The issue is not generating massive watts for one or two turns of the pedals, it is maintaining that output over time. It doesn't matter how strong your legs are if your cardiovascular system can't transport and burn enough oxygen to fuel the sustained effort.

I have been meaning to reply to this thread for a few days now and this is essentially what I've been intending to say.

Basically, the sustained power you can produce is going to be a product of both muscle strength AND oxygen delivery/utilization (ie "cardiovascular fitness"). I did not fully understand this until I started working with my coach, I thought becoming a "stronger" cyclist meant that I literally needed more leg strength- ie I thought it was a muscle thing.

Now, six months into the training process, I see what we're doing and I'm like "Ohhh. Now I'm starting to get it". The leg strength was not a limiter for me. It was the cardio. Yeah, I do a little leg strength work, but my muscles get plenty of work just from riding. Mostly he has added all kinds of hypoxic type intervals, we have spent months working on high end cardio stuff. It's made me a "stronger" cyclist and way increased my endurance. It's interesting because everyone thinks of CV endurance as coming from the classic lower intensity zone 2 ride. You do indeed get some degree of endurance from that type of training. But if you want to be able to work long periods of time just below threshold (I think of this as high-intensity endurance), you need to do this hypoxic type stuff. If you just ride long distances in zone 2, you will be able to ride long distances but you will not be getting faster, which is what we are really meaning when we say a rider is "strong"- its somebody who can ride fast and not seem to tire.

I mostly ride with men and I frequently get the comment towards the end of a ride, "you're a strong rider". Actually the men who say that to me are quite a bit stronger than me in absolute muscle strength. What they're seeing is that we've done 30 miles of climbing & I'm still riding well whereas they are tired. The difference is really in the CV conditioning and my ability to spend hours riding sub-threshold. This is something that I've been actively training for months. Whereas your typical casual male rider achieves similar results by relying on their naturally greater muscle strength. They wonder how a girl drops them 80 miles into a climbing century. Lots of hypoxic intervals, that's how.

Based on comments OP has made about how winded he gets on climbs, it sounds to me the he needs to be working his high-end CV fitness too, not his leg strength. Just one newby's opinion, take it for what it's worth.

Yeah, Heathpack, and that echoes my earlier point that big ring/strength training is good, but it's only part of the program.

The limit in hills is example the big ring 53 and largest cog 23 that not make very hard to go uphill?

Totally. It's hard to really wrap your head around this concept until you experience it. The big confusion for me was the concept of zone 2, low intensity work being targeted at cardiovascular endurance. I did tons of that, so I assumed when I was slow that my limiter was leg strength. I'm a woman after all and that's what women lack compared to men.

I did not really understand that there's a spectrum of cardio. There's the "base" go-slow type of cardio and the "intensity" go-fast type of cardio. I was actually working the go-slow cardio and the muscle strength all along. I just wasn't working the go-fast cardio. It's something that you kind of have to force yourself to do at first, it's outside your normal comfort zone. But now that I do a lot of it, I really like it. There's something that almost feels "cleansing" about it.

And back to the OP's question, we have these studies:

Effects of low- vs. high-cadence interval training on cycling performance. - PubMed - NCBI

and
Effects of low and high cadence interval training on power output in flat and uphill cycling time-trials. - PubMed - NCBI

Note that these studies are of cyclists doing intervals at the respiratory compensation point, otherwise known as the anaerobic threshold or VT2. In other studies, no performance increase has been associated with doing low cadence intervals at moderate intensity. It's gotta hurt!

Just to point out that we never left the OP's subject. The point of what I was saying is that OP needs to be doing VO2 max work, not leg strength work. We were indeed discussing OP's question all along.

Well, sort of. The whole big ring thing got dropped in favor of VT2+ intervals. Which do work of course. However, these studies show that doing them at low cadence for a few weeks works even better. Note that in at least one of these studies, and recommended by Carmichael, is to do some plyo first, then go out and hit the low cadence work on the bike.

So an interesting thing is: what's going on physiologically with these high pedal force intervals? Is it increased muscle fiber recruitment? Different fiber type? Changing IIa to IIb?

Understanding Muscle Fiber Type

Whatever it is, this is indeed leg strength work. If you can push on the pedals harder, your legs are stronger. There are many drills to increase pedal force. One of the commonest is to do big ring standing starts, going from say 10 mph in your sprint gear to on top of the gear with 5 minutes recovery between or going from very slow and only doing 10 pedal strokes, similar recovery.

