Is your goal to increase your cadence?

I have about decided I am one of those people who has more power than speed in my legs. I might also be able to spin faster if I weighed 170 pounds instead of 204 pounds.

As I read bits and pieces about cadence, I discover missing pieces of the puzzle. When I started riding seriously in the 1970s, ankling at the bottom of the pedal stroke was encouraged. Now you are not supposed to extend your foot at the bottom of the pedal stroke, but keep it flat. I like ankling. It spreads out the work between the top and bottom leg muscles better and gives me a smoother pedal stroke. But, keeping the foot flat at the bottom is supposed to make a higher cadence easier to attain. (Joe Friel in Cycling Past 50)

In the 1970s cadence was something that each person had as a natural inherited rhythm. The idea was to change gears in order to maintain one's natural cadence (and efficiency) during changing conditions. Since Chris Carmichael and Lance Armstrong, we are all supposed to spin at 100 rpm or so. I understand that spinning a bit faster in a lower gear is less arduous than lugging it in a gear too high.

Those who increase their cadence have various strategies for doing it. They have cadence measuring on their cyclometers and try to add 3 to 5 rpm. until it feels normal and then add another 3 to 5 rpm. They spin as fast as they can without rocking their hips while riding on a slight downgrade. They take spinning classes in a gymnasium. They spend a couple of years working up to a higher cadence because it takes a while for all of the small capillaries necessary for more blood delivery to develop in one's legs.

For those of us who do not have a cadence feature on our cyclometers, it is not hard to know our cadence after the fact and make comparisons to other rides. Multiply the constant 336 by your speed in miles per hour. Divide that by your gear in inches. The quotient is your cadence.

I am not Lance Armstrong and never will be.