Road Cycling - What cadence, cycling, Should I Use if I want to improve my leg speed for running

I want to improve my leg speed for running. I'm not looking to improve my biking efficiency, I am trying to increase my running turnover rate to 252strides/min, so I am thinking of training on my bike at 150rpm. Is that a good idea for training my legs to be fast without going anaerobic? I am now able to bike at 150rpm without bouncing but it is hard to hold for more than a minute. 120rpm seems a sinch now and 90rpm seems to be a recovery cadence. Oh yeah I stay in 52/25 so my speed is 18.4mph.

Is that a good idea for training my legs to be fast without going anaerobic?
I don't understand. Why do you think running turnover rate is important in being fast without going anaerobic?

I was a serious (competitive) runner for many years, as well as a non-competitive cyclist. The best way to train for running is by running. I'm pretty sure of that. Cycling may help to build muscle strength. But if you're looking to improve your running speed, that's mostly a factor of strength, power and anaerobic endurance. I don't know that it has much relationship to cycling cadence.

Just a thought: If you want to improve turnover rate, learn how to run downhill properly (leaning forward, not back), and do a lot of that.

The only problem with running to train for running is that I am recovering from a long, 7 month, cronic injury so I am staying away from running at the time but I want to get back into shape and have better leg speed than before.

Recovering from injury is a good reason to switch to cycling. I wasn't trying to discourage you from riding a bicycle. My point is that cycling is probably not very effective training for running. If the goal is only to be a runner, then time is better spent running or lifting weights.

It is an interesting theory that cycling cadence can somehow be related to running speed. I've never heard of that, though. I doubt anybody knows the answer to that.

Getting a little older is the reason I've switched to cycling. ;) There are a whole lot fewer impact stresses. I had my share of injuries when I was running.

Anyway, good luck.

what kind of running did you do? are most cyclist the ones who are/were at one time distance runners? all I know is that the speed of the contractions relating to the muscles in running (except the gluteal medius, inner thigh and trunk) have become much faster and it seemed to make my small "run to the refridgerator" done at a greater turnover rate than usual. does cycling at a high cadence while resulting in a high heart rate (80%-95%/160-190) result in a greater risk of injury than cycling at a lower intensity? If I have a MTB, should I move the saddle closer to the handlebars to engage my hamstrings more than usual or will that give me back problems?

thanks:p

Originally posted by fujimo
what kind of running did you do? The kind that gives you "runner's knee" ;) Distance, but not long distance.

Those are some excellent questions you asked, fujimo. I'm afraid I can't help you.

:confused:

Cheers :beer:

sorry I guess long distance is a little ambiguous; a 200m runner may think a 800m is long distance or one may think that a marathon or greater is long distance. I myself am talking about a fairly short long distance race, the XC 5000m. I'm looking to regain my spot as the 7th spot on varsity this fall, my junior year in HS. It's kind of cool to know that our team is actually favored to medal at state, unfortunately I don't know if I can recover and make it on the team on time. Oh well, I'm just looking to improve my cardiovascular system in hopes of running sub-17minutes.

I cannot answer your running questions--I avoid running as much as possible (unless I am chasing a soccer ball).

But, I can say this about cadence in cycling. The generally accepted idea is that high cadence is much friendlier to joints, muscles, and tendons than low cadence. It allows the use of lower gears, which has the effect of transfering "the load" from the legs to the cardiovascular system--so to speak. With a significant power output, really low cadences (like below 60 rpms) are just asking for injury, usually to the knees.

But, most cycling literature seems to consider somewhere around 90 rpms to be ideal for recreational cyclists. A lot of racers like slightly higher cadences 90-110 (this seems to be a more recent trend, and there remains a lot of lower cadence "gear mashers"). Anything above 120 is considered really high, and most folks will bounce in the saddle about 120-130, and not be able to sustain it for very long (aerobically). Cycling coaches will get their athletes to turn really high cadences for the sake of doing effective sprints. I have also read that studies have found track racers having their maximum power output at about 160 rpms.

So, your stated cadence goals are already above what cyclist normally do (with sprints being the exception). I do know that you can get accustomed to higher cadences (although it takes a while), but I am not sure whether that would transfer to something off the bike.

Cheers,
Jamie

Originally posted by jmlee
I am not sure whether that would transfer to something off the bike.I don't think it transfers to much of anything as far as running is concerned, except maybe cardivascular fitness. Cycling and running are apples and oranges in terms of the way you use the muscles in your legs. I can't recall reading about many great runners who used cycling as a major part of their training. Walking, yes, but not cycling. Nothing against cycling - in fact I've converted entirely to cycling myself. Now that I'm using higher cadences (I used to be a 'gear masher') and not running at all, I don't have any problems with my knees. In fact, my knees feel pretty darned good. :D

Originally posted by fujimo
I myself am talking about a fairly short long distance race, the XC 5000m.That's what I'm talking about, too. I ran mostly XC and the 5k on the track. I occasionally ran in mile races and fairly often ran 10k's. That's about it except for some road races.

In normal terminology:
Less than 400 meters is a sprint.
800m, 1500m and mile are middle distance
5k and 10k are distance
longer than that is long distance
XC is XC, but essentially the same as distance


I'm looking to regain my spot as the 7th spot on varsity this fall, my junior year in HS.Good luck. Sometimes you can't rush the recovery but, at your age, things heal pretty fast.

Cheers