# Slowly slaying the high cadence myth....



## Fab Foodie (2 Sep 2020)

I’ve never bought into the whole spinning/high cadence story.

As a club cyclist and occasional TT rider I was constantly encouraged to spin faster over my naturally lower cadence/high gear style.
Believe me I tried, for over season. Eventually gave-up, returned to my natural style and improved!

https://www.bicycling.com/news/a263...I&utm_medium=social-media&utm_source=facebook


----------



## ianrauk (2 Sep 2020)

Now aint that a weird coincidence Fabbers.
I bought a cheap cadence sensor off the bay, got it on the weekend and fitted it to my commute bike.
I guessed my cadence on my commute was in the high 70's.
For my 3 commutes to date this week my cadence has been.
87avg 118max
87avg 127max
91avg 157max

It's nothing scientific for me and i'm not looking to improve anything, cadence, speed or stamina etc
I was just curious and its early days but I am surprised at how high the figures are.


----------



## Twilkes (2 Sep 2020)

I'm about 85-95rpm pretty much all the time. if I try sprinting (badly) I can maintain about 110rpm for a short time, and maxed out at 120rpm once. On the 1 minute sprint segment that I tested cadences on (or at least tested different gears, which resulted in different cadences) they were all within a few seconds of each other so within the margins of a gust of wind. I was more out of breath with a high cadence and my legs hurt more with a low cadence, so the best balance will be somewhere in between.

Which is what a lot of the research shows, a self-selected cadence is best, riders with a bit of experience in the saddle tend to know what works for them, they'll shift gear if it feels too hard or too easy. This is a great video on cadence, all of this guy's videos are worth watching: 
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6I1z7eyXOI


The conclusion that pros pedal fast because they produce a lot of power, rather than producing a lot of power because they pedal fast, is a good one, and backs up the linked research that amateurs who will be producing less power are maybe more suited to a lower cadence, or at least maybe not suited to a high cadence (90rpm+). One thing that jumped out from the article is it didn't mention the power produced, only ventilatory threshold - I don't know what the relationship between the two is, but if they'd asked the riders to maintain the same power with different cadences then they might have seen different results.

Out of interest, @Fab Foodie do you know what your usual cadence is?


----------



## cougie uk (2 Sep 2020)

I have noticed that non cyclists tend to pedal at about 60rpm. So higher is better but it depends on your definition of high cadence.


----------



## Blue Hills (2 Sep 2020)

I'm no cycling scientist and have no great interest in speed or "training" but I had the idea that a high cadence was meant to be about reducing strain, not necessarily speed as such.
I did the Dunwich Dynamo one year making a conscious effort to spin and at the end felt as if I had pretty much floated there.
I used to use a low cadence, really pushing against the gears as I think many beginners do.
Then, cycling with some old ctc folk noticed that they seemed to have a far more relaxed pedalling style.


----------



## Sterlo (2 Sep 2020)

ianrauk said:


> Now aint that a weird coincidence Fabbers.
> I bought a cheap cadence sensor off the bay, got it on the weekend and fitted it to my commute bike.
> I guessed my cadence on my commute was in the high 70's.
> For my 3 commutes to date this week my cadence has been.
> ...


Same here, I've mad mine for a couple of weeks now, similar figures. I don't think there is a right and a wrong, I'll go at whatever feels comfortable. One ride I might do a higher cadence, another will be lower, I got my sensor just out of curiosity.


----------



## gavroche (2 Sep 2020)

I think we all have a "natural cadence" we feel comfortable with. If you look into the peloton, you will see that riders pedal at different cadence on the same terrain. Look at Froome, no one pedals as fast as he does but it seems to work for him.


----------



## Salty seadog (2 Sep 2020)

My cadence changes in line with the resistance fed back to me through the cranks. 

I use both cadence and the gear lever to find my balance. 
My average has been 0 revolutions per year since 2019. This needs remedy. 🧐


----------



## fossyant (2 Sep 2020)

60rpm is a bit low, but 70-90 seems to be a sweet spot. There was certainly a sweet spot on my fixed on the flat. The higher the RPM, the harder it was to keep the power down. Riding fixed did improve my cadence, as there was no choice.

I tend to ride between 70-90 rpm - like everything it's what you are used to, but going below 60 (unless climbing) is a not very efficient.

One thing I've noticed, is that on the MTB, if you are doing a 'technical' climb (i.e. rocky or with stuff to get over) you have to spin otherwise you will bog down if you hit something. Smoother climbs then you can use a lower cadence.


----------



## matticus (2 Sep 2020)

cougie uk said:


> I have noticed that *non *cyclists tend to pedal at about 60rpm.


Wow.

That's about 60rpm higher than I see.


----------



## si_c (2 Sep 2020)

My natural cadence seems to be around the 85rpm mark - of course when you factor in coasting over a ride it drops to around 75-80 rpm depending on the ride. On an indoor trainer that does rise to about 90rpm.

One advantange I find to a higher cadence is that it's easier to accelerate from a higher cadence - this is particularly useful when hitting the front of a set of lights as it goes green 

Overall I don't think it matters too much, pedal at 20mph at 90rpm or 20mph at 60rpm, you're still pedalling at 20mph so I would have thought the same energy was being expended and the same power being produced.


----------



## matticus (2 Sep 2020)

There are too (difficult to measure) possibel factors:
- efficiency (i.e. energy used by your muscles -vs- reaching the pedals), and
- wear/strain on your muscles joints etc

I think *most* agree that your legs stay fresher if you spin. By how much? No idea! Could be irrelephant.
Does spinning prevent injury? I'm not sure, but I've chosen to play safe, and it just *seems* likely.


