pepsi4all

Mash it or Spin it, Torn up on how to train.

I have been torn up on how to train.
I have been biking for a year and I now average 22-23mph with
a good push with my road bike and 23-25 on a good day
with my tri.

I mash my crankset a lot, and this got me stronger as I believe, anyways.
However, I just bike a week ago with a much stronger rider Deogracias
Asuncion.

He is much stronger than I am, and left me on a climb last week and on a flat.
He pedals with very high cadence. Since then, I have been training myself
to use high cadence the same as him. It is probably 90-110 per min.
cadence.

This seems to slow me down, and my heart rate is on roof 178 just going
22mph. If I mash it my heart stays low 162 with the same speed
and much easier for me to do.

I am confused, should keep training with high cadence?
I just see a lot of results from mashing my crank. I went from 15mph when I
first started riding last year and now to 23mph on a roadie, and still rising from just mashing it.

I believe Greg Lemond trained mashing his cranks too. They say to get
stronger... Climb!, isn't that same thing when you have higher resistance
when putting your harder gears on.

Any advice is appreciated.

Thanks.

WingSuit

I will leave all the detailed responses to the many who train scientifically but in general, spend most of your time spinning in lower heart rate zones, to build your capability to burn fat for fuel, not carbs. this will help you race faster, in the long run (or ride). mix in some hard rides or intervals (maybe hill repeats) once or twice a week. seems like your leg strength is better developed than your cardio capacity (meaning you have a limited cycling base). check out The Cyclists Training Bible by Joe Friel, or Base Building for Cyclists by Thomas Chapple.

Bacciagalupe

Spinning is better.

Long story short, it utilizes the aerobic system rather than your leg muscles, so it's more efficient and better for longer periods of exertion.

This is why you're seeing a higher heart rate when spinning as opposed to mashing. You also haven't trained your aerobic system much, thus it hasn't gotten anywhere near optimal efficiency yet.

Also keep in mind that at 23mph, you're already facing significant amounts of drag. So all other aspects kept consistent, to go from 23 to 24mph requires significantly more power than going from 15mph to 16mph. I.e. don't expect to go 27mph just because you learned to spin rather than mash.

Last but not least, spinning is much easier on your knees.

clones2

Ive experimented a lot this year with climbing the same hills over and over and trying to climb them in difference gears with different cadences... and I am in the same shoes that you are in. My cardio system is just fine...but spinning high cadences sends me to the red line pretty quickly. I can "mash" a gear and keep my cadence in the 70's and get up hills faster than spinning something closer to 90-100rpm and it keeps my heart rate a lot lower, giving me the ability to have something left in the tank to really push over the top hard. Theoretically the same power output... but one keeps my heart rate lower.

HOWEVER... before you bash my approach. I think it's extremely important to improve high cadence spinning as much as possible... and high cadence interval training should help a lot. It's good for the muscles and cardio system, and it will only benefit you. Just because mashing a lower cadence works best for me now.... I'm spending more of my training with high cadence spinning trying to get improvements there.

hhnngg1

First off, I'd be impressed if you were truly holding 23-24mph solo for the entire duration of your ride. Very different than holding 23-24mph even for 15 minutes, then backing off for a period. If you are though, that's a really good result and you should backdoor brag the Garmin GPS post here!

You should train whichever you're worse at. For most newbs to cycling, spinning is harder for them and thus they should practice riding at 95-105 cadence until it's not uncomfortable to them. It is true that using higher cadence will offload some effort to the heart rather than the leg muscles; for most, the cardiac system can eventually be trained to go longer/farther than the legs, although if you're less trained your legs may give you better results at first particularly if you have strong legs.

Still, attention to cadence is nearly insignificant in importance compared to attention to power or comparable metrics like HR (if you're zoned correctly) or even RPE. You put out more power, you go faster, regardless of cadence. You hold power for longer, you last longer. Cadence changes give a small variance to this, but the influence is so small that a lot of really top riders completely ignore cadence and just do what feels natural.

Spinning up a hill doesn't get you up any faster.

hhnngg1

On a related note, many people limit their hard efforts of 22-25+mph to shorter bursts well under 20 minutes, and usually under 45-60 mins unless they're doing a TT race. (Which is why I commented on your 'avg speed' of 24mphish.)

With short efforts, slightly lower cadences are often favored by pros to hit higher speeds,even at the cost of legs. Some pros positively mash in short TTs <60 minutes, whereas that same rider will spin as much as possible in a 4 hour stage race. With shorter efforts, you can afford to burn more muscle effort since it'll be over quick. If you're riding like most folks, and only doing short bursts of 24mph, you'll feel that lower cadence is the way to go.

