# High cadence, low power, high heartrate?



## mgurtzweiler (Jul 11, 2010)

My speed skills have been identified as a weak point (along with endurance like most new racers) and it was suggested that I try riding once or twice a week at 110-120 RPM while keeping my power around my endurance point to help develop my neuromuscular systems and smooth out my peddle stroke. 

Well on my commute today I gave it a shot and my heart rate was jacked. At my self selected cadence my endurance HR is around 140. With the high cadence drills it was in the 170s (and I worked to keep the cadence high for up to 10 minutes at a time. Damn stoplights). I double checked the workouts in WKO and I was indeed right around endurance normalized power.

Getting to the point. Is this type of workout more endurance (by power) or high tempo / threshold (by heart rate). 

Thanks for the insight.


----------



## scotty_b (Feb 16, 2011)

Personally I think people get too hung up about cadence. It is probably fair to say that a higher cadence is generally better, but it is not suited to everyone. If you have skinny legs with relatively low mass and power then a high cadence will be good, but if your legs are 'thick set' a lower cadence will be more suitable (otherwise you're spending a lot of effort just overcoming the inertia in your legs). Ultimately you have to feel comforatble.

There are a lot of high profile riders in the the pro peleton who ride with a low cadence.

In terms of neuromuscular systems to smooth out stoke, this can be achieved on a turbo trainer using long periods on just one leg at a time.


----------



## ZoSoSwiM (Mar 7, 2008)

If your typical self selected cadence is lets say 90 then your legs have grown accustom to that frequency. When you up your cadence you offset the load from muscular to cardiovascular. So.. your heart rate goes up and the direct load on your legs goes down for the same output power.
Inversly is also true.. lower your cadence and the load on cardio drops and muscular load increases. 

You can train yourself to be more comfortable at both ends of the spectrum but it takes time.

For instance.. I typically am comfortable around 95-100rpm. When I bog down on a hill and my cadence drops to the 70's I really suffer. My legs start to hurt at lower wattages and my heart rate goes up. When I spin myself out at over 120rpm My heart rate raises a little but not as much as when I grind the gears. I've tested this on the trainer by keeping my wattage in the middle of Z3 and changing gears to alter my cadence. My heart rate curve is cup shaped.. higher at low cadence, lower at my self selected cadence, and higher again over my comfort zone. 

So.. your body is just responding to how you ride pretty much.


----------



## SlowMover (Jun 6, 2010)

I was a spinner in the 70's, a masher in the 80's, even more of a masher in the 90's when the big crank/ring revolution worked it's way into the male ego and finally back to pretty much a spinner.

It takes time, but I believe most anyone can adapt to one or the other. I find my results are much better, not a little, but much better with a higher cadence. If you are road racing I believe you will find the higher cadence a big help in dealing with accelerations. Unless you have sick wattage jumps at your fingertips a higher cadence is almost always a benefit for us mere mortals. TT's are a different story though and I can see where finding whatever feels best and pegging it there would be better for some. 

Just give it some time....


----------



## kbiker3111 (Nov 7, 2006)

A higher cadence is always less efficient bio-mechanically and since you've identified it as a weakness, I assume you're even less efficient. Therefor your HR will always be higher than your self selected cadence. Its definitely not a tempo workout, but it will leave you more fatigued than an endurance workout because, believe it or not, this is a type II muscle workout. You're training your fast twitch muscles to activate over and over when you spin above your comfort zone.

I am a big believer in having the ability to spin. Its not something you need to do constantly, but a skill every racer should have. I find its beneficial to spin when I'm pushed out of my comfort zone on a climb and its definitely beneficial to have quick leg speed in a sprint.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

mgurtzweiler said:


> My speed skills have been identified as a weak point (along with endurance like most new racers) and it was suggested that I try riding once or twice a week at 110-120 RPM while keeping my power around my endurance point to help develop my neuromuscular systems and smooth out my peddle stroke.


When you say speed skills, what do you mean?

Riding faster means either producing more power, and/or reducing the resistance forces. I would be focusing on those if you want more speed.