----------



## MrGrumpy (2 Sep 2020)

High 70s for me, generally. Don`t really pay too much attention to it now. I know when I need to change gear and when I can push hard.


----------



## Low Gear Guy (2 Sep 2020)

Riding around with low cadence and high gears puts a lot of strain on the knees. Pedaling at a higher cadence is easier and enables me to ride longer distances with a heavier load.


----------



## dan_bo (2 Sep 2020)

Don't think that in 35ish years of riding I've ever met a cyclist with bad knees.


----------



## matticus (2 Sep 2020)

Nonsense. Utter and total.


----------



## GetFatty (2 Sep 2020)

I would have thought mine is quite low (although @ianrauk would be able to hazard a guess) but I find it suits me better. I also find it helps with acceleration in that I have potential to up my cadence while staying in the same gear.


----------



## ianrauk (2 Sep 2020)

GetFatty said:


> I would have thought mine is quite low (although @ianrauk would be able to hazard a guess) but I find it suits me better. I also find it helps with acceleration in that I have potential to up my cadence while staying in the same gear.



Yup, would agree with that, a slower cadence then me definitely.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (2 Sep 2020)

Good, it's always been bollix


----------



## Rusty Nails (2 Sep 2020)

dan_bo said:


> Don't think that in 35ish years of riding I've ever met a cyclist with bad knees.


----------



## ColinJ (2 Sep 2020)

dan_bo said:


> Don't think that in 35ish years of riding I've ever met a cyclist with bad knees.


Local cycling pal @Littgull is now drastically cutting back on hilly rides because he has developed... _bad knees_!

As for cadence... I built myself a singlespeed bike a few years ago and experimented with different gear ratios before settling on 52/19. I have ridden thousands of kms on the bike since then so I have developed a good understanding of how it feels riding at different speeds and hence cadences. 

60 rpm gives a speed of about 21 kph and that feels very easy, but below my natural cadence. 

100 rpm gives a speed of about 35 kph and on the flat that feels too 'spinny', like my legs can't quite keep up. I'm not really fit enough to do that speed for long on any kind of upward slope, but curiously enough it feels more natural doing it up a slight drag, say 1-2% gradient. That provides enough resistance for my legs to work against. I wouldn't like to pedal much faster than that with a bike with a freehub. (I've never ridden fixed but everybody says that it easier to maintain higher cadences when you can't freewheel?)

70 rpm ~= 24 kph. Comfortable but slightly slow.

80-90 rpm ~= 28-31 kph, ideal cadence range for me.


----------



## Fab Foodie (2 Sep 2020)

Twilkes said:


> I'm about 85-95rpm pretty much all the time. if I try sprinting (badly) I can maintain about 110rpm for a short time, and maxed out at 120rpm once. On the 1 minute sprint segment that I tested cadences on (or at least tested different gears, which resulted in different cadences) they were all within a few seconds of each other so within the margins of a gust of wind. I was more out of breath with a high cadence and my legs hurt more with a low cadence, so the best balance will be somewhere in between.
> 
> Which is what a lot of the research shows, a self-selected cadence is best, riders with a bit of experience in the saddle tend to know what works for them, they'll shift gear if it feels too hard or too easy. This is a great video on cadence, all of this guy's videos are worth watching:
> View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6I1z7eyXOI
> ...



Last time I measured its 70 to 90 from memory.


----------



## Fab Foodie (2 Sep 2020)

Low Gear Guy said:


> Riding around with low cadence and high gears puts a lot of strain on the knees. Pedaling at a higher cadence is easier and enables me to ride longer distances with a heavier load.


I think the knees argument is bollox.


----------



## Fab Foodie (2 Sep 2020)

matticus said:


> Nonsense. Utter and total.


What is?


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (2 Sep 2020)

Saddle height would likely have more effect on knee joint health than cadence, especially when it results in gross over extension of the leg


----------



## matticus (2 Sep 2020)

Fab Foodie said:


> What is?


The post immediately before mine:


dan_bo said:


> Don't think that in 35ish years of riding I've ever met a cyclist with bad knees.


It's twaddle. Would take 30 seconds with google to find plenty.


----------



## matticus (2 Sep 2020)

Fab Foodie said:


> "
> _Riding around with low cadence and high gears puts a lot of strain on the knees. Pedaling at a higher cadence is easier and enables me to ride longer distances with a heavier load. _
> "
> 
> ...


Based on your data sample of one, I presume? Not confirmation bias at all, of course! :P


----------



## Low Gear Guy (2 Sep 2020)

dan_bo said:


> Don't think that in 35ish years of riding I've ever met a cyclist with bad knees.


How would you know?


----------



## Tigerbiten (2 Sep 2020)

My cadence varies in line with my power output.
My low power cadence is in the 60-70 rpm range. I'll spin this cadence either when I've had to drop my power output because I'm overheating badly when hill climbing or I'm just turning my legs over in a high gear on a decent.
My normal cadence is in the 70-80 rpm range. As this is my normal cadence, I can happily keep this up all day.
My high power cadence is in the 80-90 rpm range. The fitter I get then the higher my power output is and I start to spin this range.
I can hit down around 40 rpm if I've run out of gears down on a hill climb. But at this speed I'm grinding my way uphill which end up hurting my knees.
I can also hit around 100 rpm if I cannot be bothered to shift up a gear range on a decent. But a this speed I'm overspinning and my efficiency suffers, a higher heart rate for no real increase in speed.

Luck ..........


----------



## dan_bo (2 Sep 2020)

Low Gear Guy said:


> How would you know?


Conversation, usually.


