A question of...cadence?!
Comments
-
Ai_1 wrote:I think that statement contradicts itself - unless I'm misunderstanding you as I did with philthy3's earlier post!
If you're are correct in saying muscles tire due to force not the speed you turn them then cadence is absolutely critical.
As I said in my earlier post: Power = Torque x Cadence
If you contend that force is the only thing critical to leg fatigue (I'm not sure i agree) then maximum torque without impacting the legs is fixed and cadence increase is still available to produce more power providing your cardiovascular system can handle the extra load. So for cyclists who's cardiovascular ability is greater than their ability to preserve their legs at high pedal forces cadence is critical to allowing them perform to their best ability.
Force, effort - whatever you want to call it - is the principal cause of fatigue, not how fast you happen to be turning the pedals while doing so. That's all I'm saying. Cadence will play a role in that, by definition, but the impact of cadence in general is usually over-stated - and this thread is no different.0 -
There is no doubt that one cannot simply use one thing and make it the most important in performance terms. Cadence is one factor but I can understand there are many others and all works together. Lung and heart conditioning, lactate threshold, diet, energy levels all plays a part. I don't think no one is over rating the effect of cadence but in my particular case it was a notorious improvement in my feeling during and post my bike ride.
On top of all this the bike you ride, the way it fits with your body will also play a part... I think there is much over over rating regarding saving 20 or 40g in a fancy rear derailleur or things like that... Just don't take the house keys... Job done.
Any how everyone is entitled to an opinion and for it's all part of the forum and learning. For one, I fully appreciate the multifactorial effect on performance. Cadence is but one, just so happens it is one easy to measure.
Pedro0 -
When I say force I actually mean force, specifically, i.e. how hard you push on the pedal. This is not the same as power, work, etc. Each term has a specific meaning without which my previous post is just waffle. If you meant something else by that term then we're at cross-purposes.Imposter wrote:Ai_1 wrote:I think that statement contradicts itself - unless I'm misunderstanding you as I did with philthy3's earlier post!
If you're are correct in saying muscles tire due to force not the speed you turn them then cadence is absolutely critical.
As I said in my earlier post: Power = Torque x Cadence
If you contend that force is the only thing critical to leg fatigue (I'm not sure i agree) then maximum torque without impacting the legs is fixed and cadence increase is still available to produce more power providing your cardiovascular system can handle the extra load. So for cyclists who's cardiovascular ability is greater than their ability to preserve their legs at high pedal forces cadence is critical to allowing them perform to their best ability.
Force, effort - whatever you want to call it - is the principal cause of fatigue, not how fast you happen to be turning the pedals while doing so. That's all I'm saying. Cadence will play a role in that, by definition, but the impact of cadence in general is usually over-stated - and this thread is no different.
If you do mean force then as I said: power = cadence x torque
and since torque is proportional to force, power is then proportional to cadence, so cadence is critical (as before, assuming sufficient cardiovascular capacity). However it's no more critical than the force you're able to apply sustainably. Both are important and the fact I'm discussing cadence is because that's the point of the thread, not because I think it's the single most important thing in cycling! I suspect the same goes for everyone else.0