Plyo increases pedal force, as do squats and then jump squats.

Be all that as it may, nothing increases speed like anaerobic intervals, as you point out. Leg strength, however, is still a factor. You simply have more endurance when you use a smaller proportion of the available contractive force in your legs, back, abs, arms, etc. By analogy, you'd be able to hike fast uphill for a lot longer if you can squat your bodyweight than if you can only squat half your bodyweight. One steps up one leg at a time. I would think that would be obvious.

Personally, I have seen big changes in my high end performance by doing leg strength work: going from getting dropped to leading on hills. No change in interval protocols.

.

Fibers that are not recruited do not adapt. So, all of the different fiber types need some stimulation.

I try to do one very hard ride per week in hills and using the big ring as much as possible but some hills are way too steep for the big ring. My muscles do not fatigue too much and that includes non-stop big ring rides of up to 24 hours in duration. One key point is to allow sufficient recovery before thrashing in the big ring. I also try to do one session of hill intervals on my "training hill" that is about 6 minutes long at 10% gradient, I do not spin this hill; rather, I push a relatively large gear while seated but I also put out a defined power level. The rest of my riding is low zone 2. I ride anywhere from 250-500 miles per week.

I also use a Compex EMS unit periodically for recovery and to maximize recruitment of slow and fast muscle fiber types.

Losing weight would be your biggest bang for the buck when it comes to climbing. I started 17 months ago at 255 lbs and could climb a particular hill at around 8.5 mph and now at 185 lbs, I can climb it at 12.5 mph. A large portion of that speed is lost baggage although my power output is up over 20%.

Just be careful with hard low cadence efforts. Your knees and hamstrings will thank you.

No, not just "sort of". We were "actually" addressing OPs query. Which was whether low cadence/high pedal force (ie "mashing") workouts were what he needed to become a stronger rider ie to get over the hills faster. He wants to be faster on hills. Everybody is right that weight loss is a huge part of that. The other part is being able to output power. People correctly pointed out that power is a product of muscle strength and the ability to deliver 02 to muscles and for the muscles to use the 02. So OP's option is to increase one or the other or both.

OP then went on to say that he feels like his legs are stronger than his aerobic engine, he gets winded on long climbs. Hence the recommendation that he work his aerobic engine. Working his aerobic engine will also result in him building muscle, so its a win-win situation.

So no, those of us who started talking about V02 max intervals were not indulging ourselves and talking about whatever we felt like. We were actually reading and responding to OP's original question, taking into account what he has said about his own riding.

Also, OP, should you decide to work your aerobic engine, be aware that you can more safely (to your knees) do a lot of this work on the flats. You should probably in fact do most of it on the flats. Do some climbing for sure. But I can 100% tell you that putting out high pedal force pushing really hard up hills for extended periods of time will make your knees sore. Be cautious and don't sideline yourself with a knee injury. There is a lot to be said for specificity in training- ie getting better at climbing hills by climbing hills- there is an aspect of it that requires that you gain experience by doing the exact thing you want to be better at. But you can also get surprisingly better at some things by doing safer alternatives and flatland or trainer intervals in your case are a great example.

I agree loosing weight is and well be by far my biggest improvement. I'm almost down to #200 from #236 and I still focusing on that. Since I don't have a lot of time on the bike I almost always ride hills when I do because it gives me the best workout for the least amount of time. However I do have a trainer and more time riding on the trainer should really help improve the weight loss and aerobic engine as well.

If it makes you feel any better, my assessment of my own riding is that I could really stand to use a few pounds. It would help me tremendously with the climbing. You are not alone.

Depending on how you define "best," the best workouts are going to be on your trainer. When I say this, by "best" I mean the most efficient, the rides where you can get the most intensity in the shortest amount of time. Depending on how much you like the trainer, though, it might be way less fun than going out and riding the hills. I happen to like the trainer, so I do a few trainer interval workouts per week. Then ride with my friends in the hills and flats the rest of the time. Its a good mix, keeps life interesting on the bike.

In the absence of a power meter, doing intervals on a constant gradient hill allows for relatively easy monitoring of output. The trainer is also good

Some terms being used in this thread are simplistic and at times seemingly contradictory. What is a cardiac engine?