Nothing wrong with such drills, do more of them and it'll get easier. It's not going to help produce more power though, which is what really matters. Typically as you improve power output and get more years of racing in, you will tend to increase your cadence a little.

Shape of one's legs has nothing to do with it. Just look at the leg speed of some elite world class track sprinters.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

some folks can spin (big heart/smaller legs) some can mash (bigger legs /smaller heart)
the fact that Lance and Jan were always at each others throat using opposite techniques shows neither technique is superior, just that one works better for each individual
Chris Carmichael, the guy who taught Lance to spin is a masher


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

atpjunkie said:


> some folks can spin (big heart/smaller legs) some can mash (bigger legs /smaller heart)
> the fact that Lance and Jan were always at each others throat using opposite techniques shows neither technique is superior, just that one works better for each individual
> Chris Carmichael, the guy who taught Lance to spin is a masher


So many myths in one short post....


----------



## 8Ring (Jul 15, 2007)

"A higher cadence is always less efficient bio-mechanically and since you've identified it as a weakness"

Why is this and what data supports it? If this is true, would a 30rpm cadence be twice as efficient at a 60 rpm cadence and three times more efficient than a 90 rpm cadence?

Similar to another person who posted here, I have long fairly skiiny legs and prefer higher cadences (80-95 rpm) on both flats and climbs. If I downshift and go the same speed at over 100 rpm, my heart rate goes up a bit. If I upshift and go below 65 rpm, my heart rate goes up a lot and my legs get tired much faster. My right knee will begin to hurt too. 

Chris


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

8Ring said:


> "A higher cadence is always less efficient bio-mechanically and since you've identified it as a weakness"
> 
> Why is this and what data supports it? If this is true, would a 30rpm cadence be twice as efficient at a 60 rpm cadence and three times more efficient than a 90 rpm cadence?
> 
> ...


there are numerous studies on cycling performance and cadence (just typing those words into PubMed comes up with 90 references), and once you weed out the chaff, you will find that there is typically a relationship between cadence and gross mechanical efficiency (mechanical work done at cranks as a proportion of total energy metabolised). 

It's not a 1:1 ratio as you are suggesting. But typically, lower cadences (e.g. 60rpm) are a bit more more efficient than higher ones (e.g. 125rpm).

But that's all a moot point since efficiency isn't all that important to performance (once you've got to the level of an average club cyclist). What matters is effectiveness and how much power you can produce/sustain (and then it's a matter of how you utilise the power you've got).

So focus on effort level and choose a gear that feels good.

When riders begin racing, some might find they need to use different gearing choices than they are used to in order to be effective.

The size/shape of one's legs are not a factor. Some of the fastest legs speeds attained while producing significant power are by elite track sprinters. In general they have much larger legs than roadies.

If you are experiencing knee pain when riding, even at low cadence, then I would suggest that your bike set up is not optimal, or you have a pre-existing injury.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

I quit paying too much attention to cadence other than to make sure I mix it up a bit training. I race road and track and both spin well and mash a big gear its totally depends what I am doing i.e. if Im sitting in the pack just following the acceration I spin and save my legs if Im solo off the front or TTing I mash a big gear on the track I spin as fast as I need to to go the speed taht is needed or at least possible.


----------



## 8Ring (Jul 15, 2007)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> there are numerous studies on cycling performance and cadence (just typing those words into PubMed comes up with 90 references), and once you weed out the chaff, you will find that there is typically a relationship between cadence and gross mechanical efficiency (mechanical work done at cranks as a proportion of total energy metabolised).
> 
> It's not a 1:1 ratio as you are suggesting. But typically, lower cadences (e.g. 60rpm) are a bit more more efficient than higher ones (e.g. 125rpm).
> 
> ...



Now I see what you mean. I am trying to focus on effort level by minding my heart rate and breathing using different gears at approximately the same speed. As I get stronger, I'm getting more comfortable in the 70-75 rpm range, but I just prefer to spin a little faster.

My right knee has a small spot that's nearly bone on bone due to old injuries. One of the small pleasures of having led an active life.

Thanks for the information.

Chris


----------

