Location: Farthingstone

PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 9:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mattsurf wrote:
explorerJC wrote:


It is anecdotal, but higher cadences rely on efficient physiology and lower ones muscular strength....

I would point out that researchers recommend optimal mechanical efficiency at around 90...

And, just for fun, I will repeat that if you train to a certain cadence it may feel 'natural' but is in fact learned behaviour


I read Brett Sutton's article on Cadence with interest. Last winter I made a concerted effort to increase my cadence to 90rpm, but over last season I have dialled it back a little to around 85rmp on average. Last season I rode better than ever before, but that may be because running injuries meant that I spent more time on the bike.

Whenever I do an ftp test (20 minute version) my cadence is around 95, maybe I should have a look at my ftp at a lower cadence but pretty sure it will be lower

However, when I look at my power vs heart rate, I notice that for a given power (around 220w), my HR is slightly lower at 80rpm than 90rpm, however, if I drop my cadence to 70rpm my quads begin to ache pretty quickly.

My conculsion is that an important factor is torque; power = torque * angular velocity (ie cadence). If I am riding at 170W @ 70rpm, this is the same torque as riding at 220W @ 90rpm, so it may make sense for a rider at 17mph average to cycle at 70 rpm while a rider at 22mph will be a 90rpm


if you are riding in the same gear at 80 and 90 then your HR will be higher....

it could be, of course, that it takes more than a season to increase cadence satisfactorily. That said, if during the transition, riding at 90 results in being able to race better at 85, then that supports the theory that a lower cadence allows for greater substrate for the run...
_________________
www.appliedtri.co.uk Tri and Du coaching

www.naturalrunningform.co.uk Natural Running Form Coach

2018 Training Camps http://www.appliedtri.co.uk/training-camps/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
mattsurf




Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Posts: 306
Location: Zug, Switzerland

PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 11:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

explorerJC wrote:
mattsurf wrote:
explorerJC wrote:


It is anecdotal, but higher cadences rely on efficient physiology and lower ones muscular strength....

I would point out that researchers recommend optimal mechanical efficiency at around 90...

And, just for fun, I will repeat that if you train to a certain cadence it may feel 'natural' but is in fact learned behaviour


I read Brett Sutton's article on Cadence with interest. Last winter I made a concerted effort to increase my cadence to 90rpm, but over last season I have dialled it back a little to around 85rmp on average. Last season I rode better than ever before, but that may be because running injuries meant that I spent more time on the bike.

Whenever I do an ftp test (20 minute version) my cadence is around 95, maybe I should have a look at my ftp at a lower cadence but pretty sure it will be lower

However, when I look at my power vs heart rate, I notice that for a given power (around 220w), my HR is slightly lower at 80rpm than 90rpm, however, if I drop my cadence to 70rpm my quads begin to ache pretty quickly.

My conculsion is that an important factor is torque; power = torque * angular velocity (ie cadence). If I am riding at 170W @ 70rpm, this is the same torque as riding at 220W @ 90rpm, so it may make sense for a rider at 17mph average to cycle at 70 rpm while a rider at 22mph will be a 90rpm


if you are riding in the same gear at 80 and 90 then your HR will be higher....

it could be, of course, that it takes more than a season to increase cadence satisfactorily. That said, if during the transition, riding at 90 results in being able to race better at 85, then that supports the theory that a lower cadence allows for greater substrate for the run...


I was riding in one gear lower at 90, this is an example;

10 mins power 220w @90 rpm HR156
10 mins power 220w @80 rpm HR154

I have tried this a number of times, with 5 and 10 min efforts, maintaining 220w, I get similar results HR is always lower at 80 rpm by between 1 and 3 bmp. It is not a lot, but it is consistently lower HR at lower cadence
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JaRok2300




Joined: 01 May 2014
Posts: 316
Location: Worcester, UK

PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 11:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Do you vary the order of your efforts as I've been doing a similar thing but find tiredness impacts my HR as the session progresses as below:

1. 10mins 180W 90rpm 137bpm
2. 10mins 180W 80rpm 139bpm
3. 10mins 180W 88rpm 141bpm
4. 10mins 180W 88rpm 142bpm

That was my session from last night with 4mins at 100W between each effort. The first 2 reps were at fixed rpm, the last two I just did what felt best but the HR climbed each time.

You may be much fitter than me but the differences are too small for me to draw any conclusions, certainly at this early stage.

If I hadn't seen the numbers I would have said my legs ached more on the 80rpm rep but my HR was lower which clearly wasn't the case but it felt more taxing on the legs and less so on the heart/lungs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mattsurf




Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Posts: 306
Location: Zug, Switzerland

PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 12:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JaRok2300 wrote:
Do you vary the order of your efforts as I've been doing a similar thing but find tiredness impacts my HR as the session progresses as below:

1. 10mins 180W 90rpm 137bpm
2. 10mins 180W 80rpm 139bpm
3. 10mins 180W 88rpm 141bpm
4. 10mins 180W 88rpm 142bpm

That was my session from last night with 4mins at 100W between each effort. The first 2 reps were at fixed rpm, the last two I just did what felt best but the HR climbed each time.