The easiest way for a beginner to proceed is to hire a coach but training really is not that complex, it just takes a bit of reading. Most us amateurs put too much training load of the wrong sort onto themselves. They do not recover sufficiently and their hard rides are not hard enough while the easy rides are too hard. Nobody here can write you a plan because we do not know how much time you have, what your current level of fitness is, how you respond to training, etc. For instance, if you only have 4-5 hours on the bike, you might benefit the most from 3 high intensity sessions per week whereas another new rider with 12-15 hours per week to train might benefit more from lots of relatively low intensity work and only 1 or 2 interval sessions. For another, youngsters recover faster than us older riders and can take more load. I know that I could back in the day. Don't increase load too much week by week and periodically take time off the bike as your body gets stronger when rebuilding and it is easy to overdo hill and big ring work. I used to do hill sprints back when I enjoyed doing Crits as it seemed to simulate jumping out of every corner. As long as it was not overdone, it did not hurt me. At my age, no thanks

The trainer is good in terms of dialing in a power level or heart rate level.

Hills will tax your arms, shoulders, glutes, and lower back in a way that just will not happen on a trainer.

If you want to ride hills well, ride hills.

Thanks for the tips here is the article I was referring to.

4 ?Big Gear? Cycling Workouts To Build Leg Strength in the article he refers to "cardiovascular system" and I have read other places that use cardiovascular engine as well.

Since I'm limited by time I try and get "intense" workouts in whenever I do ride which is why I like hills. I've already experienced the mistake of doing too much too soon, but I toughed it out and now as a result I almost never get sore from hills unless it's over 5,000' on a single ride. Like you said I think the answer is to keep mashing, but through in some intense rides on the trainer to balance my workouts. I can't recall the last time I was on my bike and didn't get in at least 2,000' of incline.

Why is the easiest solution always the hardest?


I hate riding the trainer, it's boring and I always feel like I'm horrible hot, because I'm not riding in the wind to cool me off. I've tried watching movies, TV, training videos and nothing keeps me from getting bored. The only way I can tolerate it is outside with a big fan on my as I watch a bike race lol. I really want to try ZWIFT as I think that would encourage me as I'm far too competitive, but that would mean getting a new trainer and I'm honestly just too cheap to bother....

To keep cool on the trainer, I crank the A/C and put two fans blowing on me. The workout only takes 75 minutes. I also crank the tunes.

If you're bored, you're not hurting nearly enough or are not paying attention to what you are doing. You're on the trainer to do a job of work, so pay close attention at every moment to everything about being there. Exact pedal stroke, elbows, knees, head, back, butt, breathing, cadence, HR, speed, hand position, then varying all of these and seeing how that affects your speed or HR. You're not just sitting on your bike, you're training. Every tiniest detail makes a difference. You're only on there to do a specific task, so make every trainer session count.

If every time you go out, you're climbing at least 2000', you're not getting in enough easy rides. Or probably enough high intensity ones.

Note that the tri guy to whom you link is advocating the opposite of what was found to be the case in lab studies of competitive cyclists (post 31): Low cadence training is effective when used in anaerobic intervals. Otherwise, not.
Low cadence interval training at moderate intensity does not improve cycling performance in highly trained veteran cyclists

OP,

So on a typical ride you're doing 2k ft of climbing at low cadence in the big ring without your HR hitting Z3?

If that's correct, I'd definitely refer you back to gregf83's post, I think the first reply in the thread, and recommend you focus on training your threshold power, which is also essentially what Heathpack was saying about building hi-intensity cardio ability. You're not lacking leg strength, that's for sure.

You and I are the same age and weight, and spend about the same time riding both indoor and out, so perhaps my experience in training to get up hills is quite relevant. I did (and still do) train to build FTP, so max sustainable power, but faster climbing came from being able to maintain higher HR, higher PWR, and higher cadence.

I also have to pay particular effort to being able to return to moderate effort levels after punching up to max levels, because I'm really more of a diesel than a quick revving engine. I can get on top of a high Tempo power level and pump it out all day, but for me to respond with anaerobic power levels to an uphill attack, or to surge with that kind of power, really empties the tank in short order. I think a lot of it is just being comfortable working at high HR levels and being willing to suffer. I don't suffer well, I think, but knowing that my HR is going to settle down from near max, and that I will recover even at Tempo power, gives me the confidence drive harder.