----------



## screenman (2 Sep 2020)

dan_bo said:


> Don't think that in 35ish years of riding I've ever met a cyclist with bad knees.



No we have never met but I can assure you I have very bad knee's, but they may have been worse if I was not a cyclist.


----------



## flake99please (2 Sep 2020)

My cadence used to sit between 60-65, and I usually rode in the highest gear possible. Since owning a recumbent I have noticed a huge difference in my riding style, as higher gears and lower cadence wasn’t doing my knees any favours on the trike. I now use lower gearing and spin consistently between 80-85 rpm on my upright bikes.


----------



## dan_bo (2 Sep 2020)

screenman said:


> No we have never met but I can assure you I have very bad knee's, but they may have been worse if I was not a cyclist.


That'll be the cyclocross


----------



## lazybloke (2 Sep 2020)

Low Gear Guy said:


> Riding around with low cadence and high gears puts a lot of strain on the knees. Pedaling at a higher cadence is easier and enables me to ride longer distances with a heavier load.





dan_bo said:


> Don't think that in 35ish years of riding I've ever met a cyclist with bad knees.


I have little opinion on best cadence within a range of say, 60-100.


However I had a road bike with awful gearing and considerably lower cadence that caused all manner of knee pains & aches. I persevered for a crazy 18 months before improving the gearing. The pain vanished overnight. Not had the problem since.
Avoid extremes!


----------



## HMS_Dave (2 Sep 2020)

I will be awarded a 'kerching' moment here im sure, but i don't want to ride as fast as i can, in a giant condom being concerned with my cadence or my speed for that matter. I haven't met a "normal" cyclist that does as the roadies are all wizzing past, spitting and trying to max out their aerodynamics by licking the handle bars not bothering to say hello... Too serious for me, nothing like a bimble down the road at a pace that i can enjoy the nature, something i have missed dearly.

Each to their own of course, You do you...


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (2 Sep 2020)

I don't want to know anything about touring and recumbents so I avoid those sections entirely, don't quite understand why you'd open a cadence thread in the training section to say you have no interest in training or cadence.


----------



## screenman (2 Sep 2020)

dan_bo said:


> That'll be the cyclocross



More like heredity.


----------



## 12boy (2 Sep 2020)

I've never thought I pedaled at a high rpm and ride single speed or bikes with big gaps in the gearing pretty much these days, so I am comfortable with a wide range of rpm from 10 to 60. I belong to the school of thought that sets the saddle high enough so the heel barely reaches the pedal when the leg is extended, been riding for about 60 years and don't have knee problems. I suppose I could go faster if I was a spinner but I am hardly in a race and go fast enough for me. As long as I can get my 20 miles in on days without ice or snow I am happy as a pig in poop.


----------



## Fab Foodie (2 Sep 2020)

matticus said:


> Based on your data sample of one, I presume? Not confirmation bias at all, of course! :P


Based on my years of bike riding, clubs, zillions of cyclists I have mett and ridden with, none to date have complained ever of bad knees as a result of cycling. That’s not to say there are none but it’s one of those common tropes that I have never see real evidence of. If it were true there’d be a lot of old bike riders hobbling round...


----------



## matticus (3 Sep 2020)

Fab Foodie said:


> Based on my years of bike riding, clubs, zillions of cyclists I have mett and ridden with, none to date have complained ever of bad knees as a result of cycling. That’s not to say there are none but it’s one of those common tropes that I have never see real evidence of. If it were true there’d be a lot of old bike riders hobbling round...


Shall I send you the receipt from my physio?
Or you could just google for others' problems ...

Sure, they're way rarer than in running and can usually get sorted out, but you're in some sort of dream-world to deny them completely


----------



## Venod (3 Sep 2020)

The best cadence is what your comfortable pedaliiing, I am now a high cadence pedaler, when I was younger it was a bit lower but I was also running a lot and my legs were stronger (more muscle).
I don't have a power meter on the bike but the turbo does, it shows I can put out more power spinning.


----------



## MichaelW2 (3 Sep 2020)

I am usually a spinner but I injured my knee on a long complex uphill junction when the lights turned against me. I had to accelerate uphill in too high a gear.
I avoid pushing hard gears to protect that knee.

Optimum cadence is affected by the riders leg length, mass, muscle type and strength and by the relative length of the cranks.


----------



## Lovacott (3 Sep 2020)

Low Gear Guy said:


> Riding around with low cadence and high gears puts a lot of strain on the knees. Pedaling at a higher cadence is easier and enables me to ride longer distances with a heavier load.


I've always been the opposite. I prefer to work my legs harder which builds muscle and strength and therefore reduces the risk of injury.

I find pedalling really fast more tiring on my legs and lungs as well.


----------



## steverob (3 Sep 2020)

Dogtrousers said:


> I find I use a really high cadence (around 100) on my turbo. Bike is much lower and depends on the length of the ride, how hilly it is, what mood I happen to be in and the alignment of the moons of Jupiter.
> 
> I don't know why I go so high on the turbo. I think it's because the turbo to me is just an exercise machine and not really that much to do with riding a bike. 100 just feels right for that. I also do hard intervals and put in quite a lot of effort on the turbo, which I generally don't do on the road.


Interesting - thought it was just me that did a much higher cadence on the turbo than outdoors! Having said that, for me a high cadence is high-80's, while on my normal bike it's mid-70's.

