Cadence

I promised you something on cadence some time ago, and here it is. Nothing earth shattering and no panacea for any cycling woes you may have. But hopefully it will give you some food for thought and maybe try something different and see what happens.

There has been much debate on any number of cycling forums about what is the correct pedalling cadence. The truth is, there is no specific cadence that will be right for everybody, you just have to work it out for yourself. Based on my limited knowledge of physiology I believe that if you have skinny legs but big lungs then you can spin a faster cadence, but if you are big and powerful then a slower cadence may suit you better. A bit like Lance Armstrong and Jan Ullrich; both excellent time triallists and usually finishing within a few seconds of each other but their pedalling cadences were vastly different. Armstrong with his large lung capacity spinning away against the powerful legs of Ullrich pushing a big gear. The results were very close but the journey was significantly different. So why have I joined the debate? Recently, a friend mentioned that their coach of the time had said that Chrissie Wellington (CW) had won the Kona IM World Champs at an average cadence of 66rpm. Blimey, I thought, that is very low. The next time I was on the turbo I put the bike in the biggest gear (53 x 12) and pedalled at 66rpm. 35.8kmh. Mmmm, CW averaged just under 38kmh at Kona so if the claim was true she must have been pushing a 53 x 11 all the way round. Now take in to consideration the CW herself described the wind on the return leg as 'brutal' and you begin to see the tale unravelling. So I hit the internet and, unsurprisingly, Slowtwitch came up with a whole thread on the subject of CW's cadence at Kona. Blimey (again!), is it really such a hot topic? Anyway, after reading a number of posts arguing high v low cadence and CW this v CW that, the truth came out. No-one knew what CW's average cadence at Kona was for the very simple reason that she didn't have a cadence meter on her bike! I guess when you do as many miles as CW you just 'know' what is right. I was concerned, though, that a professional coach would use such a quote without first checking its validity, but hey ho, who am I to question such things.

So where do I stand on the cadence debate? If you have a turbo trainer it can be very useful to experiment with different cadences and see how each feels. Use a power meter, HRM or any other measuring device to see how you are feeling actually impacts on performance. For example, I found that my HR dropped by a few beats if I put the bike in a gear and span at my usual cadence (about 92/93 rpm) but then shifted up one (harder) gear and let the cadence drop until the speed matched the previous gear. Not very scientific but these are the sort of things you can do on a turbo. Occasionally I shut my eyes (this one is best done only on the turbo!) and spin for a few minutes seeking that 'sweet spot' feeling. When I find it I open my eyes and check the cadence; I'm not usually surprised. I do know, though, from experience, that if my cadence drops significantly (and by that I mean low 80s or lower) then my power drops away very quickly. This is the main reason why I have a compact chainset on my road bike as it allows me to maintain my cadence up all but the very steepest of hills without wearing my legs out too much. Yes, I can drag my sorry a** up a steep hill using a 53/39 chainset with a 12-23 cassette but at the top my legs are much fresher using a compact and I can push on over the top, rather than having to spend a few minutes recovering.

So there are my unscientific thoughts on the cadence debate. I'm interested in the views of others, especially those who use much lower cadences than 'the norm'.