That I do power training on the stationary has been great for me, because on the road, I've always tended to be conservative, afraid I'm going to bonk, and wanting to keep something in reserve for whatever may happen (will the group pace rise, for instance). On a stationary, I can perform exactly to the prescribed power level, and can drain the tank when I want without concern. Psychologically it's a real boon, but it pays out on the road in terms of performance, too; while I'm not one of the fastest climbers on Strava segments overall, maybe top 15% of a few hundred riders on average, but in the 200lb+ category, I'm usually vying for first.

You should probably reconsider investing in a power-enabled trainer or consider a bike meter of some type, so that you can use power to really dial in on your goal. Power makes training to plan quite easy.

I never climb in the big ring. In fact I've always run out of "gears" to shift down to on hills. I just end up with a really low cadence around 50-60 because my legs aren't strong enough to push harder / and keep a faster pace. I basically just end up in Zone 3 for most of the time during the climb on long climbs. I looked back at my longest single climb and it was just over 4000' in just under 3 hours. Out of that entire ride only 1% (1:23) was not in Zone 3 or lower so I figured my legs are too week to maintain a higher cadence.

Most riders below the elite category can't do 4000' climbs in zone 4, which for most HR based zone plans is 94% - 100% of lactate threshold heart rate (LTHR). Many non-elites have trouble holding their LTHR for more than 20 minutes. So what you're saying doesn't really mean anything except that you're just like the vast majority of us.

You've seen above that doing intervals over LTHR at a low cadence has been found to be very beneficial. OK, but can you do them? Here's simple test and maybe you've already done it:

On a day when you're feeling good, legs aren't tired and preferably you took yesterday off . . . Go out and warm up well for 30 minutes. Do a couple hard jumps of one minute during the warmup. Then go to the foot of a long steady climb and hit it hard. Keep shifting until you are at a steady state cadence of ~60 and pushing on the pedals almost as hard as you can. Watch your HR. Shift as necessary to be able to hold a very hard effort and ~60 cadence. Does it come up above LTHR after about 5 minutes of that or even before? If it does, it's not your legs, they're strong enough. If you simply can't get it to LTHR at that low cadence then no, they're not strong enough. You should be able to do this.

Have a go at that and get back to us.

Either way, you shouldn't be doing 4000' climbs at 50-60 cadence because you can't pedal faster and make it to the top. That's unacceptable. You'll wear your legs out much too fast and thus your climbing speed will be even more limited with your current level of strength and fitness. You need much lower gears. To go from a cadence of ~55 to an appropriate cadence of ~80 on the climb, you need a lowest gear of about .7 * (your current lowest gear-inches).

I would not listen to folks who say all you have to do is get more fit to get your cadence up on these climbs. Sure, that's true. But what they leave out is the process. During the process of getting fitter, you need to be able to climb at a reasonable cadence or not much happens in the way of getting fitter because you wear out too easily. You need to be able to do at least three 15' Z4 intervals to make good progress, and you won't be able to do that without being able to spin.

Here's the gear layout of one of my bikes:
HTML5 Gear Calculator

Note that the lowest gear-inches for this drivetrain is ~28. "Gear-inches" is calculated by: (chainring teeth)/(cassette cog teeth) * (nominal wheel diameter). Wheel diameter for a 700c bike is usually assumed to be 27", though the above calculator takes into account tire size. Also note that you can set this calculator to compare two drivetrains, so you can enter your own drivetrain and check its gear inches while comparing it to another one. The lowest scale shows how many mph each gear combination will produce at the cadence to which you set the cadence slider.

Have fun!

Ok that sounds good I have a ride planned tonight and I have 2 good sized hills I can test on. When you say pedal hard do you mean out of the saddle trying to sprint like the Gorilla hard or just a good solid effort without blowing myself up in the process?

Don't sprint, stay seated. The hardest effort you can sustain for 5 minutes or so. Don't blow up, but push up against that limit. Don't blast your HR up. Put a heavy stress on your legs and when you HR stops rising, take that leg stress up another level. Keep doing that until your HR simply won't rise any higher. Then hold about that level for as long as you can. You should be panting hard. It's amazing how long you can keep that panting up as long as you don't go too hard and blow up. Feel your way. If you slow down to deep breaths, kick it back up to panting again. Remember, it's not that you lack oxygen. You have plenty of that, more than you need. The panting is just to get rid of the CO2.

On a somber note, I always take a cell phone.

That's interesting. Since you have such strong feelings about the appropriate cadence on a climb, do you also have strong feelings about the appropriate crank torque? What would that be?