Cadence, Speed and hill climbing.

[ayceejay]

"Working on strength only will not cut it."

 

[black'n'yellow]

yep, saw that - I think we're in agreement...

 

[oldfatfool]

Can't be arsed reading all the crap, but in answer to the OP it is the watts (power) you can sustain at a given cadence. No use being able to spin at 110 rpm if you can only hold 200 watts at that cadence for any given period of time, ie you hit a hill and stall.

So we have

The Tractor, low cadence, massive power,The grinder

The V8 muscle car ~ high power high cadence ~ The good all rounder

The Moped ~ High cadence, low power ~ You

Work on hill repeats and muscle tone to increase your power and then the higher cadence on the hills will come.

 

[black'n'yellow]

Can't be arsed reading all the crap, but in answer to the OP it is the watts (power) you can sustain at a given cadence. No use being able to spin at 110 rpm if you can only hold 200 watts at that cadence for any given period of time, ie you hit a hill and stall.

So we have

The Tractor, low cadence, massive power,The grinder

The V8 muscle car ~ high power high cadence ~ The good all rounder

The Moped ~ High cadence, low power ~ You

Work on hill repeats and muscle tone to increase your power and then the higher cadence on the hills will come.

Hang on - I thought we'd moved on from the point that cadence is largely irrelevant..?

 

[User6179]

Can't be arsed reading all the crap, but in answer to the OP it is the watts (power) you can sustain at a given cadence. No use being able to spin at 110 rpm if you can only hold 200 watts at that cadence for any given period of time, ie you hit a hill and stall.

So we have

The Tractor, low cadence, massive power,The grinder

The V8 muscle car ~ high power high cadence ~ The good all rounder

The Moped ~ High cadence, low power ~ You

Work on hill repeats and muscle tone to increase your power and then the higher cadence on the hills will come.

You missed out the Transit van - good on the the flat but poor power to weight ratio= Crap at hills .

 

[marzjennings]

No! Endurance riding is about sustaining a given power output over a given distance. Endurance riding has NOTHING to do with leg strength. Leg strength is not a limiter to endurance riding. Show me some evidence to the contrary.

Ohhhh - once again, you've not grasped it. To push harder, you need to be able to tolerate a higher effort. This does NOT mean 'stronger' legs (incidentally, did you actually look up the dictionary definitions of 'strength' and 'power'? It doesn't sound like you did)- it means training your body to produce more sustainable power. Strength is not a limiter. Sustainable power is.

But some level of leg strength is required to complete an endurance ride. You've (or the data you've sourced) set the bar, the required leg strength, at the ability to climb a set of stairs. I do not argue that if one is able to climb a set of stairs one could also condition you legs to maintain that 'power' for the duration of an endurance event. the point is, what if you want to improve on the ride time for endurance event.

Say a person expends 150w to climb a 3m set of stairs in about 10 seconds. And they develop their level of fitness to continually knock out 150w for 100miles, which would give them about 6 hour run time(with no more leg strength, as you point out). Not bad, they have produced a sustaining power output for a long, enduring ride. Say now they want to do the same distance but quicker. They need more power (if body mass and aero position are already optimum). Maybe they want to ride 100 miles in 5 hours, which could mean they need to produce 240w continuously. So they train and the achieve their goal, 100miles in 5 hours. Awesome.

After all that training, guess what, their legs will be stronger, bigger maybe, more toned for sure. They'll be climbing those stairs 2 at at time in half the time they used to. Stronger legs producing more power to travel faster over an long, endurance, ride. Leg strength will now be greater than required to climb a set of stairs.

Your position that 'stair climbing' strength is sufficient to complete an endurance ride is correct, unless you also include a time objective, i.e. go faster up a climb. At that point I feel leg strength is key to producing the additional power required.

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

Or a better CV system which is where the power is generated.

 

[black'n'yellow]

But some level of leg strength is required to complete an endurance ride.

Well, obviously. I don't think anyone has ever disputed that. If you had no strength in your legs, you would not be able to walk, run, ride a bike, or stand-up without assistance.

You've (or the data you've sourced) set the bar, the required leg strength, at the ability to climb a set of stairs. I do not argue that if one is able to climb a set of stairs one could also condition you legs to maintain that 'power' for the duration of an endurance event. the point is, what if you want to improve on the ride time for endurance event.

