Cadence/Speed/Hr Q

[SadieKate]

http://www.roadbikerider.com/255e.htm

Excerpt: HIGH-CADENCE PEDALING

Pedaling cadence is individual. Don't copy high-cadence riders like Lance Armstrong until you determine if that's your most efficient style.

As a result of Lance's success with fast pedaling, many recreational riders and racers have spent inordinate amounts of training time trying to spin faster. The thinking goes: If Lance does it, I should do it, too.

But not so fast. Like most cycling techniques, rapid pedaling is appropriate for some riders but not for all riders. Just because it works for Lance doesn't mean it will work for you.

For perspective on this issue, I talked with Allen Lim, the doctoral graduate from the University of Colorado who has been studying power output in cyclists (see chapter 3). As a result of his studies, he has formulated what might be termed Lim's Law:

"A fast spin isn't a technique for producing power. It's a result of having power."

In other words, Lance doesn't spin fast in order to increase his wattage at a given heart rate. Instead, he spins fast because he has so much power that he can afford to ride at a faster cadence, thus sparing his leg muscles and transferring the strain to his cardiovascular system. It's an important distinction.

The heart muscle doesn't fatigue like leg muscles do. Spinning fast on early climbs in a long race means that Lance has plenty of leg power left when it's needed near the end.

So, Lance pedals fast because he has more power than his competitors. To restate Lim's Law, fast pedaling isn't a training technique to help you gain power, it's a byproduct of being powerful.

Fine. So how do you determine what cadence is best for you? Take the test described below in Try This on Your Next Ride.

7. Try This on Your Next Ride o^o o^o o^o o^o o^o o^o

Take Testa's Test to find your best climbing style and cadence.

Max Testa, M.D., is a former pro team physician who now directs a sports medicine clinic in Davis, California, owned by Eric Heiden of speedskating and cycling fame.

According to Testa, the key to discovering your most-efficient cadence is to pay attention to what happens
when you're about to blow on a climb.

"What fails when you're trying to keep up on a climb?" he asks. "Do you shift to a lower gear and spin fast because if you go to a bigger gear and grind your legs die? In that case, you need strength. But if, when you use a smaller gear and spin, your breathing goes out of control, you need more cardiovascular conditioning."

Try Testa's Test when you're doing hill repeats:

---On the second or third time up the climb, when you're warmed up but not yet tired, stay in the saddle and push as hard as possible. Near the top, at the point when you begin to lose power and your pedal stroke gets ragged, shift to a harder gear and try to maintain the same speed. Pay attention to what happens.

---Recover, then do the climb again. This time when the going gets tough, shift to an easier gear and try to spin. Compare your sensations and your speed.

Done on several days with rest between sessions, this experiment should tell you whether you're more efficient as a spinner or a grinder. It should also reveal if you need to work on leg strength and power or cardiovascular conditioning in order to become a better climber.

[SadieKate]

An article by velogirl on estimating heart rate zones.

http://www.velogirls.com/resources/p...ions/heart.htm

[crazycanuck]

Thank you so much for the info ladies.

Again, I apologize for my TE search skills...

C

[SadieKate]

Oh no. I searched on the world wide web. I just knew where to look for credible info.

I'm a big fan of the newsletter from the guys at roadbikerider.com. Its free, funny and informative. What more can you ask for?

[doc]

An article by velogirl on estimating heart rate zones.

http://www.velogirls.com/resources/p...ions/heart.htm

CrazyC

The heart rate calculation of 220 - age is complete and total nonsense. It is not based on any science and should be ignored. (It is loosely based on the fact that newborns have a normal heart rate up to 220 - which is true. To which there is nothing to say but "so what". This has abolutely nothing to do with the maximal exercise heart rates of adults.)

You can find lots of discussion here about testing for your own max heart rate with maximal effort.

[SadieKate]

The heart rate calculation of 220 - age is complete and total nonsense. It is not based on any science and should be ignored. (It is loosely based on the fact that newborns have a normal heart rate up to 220 - which is true. To which there is nothing to say but "so what". This has abolutely nothing to do with the maximal exercise heart rates of adults.)

You can find lots of discussion here about testing for your own max heart rate with maximal effort.

Go through your Polar book. The software should set up the computer with the max HR based on your age and gender but that is just an estimate. Each one of us has a different max HR. To get accurate you need to do a field test. I think roadbikerider.com had one. Sally Edwards has them. Every coach who works with an HRM has one.

Sheesh, doc, thanks for making it look I said the 220 thing was a rule set in stone.

[doc]

Sheesh, doc, thanks for making it look I said the 220 thing was a rule set in stone.

SadieKate - Please do not take that at all personally. It is one of my pet peeves (i.e. it's my issue not yours). The 220 - age thing is offered up like law all over the place and I try to debunk it whenever I can. Used to be one could find the 220-age poster in every gym and in every aerobics class room etc.

As for perceived exertion, now that has been studied. Research has shown that when the exerciser can no longer speak in sentences, that is, he/she has to take a breath every few words, they have passed their anaerobic threshold.

What others have said about HR varying with altitude, a night's sleep, dehydration etc is also true. But perceived exertion will be still be "correct" despite those individual and day to day changes.