"The 33"-Road Bike Racing - high cadence, low resistance

In one of my spinerval videos, I'm asked to do some high cadence low resistance work, 120+rpm in a very easy gear. At one point, I'm asked to stand and spin as fast as possible, while keeping "on top" of the gear. What is the point of this set? While following along, I can't help but think "when was the last time I was spinning this fast (while standing) in a race?" It's certaintly difficult but is it beneficial? On another note, I have figured out it's much easier to spin very fast, while standing, in the drops than on the hoods.

Edit: obviously, it may help sprinting but when I sprint in a race, it's ussually about 90rpm with as much resistance as I can handle, not 120+ with almost no resistance.

Then you're sprinting wrong.

+1.

Moreover, you do things in training to target specific systems, and cause specific adapations.

For example, no one advocates riding at 120 rpm on a regular basis. Howver fast pedals and speed intervals are done at that rpm.

Conversely, you shouldn't rountinely climb at 50 rpm, but muscle tensions are done at that rpm.

I'm supposed to be sprinting at 120+ rpm? Perhaps, this is part of the reason I am not a decent sprinter.

My question should have been more specific, what adaptions are occuring when doing 120+ spinning with low resistance?

I've seen the benefits of low cadence climbing intervals. It certainly seems to help build strength. 50rpm? Ouch, I ussually do my low cadence work at 65rpm.

My question should have been more specific, what adaptions are occuring when doing 120+ spinning with low resistance?
Since neuromuscular adaptations are specific to the joint velocities and forces at which they're trained, I would say that spinning at 120+ with low resistance trains you to spin fast at low resistance; and therefore, low power. Why someone would want to develop this is beyond me.

I'm supposed to be sprinting at 120+ rpm? Perhaps, this is part of the reason I am not a decent sprinter.

It's not unusual for track sprinters to sprint at 140 rpm plus. The ability to shift mid sprint with STI has made it possible to sprint at lower cadences, but hitting 120 rpm plus in a sprint would not be unusual at all.


My question should have been more specific, what adaptions are occuring when doing 120+ spinning with low resistance?

1, developing a good spin, 2. begining the conditioning to spin 120 rpm in a big gear.

1, developing a good spin, 2. begining the conditioning to spin 120 rpm in a big gear.

Except the ability to spin at low muscle tension does not carry over to spinning at high tension (adaptations are specific to the speed and force of movement). So while these drills might be fine for training to spin fast at low power, there will be little crossover benefit to producing power at high rpm's

This was from a group ride - I hit 166 rpms during a sprint:

Entire workout (152 watts):
Duration: 1:30:07 (1:31:20)
Work: 816 kJ
TSS: 117 (intensity factor 0.886)
Norm Power: 221
VI: 1.46
Distance: 28.085 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 0 1079 152 watts
Cadence: 26 166 91 rpm
Speed: 2.5 43.4 18.8 mph
Pace 1:23 23:33 3:11 min/mi
Hub Torque: 0 422 58 lb-in
Crank Torque: 0 984 139 lb-in

Peak 5s (1035 watts):
Duration: 0:05
Work: 5 kJ
TSS: n/a
Norm Power: n/a
VI: n/a
Distance: 240 ft
Min Max Avg
Power: 913 1079 1035 watts
Cadence: 116 133 125 rpm
Speed: 30.6 34.4 32.7 mph
Pace 1:45 1:58 1:50 min/mi
Hub Torque: 187 231 210 lb-in
Crank Torque: 622 780 700 lb-in

Peak 10s (999 watts):
Duration: 0:10
Work: 10 kJ
TSS: n/a
Norm Power: n/a
VI: n/a
Distance: 495 ft
Min Max Avg
Power: 843 1079 999 watts
Cadence: 109 138 128 rpm
Speed: 28.3 35.9 33.2 mph
Pace 1:40 2:07 1:48 min/mi
Hub Torque: 155 251 201 lb-in
Crank Torque: 516 832 669 lb-in

Except the ability to spin at low muscle tension does not carry over to spinning at high tension (adaptations are specific to the speed and force of movement). So while these drills might be fine for training to spin fast at low power, there will be little crossover benefit to producing power at high rpm's

Your blind application of an over-zealous interpretation of specificity to try and argue against legitimate training methods is really getting tiresome.