Get on a computrainer though and try and hold a slightly slower speed steadily for one hour with constant wattage, and after about 20-30 mins, you'll start to really notice the difference in leg fatigue between spin and mash. (They're equally painful though - the relief in the legs is offset by the higher HR as fatigue kicks in.)

grolby

The idea that spinning a lighter gear faster is always better has been oversold a bit in cycling culture, I think. People are different, and different things work for them. And a cadence of 70 while climbing isn't unreasonable.

The main benefits of spinning are:
1. Less force on the joints, which MAY reduce the likelihood of injury. On the other hand, for some overuse injuries, the increased repetitions may actually make things worse faster. My own experience is that cadence doesn't have much bearing on injury.
2. Better response time to changes in pace. If the group you are racing along in suddenly surges, or someone attacks, it's much easier to react if you are already spinning at 90 RPM rather than 75. This can be very important in criterium racing.
3. High power output via rapid movement of muscles rather than high muscular force production. This is a major component of what lets skinny little guys like me go fast when we attack. I don't have a lot of raw pedal-pounding leg strength, but I can turn the pedals over very fast. This sounds like its not an issue for you, but for some riders, it's desirable to have both strength and speed, track sprinters being the major example of this. But really anyone can benefit from developing both.

In short, there are a number of reasons why developing the ability to spin the pedals quickly is a good idea, mostly if you ride competitively (whether in actual races or competitive group rides). But I think maintaining a cadence of 90 or more under all circumstances is not actually the hallmark of good technique that some make it out to be. Some people do better with a faster spin, some people do better as mashers. I would definitely experiment and work on improving your ability to spin a high cadence for a long period of time, because you might surprise yourself. But if it turns out that you are happiest/fastest at a lower cadence, don't worry about it.

EDIT: incidentally if 23-24 mph is your true average speed for entire rides (yes, I'm very skeptical), you should consider entering some races.

tagaproject6

It doesn't really matter, Deogracias Asuncion will always be your Eleanor!

marqueemoon

Keeping your heart rate under control when spinning mostly comes with training, but there's a mental component too. Staying relaxed and focused on your breathing will help.

I like doing this kind of work at the gym where I can just focus on the effort and monitoring my heart rate and not on avoiding potholes, cars, etc... I've been focusing on spinning 100-110 and gradually increasing the resistance.

I only race cross, but it's done good things for my results this year. Planning to keep it up year-round.

RChung

Not particularly. Just train to increase your power.

You're welcome.

gregf83 

If you are using the conventional definition of efficiency i.e. energy out/energy in then lower cadences are more efficient.

Grolby covered the main reasons for using a higher cadence, but efficiency isn't one of them.

hamster

That's impossible. Even if you're less efficient when spinning, there should be at least 1-1.5 mph difference between pedaling at 178 and at 162.

But it's too hard to measure things accurately at those speeds. Small changes in wind speed and direction may matter more than a 20 bpm difference in your heart rate.

Do the same comparison on a hill instead.

androidtt

Kind of the same boat when I first started cycling a year and a half ago. Always mashed around 70-80. It definitely built up a lot of power during that time.

And then I noticed Bradley Wiggins this past TdF. I went into full-on spin work to minimize leg stresses for the run afterwards (triathlon) and my cardio/steady pace has improved a lot. I can go 20 on my TT bike for a long time (70ish miles) without any real crappy feelings afterwards. However, now mashing seems like a pain unless I get over "the hump" whenever I shift up to get back to my original cadence (100-110).

I think a combo of the two is probably best. Mash for strength, high cadence for endurance/pacing.

And congrats on your speed. You've definitely got the physical abilities for racing! Moreso than I

hhnngg1

I get the exact experience as the OP with 'harder' effort with spinning despite same power. TrainerRoad has a great 'coached' workout of intervals (forgot the name of it, but it's got lots of text prompts during the ride) where you do intervals all at identical power, each about 8 minutes long, but you do the first with a higher (95+) cadence, next one with lower (<85 cadence), and then one that you naturally fall into cadencewise. Power target is the same for all intervals. My HR bumps by about 7 bpm once I go to the higher cadence, and it feels noticeably harder for me to keep up the speed despite identical power target. (I'm usually spinning at 100-105 by this point.) Drop me down to 70, and the legs start burning at the end of the interval, but my HR is definitely lower, and it overall feels easier to me.

