![]() |
View
New Forum Topics Today's Forum Topics Set as homepage |
|
|||||||
Welcome to CyclingForums.com You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread. By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#16 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 198
|
Quote:
In training, if I am worn-out after 2x30' of SST, unable to do a 3rd rep @ my normal cadence of 90-92 rpm, I can often bang off another 30' at 85 rpm, or sometimes even as low as 70 rpm. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 59
|
Curious. My natural cadence seems to be around 110 - 115. When I don't look at the cadence and just ride and then after a while glance at the computer, it's always in that range. I have to think and concentrate to keep it at any other rate.
I'm curious why would anyone want to ride at a certain cadence (esp. if it is higher than what feels natural to them)? Why is everyone taught to ride like that over there? |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Draper, Utah
Posts: 523
|
I too will shift up towards the end of a long SST session. Perhaps the calcium ions are less likely to be released from the sarcoplasmic recticulum at lower cadence thereby negating any efficiency gains from higher cadence?
![]()
__________________
blog Last edited by Piotr : 20-02.-2008 at 07:53 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Huntsville, AL, USA
Posts: 727
|
Quote:
Exactly what I was just thinking today on my second 233 W interval.....damn calcium ions getting hung up again in the old recticulum ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 528
|
Quote:
Exactly, Steve, that's the issue in a nutshell. So far we've had proponents of the three possible options: gear up with a lowered cadence, gear down with a higher cadence, or stay in the same gear and lower the cadence. (Well, there is a fourth option: quit.) One poster equated dropping down a gear with "quitting." I know it feels that way because we never want to do it, but you have to do what is required to survive. I don't have a powermeter on my bike but I've done a lot of experimenting during interval training, and it seems to me that when I've enjoyed as much of a certain gear as I can stand, no matter what I do next is going to result in a decrease in speed; but gearing up seems to result in a greater loss of speed than gearing down. But I can't prove it because these sort of "experiments" are just too uncontrolled. But when I read that quote in Krabbe's book, I started to wonder if I was missing the boat. I still am. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,019
|
Quote:
Probably has a lot to do with the style of racing. High cadence makes it easier to jump across small gaps, deal the micro-accelerations and decelerations that occur in a fast-moving pack, and most importantly, sprint out of corners after slowing way down going into them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Draper, Utah
Posts: 523
|
Quote:
![]() ![]() Sooner or later I gots to use that line. ![]()
__________________
blog |
|
|
|
|