While there is not great efficiency in the transfer of adaptations from low-resistance high-cadence intervals to high-cadence high-resistance efforts does not mean there is zero carryover or that these drills are useless to prepare you to train your high-cadence high-resistance abilities.

Except the ability to spin at low muscle tension does not carry over to spinning at high tension (adaptations are specific to the speed and force of movement). So while these drills might be fine for training to spin fast at low power, there will be little crossover benefit to producing power at high rpm's

I won't begin to debate the science with you.

I do know however, that in the CTS program the progresion is from doing fast pedals ( high rpm, light resistence) to power intervals (high rpm maximum effort.)

Whether it physiological or psychological, its heck of a lot easier to do the power intervals after you've adapted to doing the fast pedals.

Your blind application of an over-zealous interpretation of specificity to try and argue against legitimate training methods is really getting tiresome.

Legitimate as defined by whom? I know the U.S. track sprint coaches have their riders spend exactly zero time doing high rpm, low power efforts. Further, they have their riders spend only a small fraction of their training time doing anything other than maximum efforts.

High RPM, low resistance is probably more common on the track than on the road. Low resistance doesn't necessarily mean low power. A lot of the motorpace efforts that endurance riders do are like that -- you aren't putting a lot of force on the pedals, but you are putting out a lot of power (due to the high RPM). A road rider in a similar situation would probably just shift.

The benefit of being able to spin high RPM on the track is direct-- you can go faster. Riders who can't spin high RPMs start to bounce, and then can't even maintain that.

On the road it lets you accelerate faster-- if you can do the RPMs it's easier to accelerate in a smaller gear and then shift up, rather than shifting and mashing. This is also a benefit for track riders who can maintain the RPMs, because they can race a smaller gear and stay on top of accelerations with less muscle fatigue.

I won't begin to debate the science with you.

I do know however, that in the CTS program the progresion is from doing fast pedals ( high rpm, light resistence) to power intervals (high rpm maximum effort.)

Whether it physiological or psychological, its heck of a lot easier to do the power intervals after you've adapted to doing the fast pedals.

Correct. This winter I have worked mightily on raising my max smooth cadence, and my sprint workouts are already showing the results.

when I got a powertap, I found that I made maximum power spinning at over 140 rpm. It maxes out at 140 so I don't know how much higher it was. Probably not a lot.

I will ride along at 110-120 rpm some days. I've been told I have really good form. I think speed training is valuable just for that -- improving efficiency with your pedaling form.

Legitimate as defined by whom? I know the U.S. track sprint coaches have their riders spend exactly zero time doing high rpm, low power efforts.

Hopefully we can avoid a pissing contest, but does the OP sound like an elite track sprinter? Just try to be curious rather than defensive every once in awhile. Might be able to apply your considerable knowledge to a positive end.

The drill is intended to develop technique and skill. If you don't think you need these attributes in your training good luck.

In one of my spinerval videos,... What is the point of this set?

I have the Spinervals that comes with the Kurt trainer, and, IMO, the Spinervals workouts aren't scientifically designed. (Example: 90-second intervals to "help your time trialing" and "raise your lactic threshold"...)

The drill is intended to develop technique and skill. If you don't think you need these attributes in your training good luck.

It's not that I don't need those attributes. I wasn't sure what the drill was intended to develop. Sprinting is one of my limiters. I don't spend alot of time on it; however, I'm trying to spend more time developing my sprint since alot of races tend to be crits.