Always been more of a grinder than a spinner, but I put that down to the gearing on the bike I had in my younger days not really being suitable for the local area I was riding (undulating to hilly, but bike was biased to big gears). So if I had picked a gear to spin in on the flat, it would have had to be at the bottom end of the range already, leaving me nowhere to go to if I was needing to climb all of a sudden. When I eventually got a cadence sensor many moons later, I found my average was about 65rpm! Now with a bike with a more suitable range of gears (and slightly older legs), that's crept up to low and then mid 70's over time, but I feel comfortable there, so have no reason to change.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (3 Sep 2020)

"strength"


----------



## Twilkes (3 Sep 2020)

T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> "strength"



I know what you mean, and probably agree, but what is it that means that a pro and me can both be riding flat out at 90rpm, but they will be going much faster than me because they are applying more force to the pedal and thus producing more power for the same rpm. What physical attribute is it that enables them to do that?


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (3 Sep 2020)

Twilkes said:


> I know what you mean, and probably agree, but what is it that means that a pro and me can both be riding flat out at 90rpm, but they will be going much faster than me because they are applying more force to the pedal and thus producing more power for the same rpm. What physical attribute is it that enables them to do that?


The actual force required to output 300w is around the equivalent of 12.5kg per leg. Which if you weigh more than 25kg and can climb stairs, you can already achieve.

What a pro can do is repeat that submaximal effort for hours through thousands of repetitions.


----------



## Twilkes (3 Sep 2020)

T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> The actual force required to output 300w is around the equivalent of 12.5kg per leg.
> 
> What a pro can do is repeat that submaximal effort for hours.



Ah okay, that tallies with something i read yesterday about strength being e.g. the maximum force you can output on a one-time basis, so one single deadlift, whereas like you say pedalling needs to be done over and over again, so it's more of a sustainable/endurance strength.

This page has some charts showing force for an average power/cadence, and 294w at 80rpm (the first chart in Ron George's answer) averages out at around 210 Newtons, which translates to almost 21.5kgf (kilograms force) but I don't know how that relates to the kg unit you used. If it's the same unit and a total for both legs then it's not far off what you posted: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-average-pedaling-force-applied-by-a-bicycle-rider

None of this is helping me go faster though.


----------



## matticus (3 Sep 2020)

It's a traditional irritation; describing riders as "strong" when they mean some melange of fast/fit/long-lasting.
I've learned to live with it!


----------



## matticus (3 Sep 2020)

MichaelW2 said:


> I am usually a spinner but* I injured my knee* on a long complex uphill junction when the lights turned against me. I had to accelerate uphill in too high a gear.
> I avoid pushing hard gears to protect that knee.


Fake news.


----------



## davidphilips (3 Sep 2020)

Have been doing high cadence drills for about 6 months 2 one hour drills a week, what i have found it was about 2 months before i could maintain a higher cadence and only now after about 6 months does a higher cadence seem natural to me.

Before i started my average cadence would be about 80 now its about 90, pros are slightly higher ftp and can recover faster plus thought a pain i was having at the outside of hip was maybe a worn joint but it has gone away. 

The down side is its hard work raising your natural cadence, it was and is for me and still is, still doing the drills and want to be able to spin faster my max is about 125 but my aim is to be able to spin for 10 minutes at 120.

Have read that there are cyclists that can raise there natural cadence in a few weeks with a few quick spin ups but for me its been and is really hard work?


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (3 Sep 2020)

Twilkes said:


> Ah okay, that tallies with something i read yesterday about strength being e.g. the maximum force you can output on a one-time basis, so one single deadlift, whereas like you say pedalling needs to be done over and over again, so it's more of a sustainable/endurance strength.
> 
> This page has some charts showing force for an average power/cadence, and 294w at 80rpm (the first chart in Ron George's answer) averages out at around 210 Newtons, which translates to almost 21.5kgf (kilograms force) but I don't know how that relates to the kg unit you used. If it's the same unit and a total for both legs then it's not far off what you posted: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-average-pedaling-force-applied-by-a-bicycle-rider
> 
> None of this is helping me go faster though.


That is indeed the definition of "strength"  Every weight you move in any motion is a percentage of your absolute maximum, but you move it for repetitions with the idea of adding some more weight on next week, or next month and ultimately raising your maximum.

Unlike cadence, you don't necessesarily train to increase it, but using higher cadences demands more of the CV system but reduces force applied.**

**This IMO is likely to be the point where poor bike setup correlates to knee/ITB/Hip issues


----------



## HLaB (3 Sep 2020)

I find I have a variable cadence. On a long group ride when I am getting pulled along it'll be down around 65rpm. When I am working it usually sits around 70-100rpm, depending upon the terrain etc I can spin upto 140-160rpm when required. 
A solo ride tends to see less variation. 
On the turbore my cadence seems to be around 95-105 when I am comfortable but I've seen extremes of 30 to 160rpm 🤯 The turbore higher cadence seems to have raised my solo cadences outside.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (3 Sep 2020)

Dogtrousers said:


> Without wishing to seem argumentative - why is that?
> 
> Surely you have to do the same amount of work, either pedalling slow or fast, so the CV system has to deliver the same fuel and oxygen, so has to work just as hard in both cases. Or am I wrong?
> 
> ...


Muscle contracting with higher frequency at lower intensity requires more musculature to stabilse itself, which in turn requires more glycogen and oxygen, so HR increases, efficiency decreases. Go the other way to a really low cadence(relative to you) on a climb like Sa Calobra is inherently going to be at or very near to being anaerobic, lactic doesn't clear, HR through the roof and the effort borderline if not unsustainable.

It's fair to say there's quite a large window in the middle, but perhaps at this point is also where gearing itself becomes a factor.