You may be much fitter than me but the differences are too small for me to draw any conclusions, certainly at this early stage.

If I hadn't seen the numbers I would have said my legs ached more on the 80rpm rep but my HR was lower which clearly wasn't the case but it felt more taxing on the legs and less so on the heart/lungs.


Yes I tried reversing the efforts as well.

Were you well warmed up before your first effort?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
explorerJC




Joined: 20 Oct 2005
Posts: 15192
Location: Farthingstone

PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 1:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

interesting stuff guys, please keep the data coming...
_________________
www.appliedtri.co.uk Tri and Du coaching

www.naturalrunningform.co.uk Natural Running Form Coach

2018 Training Camps http://www.appliedtri.co.uk/training-camps/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
jibberjim




Joined: 15 Aug 2008
Posts: 8215
Location: Kingston

PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 1:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

explorerJC wrote:
interesting stuff guys, please keep the data coming...


They appear to be anecdotes, not data.
_________________
Jibbering Sports Stuff
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
mattsurf




Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Posts: 306
Location: Zug, Switzerland

PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 1:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JaRok2300 wrote:
Do you vary the order of your efforts as I've been doing a similar thing but find tiredness impacts my HR as the session progresses as below:

1. 10mins 180W 90rpm 137bpm
2. 10mins 180W 80rpm 139bpm
3. 10mins 180W 88rpm 141bpm
4. 10mins 180W 88rpm 142bpm

That was my session from last night with 4mins at 100W between each effort. The first 2 reps were at fixed rpm, the last two I just did what felt best but the HR climbed each time.

You may be much fitter than me but the differences are too small for me to draw any conclusions, certainly at this early stage.

If I hadn't seen the numbers I would have said my legs ached more on the 80rpm rep but my HR was lower which clearly wasn't the case but it felt more taxing on the legs and less so on the heart/lungs.


I just looked back at the set I did last night, after a 30min warm up I did 10 mins at ftp followed by 5mins rest and then repeated

my first set was:
set 1; 271.5w 167.7bpm @87.1rpm
set 2; 275.1w, 169.3bpm @87.4rmp

The ratio between HR and power varied by 0.4%, and the second set was fractionally more efficient

but as you say, this is of more academic interest, a difference of 1 or 2 bpm may be significant for a pro, chasing marginal gains, but for an AG triathlete, not sure it means anything
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JaRok2300




Joined: 01 May 2014
Posts: 316
Location: Worcester, UK

PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 1:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Were you well warmed up before your first effort?[/quote]

Ah good point, I did 5mins at 100W before the first interval and my HR was 109 before it started but only fell to approx. 115 between the subsequent ones so that in itself could account for difference in the first rep.

I think you'd have to do the whole session at each cadence whilst still trying to make sure you were equally rested from previous workouts to try and gain any meaningful info. Even then it would be an indication of your current state and not what was possible if you trained at 80rpm (for example) for a period of time


Last edited by JaRok2300 on Fri Dec 15, 2017 1:42 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
explorerJC




Joined: 20 Oct 2005
Posts: 15192
Location: Farthingstone

PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 1:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jibberjim wrote:
explorerJC wrote:
interesting stuff guys, please keep the data coming...


They appear to be anecdotes, not data.


it's data, jim, but not as you know it... Smile
_________________
www.appliedtri.co.uk Tri and Du coaching

www.naturalrunningform.co.uk Natural Running Form Coach

2018 Training Camps http://www.appliedtri.co.uk/training-camps/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
mattsurf




Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Posts: 306
Location: Zug, Switzerland

PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 2:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

explorerJC wrote:
jibberjim wrote:
explorerJC wrote:
interesting stuff guys, please keep the data coming...


They appear to be anecdotes, not data.


it's data, jim, but not as you know it... Smile


I will pull out some files this evening to do some analyis

it takes the first 1.5 to 2 minutes of an interval for my HR to stabilise, typically it climbs, then comes down a bit

This is from a set I did last week, when I was doing very high cadence and low cadence intervals

High Cadence intervals: Avg HR 162.6, Cadence 102.9, Power 220.2W
Low Cadence intervals: Avg HR 162.2, Cadence 76.6, Power 228.8W
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mattsurf




Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Posts: 306
Location: Zug, Switzerland

PostPosted: Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

More data.... unfortunately this time does not support my theory

30 mins warm up followed by 2 x 90% ftp intervals each for 10 mins with 5 mins at 55% ftp rest between

first interval average power 249.5w, cadence 89.4rpm, HR 149.1bpm
second interval average power 250.2w, cadence 79.1rpm, HR 150.4bpm

I tried to normalise the data by dividing the power by HR, and this shows that the higher cadence has a normalised power 0.5% greater than the lower cadence interval
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JaRok2300




Joined: 01 May 2014
Posts: 316
Location: Worcester, UK

PostPosted: Tue Dec 19, 2017 11:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would imagine those figures are well within the margin of error for your power meter and/or HR monitor.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    TriTalk.co.uk Forum Index -> Training All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3
  Share
 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum





Home | About TT | Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions | Advertising | Contact TT
Copyright ©2003-2015 TriTalk®.co.uk. All rights reserved.