As far as technique and skill are concerned, I often hear conflicting perspectives. Some claim that skill and pedaling technique are developed without specific focus. In the process of riding large volumes, efficiency and pedaling technique develop naturally. In contrast, others asign specific drills to develop pedaling efficiency and proper technique.

In Friel's book, he has spin ups listed under speed workouts. Spin ups are high rpm low resistance, but he doesn't specifically state any benefit. I assume there must be benefit or why else would he have it in his book. Intuitively, I can't see how it helps, why do high rpm with low resistance instead of high rpm with high resistance? A previous poster, stated that it helps the rider adapt to high rpm before adding high resistance. Does this mean that once or if you're capable of doing high rpm there is no need for spin ups?

An interesting study:
Effects of High- vs Low-cadence Interval Training on Physiology and Performance of Competitive Cyclists
http://www.athleticedgemagazine.com/sport-conditioning/12/

"Low-cadence interval training is probably more effective than high-cadence training in improving performance of well-trained competitive cyclists. The differences in performance could be due to different effects of the two training cadences on economy and maximum oxygen uptake, possibly mediated in part by training-induced changes in testosterone."

why do high rpm with low resistance instead of high rpm with high resistance?

High rpm with low resistance is probably more sustainable, so you can put in longer duration at high rpm without killing yourself. Also, high rpm + low resistance allows you to pay attention to your form, rather than merely trying to survive.

...IMO, the Spinervals workouts aren't scientifically designed. (Example: 90-second intervals to "help your time trialing" and "raise your lactic threshold"...)

I would have to agree. I've narrowed my selection of spinerval videos to exclude a few that seem less helpful. I think some sets are included in spinerval videos to ward off bordom. Personally, I really enjoy the totally time trial (sets of 20min, 15min, 10min, and 5min with 5min RI), time trialapalooza (10 x 4min - I think) and tough love (10min x 4, 20min x 1, 30min x 1, 6min x 5, and 3min x 5).

High rpm with low resistance is probably more sustainable, so you can put in longer duration at high rpm without killing yourself. Also, high rpm + low resistance allows you to pay attention to your form, rather than merely trying to survive.

Good point.

I've tried over the past few years developing a higher cadence and I can spin very quickly. What I can tell you, at least for me, is I am no faster, my sprinting isn't faster, nor is my endurance greater. I di raeces, tt's and tri's. My ideal tt cadence is around 80 (just in the middle of what most experst say is ideal 75-85). My ideal cadence on long races is 85-90 and while I can sprint at 120 or so, I do better with a bigger gear and 100.

Cadence is very individualistic and people shouldn't try to say what works for them works for everyone else.

I guess I'm out of date but Scott Berryman (US Team sprinter from the 80s and 90s) used to do 30 rpm sets in 6 seconds - that's 5 revs/second or 300 rpms. This on a fixed gear weighted wheel spin bike setup (similar to the Schwinn DX900 rig). Low resistance, just enough that the wheel wants to slow down if you stop pedaling, not speed up or maintain speed.

When I read about that I started doing my own version of it, albeit at 15-50 lower rpms. Right now I'm stuck at about 55 less rpms, my peak rpm was 286 in the 90s, now I'm at 245 or less.

Although it's debatable if such efforts improve sprinting (I can't prove it either way or the other), I do know that my sprints are definitely at the lower end of the rpm scale - 120 is pretty high, most of my sprints are big gear 100-120 rpms.

I also find that the super high rpm efforts taxes muscles normally not taxed, and when doing them on a weighted fixed gear, my various "pull up" muscles get worked really hard as I try and control the coast down. Even when in "summer shape" (mid-90s), I get sore doing these types of efforts, and I only have to do 1 or 2 every few days.

If such efforts tax my muscles, they must be doing something differently. And if it's related to high efforts (even at no resistance, accelerating a weighted wheel is hard work), then it's got to be doing something. So I keep doing them.

More recent pics of Scott Berryman:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features.php?id=features/2004/lemond_fantasy_camp

cdr

As I said before, good luck.