----------



## rogerzilla (3 Sep 2020)

I did this experiment 26 years ago on a turbo trainer, seeing what steady-state road speed I could get for a steady level 3 heart rate. 80rpm was definitely more efficient than 100rpm. I could squeeze out 300W for 20 minutes at that cadence (probably not these days!). At 100rpm, I was about 1 or 2 mph slower, which is a big power difference.

There are other considerations besides raw efficiency, though; 80rpm at that power output could be bad for the knees if I was capable of sustaining it all day, which I wasn't, or could hasten cramp.


----------



## ColinJ (3 Sep 2020)

Dogtrousers said:


> Surely you have to do the same amount of work, either pedalling slow or fast, so the CV system has to deliver the same fuel and oxygen, so has to work just as hard in both cases. Or am I wrong?


Try lying on your back pedalling an imaginary bicycle... It would probably take a lot more effort to wave your legs about at 120 rpm than at 40 rpm!


----------



## matticus (3 Sep 2020)

Dogtrousers said:


> ...
> Surely you have to do the same amount of work, either pedalling slow or fast, so the CV system has to deliver the same fuel and oxygen, so has to work just as hard in both cases. Or am I wrong?
> 
> Now, if your slower cadence was brutally tooth-grindingly slow then maybe I could understand it, due to different metabolic pathways - maybe anaerobic work being done. But if slow is say 60 and high is say 90 then I imagine the metabolism is similar in both cases.
> ...


I'm just a physicist who's read a bit around sports fizzyology, so no ex-spurt; but I'd agree with the above.

(the only extra energy required for higher cadence is the energy needed to actually spin your legs. VERY difficult to measure, sadly!)


----------



## Twilkes (3 Sep 2020)

Dogtrousers said:


> Without wishing to seem argumentative - why is that?
> 
> Surely you have to do the same amount of work, either pedalling slow or fast, so the CV system has to deliver the same fuel and oxygen, so has to work just as hard in both cases. Or am I wrong?
> 
> ...



There is something around the balance of slow and fast twitch muscle fibres, which is different for each rider, but I can never remember which way round they are or what they do; and also aerobic and anaerobic activity, including clearing blood lactate which builds up more quickly at lower cadences - I think the video on page 1 covers some of this.

From your example, if 60 is low, a high cadence would be 120+, so 90 somewhere in the middle. 90 doesn't feel particularly high to me.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (3 Sep 2020)

Twilkes said:


> There is something around the balance of slow and fast twitch muscle fibres, which is different for each rider, but I can never remember which way round they are or what they do; and also aerobic and anaerobic activity, including clearing blood lactate which builds up more quickly at lower cadences - I think the video on page 1 covers some of this.
> 
> From your example, if 60 is low, a high cadence would be 120+, so 90 somewhere in the middle. 90 doesn't feel particularly high to me.


Everyone will be different as to natural percentage of each.. Fast twitch being the fibres you would use to sprint in the final 200m of a TDF stage, slow twitch you would primarily use, getting there


----------



## Fab Foodie (3 Sep 2020)

matticus said:


> Shall I send you the receipt from my physio?
> Or you could just google for others' problems ...
> 
> Sure, they're way rarer than in running and can usually get sorted out, but you're in some sort of dream-world to deny them completely


What’s your problem?
I didn’t deny that it’s possible or in some casesit can happen.
But the ‘knee’ thing is trotted-out ad-nauseum every-time low cadence Is mentioned as if it’s some cast-iron fact, and I don’t believe that there’s any great evidence for it being the case.
If there is I’m happy to be wrong. But for now I think it’s mostly a bit of cycling myth for which a bit of anecdata does not make it true.


----------



## Fab Foodie (3 Sep 2020)

Dogtrousers said:


> Without wishing to seem argumentative - why is that?
> 
> Surely you have to do the same amount of work, either pedalling slow or fast, so the CV system has to deliver the same fuel and oxygen, so has to work just as hard in both cases. Or am I wrong?
> 
> ...


I am a Biochemist and I still don’t know!
My own experience is that high cadence riding gets-me very out of breath for no benefit compared to my slower natural grind.


----------



## matticus (3 Sep 2020)

Fab Foodie said:


> Based on my years of bike riding, clubs, *zillions of cyclists I have mett and ridden with, none to date have complained ever of bad knees as a result of cycling. *


That is a pretty plain statement.

Glad you've rowed back on it now :P


----------



## Fab Foodie (3 Sep 2020)

matticus said:


> That is a pretty plain statement.
> 
> Glad you've rowed back on it now :P


I haven’t. I had never come across one at the time of writing. Get a grip man.


----------



## Fab Foodie (3 Sep 2020)

Fab Foodie said:


> I haven’t. I had never come across one at the time of writing. Get a grip man.
> Find some evidence that it’s the case and prove me wrong.


----------



## matticus (3 Sep 2020)

You conflated "_low cadence creates knee troubles_" 
with
"_cycling has never given anyone knee troubles_".*

It's bygones now, but I'm happy to pin the blame on you for that one :-x


----------



## rogerzilla (3 Sep 2020)

Go and ride fixed...you have no control over cadence, except for the fixed gear ratio you choose (which should be about getting down a reasonably long hill safely). All you can change, when riding, is torque. It's surprising how tolerant your legs are. I've knocked around on a 90" gear getting to and from TTs, and it was just fine.


----------



## Fab Foodie (3 Sep 2020)

matticus said:


> You conflated "_low cadence creates knee troubles_"
> with
> "_cycling has never given anyone knee troubles_".*
> 
> It's bygones now, but I'm happy to pin the blame on you for that one :-x


My points still stands as of the time of writing. So please, if there is a wealth of evidence out there (Or even a general agreed acknowledgement) that cycling causes knee problems in general or that low cadence cycling in particular causes knee trouble, bring it forward for debate. Am happy to be educated.