Sounds like you're beginning to understand at last (which is certainly a step forward from you previously calling it 'BS'). I'm going to be mixing my metaphors here, so bear with me. Let's assume that the amount of strength you need to climb each stair is 'nominal' and nothing like a maximal effort - because if it was, you would need time to recover from it before attempting the next stair. If you want to improve on your 'ride time', then you need to work on increasing the amount of effort you put through each leg from 'nominal' towards the next level which we can hopefully agree to call 'nominal +1'. Given that increase, we then need to increase our ability to maintain that 'nominal +1' effort for the duration of the effort. In both cases, you are not using anything like your maximal strength, which we have already agreed is more than is needed to climb stairs. Perhaps if you were walking upstairs carrying another heavy person on your back, you might be using a level of effort to climb each stair which may be closer to your maximal leg strength - but that's another issue.

Stronger legs producing more power to travel faster over an long, endurance, ride. Leg strength will now be greater than required to climb a set of stairs.

No, not 'stronger legs' - but a highly-trained muscle set and cardio-vascular system which is better able to respond to the demands you are placing on it. This is where you are still going wrong - If you tried to squat 180lbs (or whatever) before the improvement in your fitness, then I seriously doubt if your 'leg strength' will have changed much to the point where you would be able to squat any more afterwards. Whichever way you look at it, the important point to consider is that squatting 180lbs (or insert weight of your choice, as I know sod all about lifting/pressing) will absolutely not give you the cardiovascular improvements or improvements in sustainable power that I was talking about earlier.

Your position that 'stair climbing' strength is sufficient to complete an endurance ride is correct, unless you also include a time objective, i.e. go faster up a climb. At that point I feel leg strength is key to producing the additional power required.

See above comments on 'nominal+1'. Higher sustainable power will give you the time improvements - not more strength.

 

[marzjennings]

...wrote more stuff...

I've been trying to think why I consider that the claim that 'stair climbing' ability provides all the strength required for cycling as a bogus suggestion. The suggestion is that average power/strength requirements per stair step versus per pedal stroke are greater. And from what I've read this is true, especially considering endurance events. The problem is cycling peak/spike power/strength requirements can far exceed the power/strength requirements to climb a single step. Exceeding even the maximal leg strength of our stair climber.

For me the power and strength range to be a proficient cyclist exceeds (upper and lower limits) those of the stair climber and therefore the cyclist must develop stronger legs than stair climbing can develop alone.

Anecdotally I see this happening in two ways. One, as my daughter develops as I cyclist I can see how she builds stronger legs to overcome the small inclines on our rides. Yes there is some technique development and conditioning also going on, but in her lowest gear there were times she couldn't even turn the pedals. Now she can climb with no problem other than being out of breath at the top.

And two, almost every new cyclist I know has found stairs to be easier after they have begun cycling. Not just in being less out of breath after a flight of stairs due to improved fitness, but also at each step. Showing for me that their cycling has developed additional leg strength above their minimum required to climb each step. Though admittingly probably within their original stair climbing maximal strength.

 

[black'n'yellow]

I've been trying to think why I consider that the claim that 'stair climbing' ability provides all the strength required for cycling as a bogus suggestion. The suggestion is that average power/strength requirements per stair step versus per pedal stroke are greater. And from what I've read this is true, especially considering endurance events. The problem is cycling peak/spike power/strength requirements can far exceed the power/strength requirements to climb a single step. Exceeding even the maximal leg strength of our stair climber.

Of course they can - and they often do. But is the requirement likely to exceed your maximal strength?? NO. Pretty much the only time when you will ever exert anything like a maximal force on the pedals is from a standing start in a high gear, like on the track. Once the bike is underway, it is practically impossible to exert a maximal force on the pedals anyway.

Walk up some stairs while carrying an ever-increasing series of weights on your back. Of course the effort gets harder, but you will not have exceeded your maximal strength until your legs cannot physically lift your bodyweight onto the next stair up. The strength required to do that is far in excess of anything you will ever put through the pedals, except perhaps for the situation I described earlier - and even then only for a split second.

For me the power and strength range to be a proficient cyclist exceeds (upper and lower limits) those of the stair climber and therefore the cyclist must develop stronger legs than stair climbing can develop alone.

I don't know why your strength requirement would be any different to any other cyclist on the planet. I can only assume your understanding of the issues is at fault.

Anecdotally I see this happening in two ways. One, as my daughter develops as I cyclist I can see how she builds stronger legs to overcome the small inclines on our rides. Yes there is some technique development and conditioning also going on, but in her lowest gear there were times she couldn't even turn the pedals. Now she can climb with no problem other than being out of breath at the top.