However, I've done longer intervals and longer workouts on TR, and if I use that low-cadence mash approach, I def fade/fatigue more quickly - it's really noticeable after 60 minutes of good strong intervals when your legs start flagging.

joe_5700

You are doing the right thing with riding with stronger/faster riders. You saw what this rider did to leave you in his dust. Why are you then asking a forum? How are your averages calculated? Are these just arbitrary numbers that you can sometimes hold when glancing down at your cyclocomputer or are these distance divided by time calculations for your entire ride? At least your averages are in the realm of reality.

Carbonfiberboy 

Everyone is different. High cadence stresses the aerobic system more and low cadence stresses the legs more. Where to position yourself depends on your talent. It is possible to train yourself to be more efficient at high cadence than you are now. You'll just have to keep experimenting, which is what most of us have done.

Lance used to do hill repeats, alternating 50 and 100 cadence, thus stimulating both legs and aerobic system. That's a tough workout.

A quick way to improve cadence is to get on your rollers and spin steadily at 115-120 for as long as you can. Start with 15 minutes, increase to an hour. Even though I do that, I still do pass climbs fastest at about 78 cadence, while riders who are better aerobically will be doing 85+. As has been pointed out, low cadence is more "efficient", and 78 is as low as I can go without my legs really hurting. If I run a faster cadence, the other guys disappear up the road, assuming that we're all climbing at just below LT.

TTing on the flat is different for some reason. I go best at 96-105 on the flat. I think it's very common for people to have different climbing and flat cadences. There have been long discussions as to the reasons for this.

maverick31210

I usually just do whatever hurts more at the time. If mashing sucks and my knees and dying, I'll go for that. If my heart is about to give out, I'll spin. I basically just try to do what sucks the most and forget that it hurts.

Campag4life

hmmm...the mind of a racer. Although unknowable, I always wondered if I was mostly limited by my inability to suffer more.

junglemoth

I am completely new to cycling and have nothing scientifically or personally valuable to offer as far as your question goes. But I will say that I am always weary of what the current "studies" are saying is best. Just like how tire PSI's are changing. Now, the latest "studies" are saying that a slightly lower PSI will actually make you go faster....who knows what to believe.

I'm sure next month a new "study" will come out saying a different pedaling style is the "best". I feel like too many people get worked up about what they should be doing instead of just pushing themselves and doing what works for them. Maybe the guy who dropped you is just a better cyclist and it has nothing to do with his cadence being slightly faster.

If you're flying along and feeling good at a lower cadence then I don't see why it's so imperative to up it. Maybe i'm just new and naive but I have seen so many "studies" flip their views 180 degrees when their next findings come out. For an example in a different but related realm Google "what is the healthiest diet" and you will have literally hundreds of different people representing hundreds of different diets claiming that theirs is the best and having plenty of studies to prove it.

I'm sure there are some certain universal truths that cyclists should abide by, but I think other things are a matter of personal style and your own physiological make-up.

I wish I lived back in the day when cyclists didn't obsess over power meter readings, when cyclists used their regular normal bikes for time trialing and didn't need special aero-bars, aero-helmets, etc.

At some point all of this science and technology doesn't add anything but seems to detract from the joy of cycling in general.

Forgive my rant/

maverick31210

That just might be it. If I see a hill or something that doesn't look like fun, it looks like a boundary to me and I don't like that so I go for it. I ride the same route to work everyday and the way in is all mostly uphill and ****ty especially since I just woke up and I'm carrying a backpack with my clothes for the day (not a weight issue but just uncomfortable) anyway I keep hitting the same hills and everyday it gets less ****ty....I also keep reminding myself that the ride home is about 12 miles of all downhill lol......

Drag

Spin. I'm not sure what really is being asked, but SPIN!

caloso

Q: Is it better to spin a small gear or mash a big gear?

A: It's better to spin a big gear.

escarpment

SPINNNNN. I mashed for a good year before someone I rode with pointed this out to me. Mash when you have to, but spin fast when you can.

kingfishr

Spin of course because every cyclist's physiology is identical, we all have far more fast twitch than slow twitch muscle fiber with max heart rates of 220; mashing is for weight lifters and mere mortals.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47cGzu6-q40
Go ahead drink the Kool-Aid, but if that doesn't work for you here's a guy that has spent some time studying the question which is backed by a decent amount of research
https://myworldfromabicycle.blogspot....bicycling.html

coasting 

i have always been very bad at aerobic exercise and more of an anaerobic strength type of exerciser. so I should be a masher rather than a spinner, but I can say that mashing is far less efficient than spinning for me. Push a big gear gets my legs tired but spinning keeps me relatively longer lasting. i have big legs.