----------



## matticus (3 Sep 2020)

Cycling AND low-cadence cycling have led to knee trouble! But not for all cyclists (or all low-cadence cyclists).

This won't stop me cycling though ...


----------



## ColinJ (3 Sep 2020)

matticus said:


> I'm just a physicist who's read a bit around sports fizzyology, so no ex-spurt; but I'd agree with the above.
> 
> (the only extra energy required for higher cadence is the energy needed to actually spin your legs. VERY difficult to measure, sadly!)


I agree with you. It would be interesting to get someone to do the experiment. I suggest taking the pawls out of the freehub so the chain could still be driven round, but the bike could remain stationary on a turbo trainer. (You could just remove the chain, but that would be one step further from normal riding.)


----------



## StuAff (3 Sep 2020)

It's a very high cadence myth, really…
A casual google does show some evidence, with expert citation, of knee pain as a result of low cadence…for example....
https://www.cyclingweekly.com/fitness/cycling-knee-pain-everything-you-need-to-know-329957
Not enough medical input?
Try https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5717478/

80-85 rpm seems to be generally considered the sweet spot for most, 60-75 too low for most. 90+ best left to the (serious) racers, as @Fab Foodie 's link suggests. Certainly don't follow the example of many casual riders (not all on BSOs) of small chainring/small sprocket (often, along with saddle height too low, underinflated tyres) spinning like a loon and barely moving…

I have seen riders hurting themselves through grinding at too high a gear. Kim C's lad joined her on one of the Whitstable runs and was quite insistently doing just that, he was certainly having problems later on though I can't remember if he got to breakfast or not. One of the many things I learned from the rides for food was the importance of spinning rather than grinding- my lower cadence was commented on a couple of times, and I did notice others seemed to have a rather easier pedalling style, so I tried to do the same. Gear down a sprocket or two, spin more…it worked. Getting the Trek helped, too…52/42/30 triple. Big ring doesn't get much use, and nor should it…


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (3 Sep 2020)

The takeaway from the CW article and the science is that a fit issue will exacerbate issues that manifest at the knee joint but is not necessarily the issue. If that manifest happens to align with a sudden increase of workload (overuse) or taking on some high or low cadence training 

In the same way that saddle sores or genital discomfort are most likely not caused by the saddle but by poor interaction with it, usually via excessive saddle height and instability of the feet.


----------



## Sharky (3 Sep 2020)

A lot of posts on this thread, so apologies if this has been mentioned already.

If you need to keep changing speed, as in bunch racing, a lower gear/high cadence will make it easier to accelerate. In a time trial or on a steady club run, the need to keep changing speed is not applicable and riding a higher gear/lower cadence is just as efficient.

I usually ride a 95" fixed for TT's and in previous years have compared the fixed with my similar spec'd gears bike. Over the season there was less than 20seconds difference on the same 10 mile TT course. On the geared bike, I would have dropped the gears on the hilly bits and increased cadence. But overall makes little difference.


----------



## CXRAndy (5 Sep 2020)

Lots of anecdotal evidence comments. Just because some can't adapt to using a higher cadence doesn't mean its not the most effective way to cycle, especially for long distance, consecutive multi day rides/ or racing.


Power is developed from torque (force applied to pedals and speed(cadence)

Using a high cadence is useful as some have mentioned, in pace changes where rapid acceleration is needed. Its much easier physically to increase a light pressure cadence by 10rpm than stomp on the pedals with a low cadence. And acceleration will be faster. Racing is an example.

Long distance riding, it has benefits too, you dont deplete the glycogen in your muscles so quickly by having a light pressure high cadence pedal action. This allows a higher portion of energy to be taken from fat reserves, reducing calories by mouth. Cycle further for less input. 


Professional riders produce more power than us mere mortal cyclists, because they're stronger to be able to push a harder gear, still at higher cadences. So they benefit from what I said above.

The downside, well its not a downside, is its hard on the cardiovascular system, higher heart rate/breathing. It can feel like your lungs are near bursting, especially as you near threshold powers. But its only a case of training to adapt to the sensation.

The upside is cardiovascular vascular recovery is very quick indeed, as in a matter of minutes once you stop. Unlike muscles, where once depleted of glycogen take many hours of rest and nutrition to restore full potential.


I agree using a lower cadence can produce a bit more power, but not sustainable over many hours(suited to shorter rides). Lower cadences feel more comfortable as it lowers the stress on lungs, but if you try and try cycle at threshold with lower cadence, you are burning glycogen rapidly whilst running near maximum heart rate. 

Just try riding up a steep hill with a low cadence at threshold power, do it again and again. I bet you will stop more quickly(legs burning from the effort) than trying the same with a higher cadence, that transfers more effort to the cardiovascular system.


----------



## CXRAndy (5 Sep 2020)

Dogtrousers said:


> I do tend to get slower as I get tired. So towards the end of a long ride I may not slow down all that much but I do tend to push a higher gear. No idea why..



That's normal, as fatigue rises. Your body naturally adjusts to keep going.


Ive done exactly the same, but I find if I spend more time spinning in the earlier part of a long ride, I have something left in the legs to push the pace, or in club rides where the youngsters push the homeward pace higher, where lots of strength is required to stay (try, usually failing) with them.


----------



## fossyant (6 Sep 2020)

First road ride today in a long time - nice quiet roads in North Wales. Found I was spinning along at 90 rpm or above (unless climbing) - not had cadence for any rides other than Zwift, where that's 70-100rpm. It's probably down to MTB-ing I'm running a bit higher cadence than I thought - 100 rpm was ideal today, at 24-25 mph.