You don't say how old your daughter is, but I suspect this 'phenomenon' has more to do with physics that physiology. Or she may just be getting fitter.

And two, almost every new cyclist I know has found stairs to be easier after they have begun cycling. Not just in being less out of breath after a flight of stairs due to improved fitness, but also at each step. Showing for me that their cycling has developed additional leg strength above their minimum required to climb each step. Though admittingly probably within their original stair climbing maximal strength.

Nope - you're still grasping at this 'strength' thing. Unless the maximal strength has increased (which you agree it probably hasn't), then those are nothing more than efficiency gains - which are entirely consistent with the usual types of improvement seen in 'new' cyclists.

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

And two, almost every new cyclist I know has found stairs to be easier after they have begun cycling. Not just in being less out of breath after a flight of stairs due to improved fitness, but also at each step. Showing for me that their cycling has developed additional leg strength above their minimum required to climb each step. Though admittingly probably within their original stair climbing maximal strength.

If you find stairs easy after cycling you didn't work hard enough on the bike beforehand.

 

[marzjennings]

Of course they can - and they often do. But is the requirement likely to exceed your maximal strength?? NO. Pretty much the only time when you will ever exert anything like a maximal force on the pedals is from a standing start in a high gear, like on the track. Once the bike is underway, it is practically impossible to exert a maximal force on the pedals anyway.
.

No, see this is where I disagree, the untrained cyclist, whose only demonstrated level of fitness/strength/power is that they can climb a set of stairs, will have attempt to exceed their current maximal strength at some point as they develop as a cyclist.

This is where I think Stern get's it wrong, I believe he over estimates the potential maximal strength the untrained stair climber is capable of. Why would the body develop a lot more strength than it requires to climb stairs if climbing stairs is the hardest thing a body ever does.

And as to practically impossible to exert maximal force when underway, you've obviously never ridden a mountain bike or a single speed up a mountain where it's possible to exert to failure in a single pedal stroke.

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

No, see this is where I disagree, the untrained cyclist, whose only demonstrated level of fitness/strength/power is that they can climb a set of stairs, will have attempt to exceed their current maximal strength at some point as they develop as a cyclist.

The changes are cardiovascular not strength

And as to practically impossible to exert maximal force when underway, you've obviously never ridden a mountain bike or a single speed up a mountain where it's possible to exert to failure in a single pedal stroke.

Failure of your cardiovascular system not lack of strength.

How many times does this need to be said?

 

[black'n'yellow]

No, see this is where I disagree, the untrained cyclist, whose only demonstrated level of fitness/strength/power is that they can climb a set of stairs, will have attempt to exceed their current maximal strength at some point as they develop as a cyclist.

I notice you are now moving into the realms of pure speculation, but anyway it's unlikely. They will probably have tried to exceed their VO2 max on numerous occasions though. The two are not the same thing.

This is where I think Stern get's it wrong, I believe he over estimates the potential maximal strength the untrained stair climber is capable of. Why would the body develop a lot more strength than it requires to climb stairs if climbing stairs is the hardest thing a body ever does.

Nobody said that climbing stairs is the hardest thing you will ever do The 'stairs analogy' is just a good, practical, everyday example to illustrate strength that most people (most people apart from you, that is) seem to understand...

And as to practically impossible to exert maximal force when underway, you've obviously never ridden a mountain bike or a single speed up a mountain where it's possible to exert to failure in a single pedal stroke.

In which case you have the wrong gearing for the prevailing terrain, or the terrain is (to all intents and purposes) unrideable. Once again, you are confusing physics with physiology. Please give up.

 

[marzjennings]

The changes are cardiovascular not strength

Failure of your cardiovascular system not lack of strength.

How many times does this need to be said?

Obviously a lot more, because so far I haven't been convinced there is not wall all cyclists will experience. Not a wall where an effort has been repeated a couple of times and that last pedal stroke was too much. Agreed that's fatigue.
A wall were a rider is unable to turn a pedal even once, whether because they've just notched it up a gear, just started a climb, turn a corner on switch back or even notched up the resistance on a gym bike.
They are unable to push the pedal down at all. They are standing on the pedal, pulling against the bars down through the pedal and the bike won't move. BMX start, track sprint, heavy commuter bike on an uphill start at traffic lights. All requiring massive strength to just push the pedal once.
There must be some point at which more strength is required, muscle mass must be developed, otherwise we'd all look like marathon runners rather than cyclists.