----------



## Venod (13 Sep 2020)

Have you seen the cadence Roglic uses, very similar to Froome, seems like high cadence suites some top riders, Jan Ulrich was the last top rider I remember with a notable low cadence.


----------



## davidphilips (14 Sep 2020)

Venod said:


> Have you seen the cadence Roglic uses, very similar to Froome, seems like high cadence suites some top riders, Jan Ulrich was the last top rider I remember with a notable low cadence.


Far as i know if you actually put a cadence watch on it, he rode at like 90 rpm. It just seemed slow relative to Lance Armstrong?


----------



## johnblack (16 Sep 2020)

87 average, but 95+ climbing, I rely on my cardio rather than leg strength on anything other than short steep stuff, my knees say thank you.


----------



## PK99 (17 Sep 2020)

Venod said:


> Have you seen the cadence Roglic uses, very similar to Froome, seems like high cadence suites some top riders, Jan Ulrich was the last top rider I remember with a notable low cadence.



This post prompted me to look at pics of these 3 riders.

Ulrich was well muscled, quite heavily built for a top cyclist

Froome, in particular, is almost skeletal with huge lung capacity, minimal body fat, and muscles like pieces of string. Roglic is also skinny

@CXRAndy 's post suggests they are matching cadence style to physiology


----------



## cyberknight (17 Sep 2020)

Last club ride i looked at my cadence at the end just out of interest , i didnt consciously keep an eye on it more than usual.
Average for the ride 80 , max of 109 rpm .
I am heavy legged rider and do find i tend to push bigger gears than some of the lightweight riders.


----------



## Sharky (17 Sep 2020)

I ride 50x14 fixed for time trials and although I don't have a cadence sensor, by using the "BikeCalc" website, I get the following stats.
My time gives me a 21mph ride, which equates to a 75 rpm average.
At the slowest point, going over the bridge, my speed dropped to 15mph or less, which equates to 54 rpm and on the fast return leg, I just topped 30mph in places, giving a max 107 rpm.


----------



## itboffin (17 Sep 2020)

cyberknight said:


> Last club ride i looked at my cadence at the end just out of interest , i didnt consciously keep an eye on it more than usual.
> Average for the ride 80 , max of 109 rpm .
> I am heavy legged rider and do find i tend to push bigger gears than some of the lightweight riders.



I'm the same 80s avg and grind out hills in a big gear at low cadence so long as the gradient stays below 8% then I have to spin, I used to always ride hills out of the saddle now always seated apart from Wales a few weeks ago when we went 25-30+% that was awful in fact it was the first time I considered stepping off


----------



## itboffin (17 Sep 2020)

I’ve tried to spin 95+ but I can’t it quickly burns and i fade whereas I can push a lower cadence at the same speed for hours, I see no reason to change


----------



## davidphilips (18 Sep 2020)

itboffin said:


> I’ve tried to spin 95+ but I can’t it quickly burns and i fade whereas I can push a lower cadence at the same speed for hours, I see no reason to change


Thats where i was about 6 or 7 months ago, nothing wrong with it but in my case anyway what i found i could go on club runs and even do quite well on long fast runs at a steady pace but was getting dropped on some of the faster club runs when the pace would keep changing?
Know theres lot of imfo on the net and some say they could change there cadence in a few weeks but for me its been an ongoing process but well worth the time i have and still am putting into it.


----------



## Daninplymouth (18 Sep 2020)

I’ve just started using a cadence sensor, my rides seem to be around 85rpm average. Not sure if it’s because I find it fairly hilly around here so I am up and down the gears a lot rather than then just picking a tough gear and grinding away. On hills I tend to spin up at 90-100 and iv found if I drop below 80 it feels more of a slog which is surprising as I actually have decent leg strength


----------



## Fab Foodie (18 Sep 2020)

PK99 said:


> @CXRAndy 's post suggests they are matching cadence style to physiology


Which is pretty much my original point (and belief) that people find their best cadence tends to be that which is most natural for them, and by definition suits their physiology....


----------



## Fab Foodie (18 Sep 2020)

Dogtrousers said:


> This is where I start to struggle. I hesitate to weigh in here because I'm not a biochemist and these things can get a bit heated. But I'll try anyway. I'm not trying to pick an argument, but I'm not convinced.
> 
> Glycogen (and other carbohydrates) is what powers muscles. Fat doesn't do this. You can't burn fat and not glycogen/other CH. You might convert the fat to glycogen/other CH indirectly but you cannot power muscles with fat _instead of_ glycogen (or other CH). Fat is like money in your wallet. You can convert it to petrol, but you can't burn it directly in the engine.
> 
> ...


From a lapsed Biochemist....the basics (as I learned them a very long time ago)!

Yes glycogen is the primary CHO fuel of muscles. Glucose in the blood gets converted to glycogen before it can be burnt, Glucose is not burnt directly.
There is NO pathway to convert fat to glycogen or glucose in the body.
Yes your muscles can burn fat directly, but it is inefficient compared to glycogen burning.
Unless the world has changed you burn a percentage of glycogen even when fat burning.
Glycogen is stored in muscles and the liver.
When you 'bonk' you basically deplete your glycogen to a very low level, that doesn't stop you moving, but as we all know it's hard to maintain any pace.
The Brain (one of the largest energy consumers in the human body), uses glycogen as its primary source of fuel and cannot run directly on fat, the body will try to protect the brains fuel supply as long as possible, it's no surprise that when you bonk you also get a bit muzzy headed.
Fat can be converted to 'Ketone bodies' which can be used by the brain and muscles, again this is inefficient compared to glycogen operation (or the expected energy delivered if it was possible to burn fat) - this is the basis behind Ketonic diets, that the body adapts to 'burning fat' indirectly via the Ketone route in a near complete state of constant glucose depletion.
Muscle (Protein) can also be broken down and used as the energy supply of last resort.

I expect these days it's far more complicated than that!


----------



## Fab Foodie (18 Sep 2020)

Dogtrousers said:


> I've edited, but not corrected, my post above. I've left it wrong for the general amusement of all.
> 
> (But my eventual conclusion still stands. *I'm still unconvinced by biochemical arguments for high cadence*)


Yes me too, but the biochemistry is part of one's general physiology/performance...none of it moves without biochemistry!


----------



## davidphilips (18 Sep 2020)

Interesting read on cadence, the sentence that really summed it up was (Whatever your case may be, there just aren’t too many riders who can’t benefit from a quicker, more relaxed (i.e. less forceful) cadence). 
https://www.trainerroad.com/blog/does-ftp-change-with-cadence/


----------



## CXRAndy (19 Sep 2020)

My own experiences has been, I've tried lower cadences and higher cadences over multi day rides. Ive also had a season where I altered my diet to ween off fast carbs. 

I found the combination of high cadence and eating protein and fats allowed me to ride without feeling I was ever going to bonk or lose performance. After 5+ hr rides I still had a fair bit of zip in the legs. 

I trained only upto 3.5 hours at cadences of 95-100rpm on a turbo using Trainer Road.


----------



## PaulSB (19 Sep 2020)

cyberknight said:


> Last club ride i looked at my cadence at the end just out of interest , i didnt consciously keep an eye on it more than usual.
> Average for the ride 80 , max of 109 rpm .
> I am heavy legged rider and do find i tend to push bigger gears than some of the lightweight riders.



Interesting comments here. I've always pushed a big gear but have recently changed this. About a year ago I met a friend of a friend on a ride. This guy was clearly very experienced and very good.

In January my friend said the guy was asking after me and said "You know, that chap who pushes ridiculously big gears." or words to this effect. I wasn't upset by this but it made me think. He remembered me, not my name but the gears I push. From what I'd seen of his riding his opinion was one to respect and consider.

I've always found spinning very uncomfortable. When lockdown hit I spent a lot of time riding alone and "trained" my legs to spin for a 30-40 mile ride. It's improved my riding significantly and I now spin all the time. What I now realise is I pushed big gears in the mistaken belief it helped me keep with the group. It did but spinning would have been better.

When club friends remark on the change I tell my little story. I get two responses; "we've been telling you this for years" or "Yes, you're known for pushing bug gears."

I now realise I was always to concerned to stick with the group to concentrate on trying to spin.

Anyway just thought this might be a useful experience to pass on.


----------



## Nebulous (24 Oct 2020)

This is a month old, but I’ve just found it. 

I have a cadence session I do on Zwift. 5 mins warm up, then 7 x 10min blocks, all at 170 watts (70% of ftp) then cool down. 

Sometimes I start at a cadence of 60, sometimes at 70. I go up 10 every 10 minutes, then back down again. So 70, 80, 90, 100, 90, 80, 70. Usually on a turbo session at steady watts I’ll have a degree of cardiac drift with my heart-rate rising slightly throughout the session. On my cadence drills workout it goes up until I reach 100, but then comes down slightly as I come back down. That suggests to me that I’m using less effort / energy at lower cadences. 

Strangely non of the round tens, except possibly 90 feel natural. 76 feels much more comfortable, as does 84, than 70 or 80. I generally have to watch the cadence record and adjust regularly where I could hold 76 much more readily by feel.


----------



## Pikey (24 Oct 2020)

I’ll add a bit more complexity to the biochemical component. The motor units, essentially groups of myocytes, like any other cell use ATP as their energy source for movement or any other process. They ‘burn’ that essentially, not glucose, fat or glycogen.
However the body makes atp from these longer chain molecules through phosphorylation.
I think there would probably be a lot more factors in play as to which pathway the body chooses to use as its ultimate long chain source for phosphorylation other than cadence. Like body composition, glycogen load in the muscles, blood glucose levels or amount of carbohydrate in the gut at that point.
Instantaneous And therefore respiratory load I.e. cadence on the muscles may play a part, but I don’t think it’s as simple as higher cadence burns fat or vice versa...


----------



## davidphilips (24 Oct 2020)

Far as i know cadence training improves your cadence and low heart rate training improves quite a few things including the ability to use fat as a fuel source, both cadence and low heart rate training are part of base training and hence the old saying you need to cycle slow to cycle really fast?


----------



## CXRAndy (27 Oct 2020)

Nebulous said:


> Usually on a turbo session at steady watts I’ll have a degree of cardiac drift with my heart-rate rising slightly throughout the session. On my cadence drills workout it goes up until I reach 100, but then comes down slightly as I come back down. That suggests to me that I’m using less effort / energy at lower cadences.



Heart rate drift is to be expected a little, but I found once I could do 2 hours non stop high cadence 95+ rpm and my heart tracked the cadence drills with pretty constant power, I was cardio fit.

If it keeps climbing, then more cardio workout is required.

Raised HR with higher cadence is just transfering more load to your cardiovascular system than legs. 

My HR could be 10-15 bpm lower with a low cadence 50-60 rpm but its no easier. It just burns your legs, which is fine for training, but sustained over a long day of riding could ruin your next days ride out.


----------



## ianrauk (29 Oct 2020)

So it's been 6 weeks since I fitted a cadence meter to my commute bike.
My average is running at 86, with lows of 80+, highs in the mid 90's.


----------

