When Lance Armstrong won the Tour de France back in 1999, he showed us a pedalling style with a very high pedalling rate, even in the mountains. Many experts have referred to this technique as one of the main reasons that Armstrong could beat his opponents so easily. With a high frequency it is easier to remove lactate from the legs, but it requires a high degree of special training to be able to maintain a high pedalling frequency.
What is the best cycling cadence?
For me, cycling pedalling rate has always been some kind of a controversial topic. I am not sure that is possible to change riding style significantly.
Nevertheless, I have tried to adapt some of my riders pedalling frequency to a faster one, believing that this would help them to save energy for the final parts of the races.
My conclusion until now is that it is not possible to make big changes, probably in the area of on average 0-5 rpm higher pedalling frequency. So special training at high frequencies can probably not explain why some riders are able to do it and others are not.
It is also worth to remember that a couple of riders who prefer slow frequencies also perform at world class level (e.g. Serguei Gonchar). Thus, a high pedalling rate per se is not predicting performance even among the best riders in the world. Take a closer look at the riders in the Tour de France and watch the differences.
Slow pedal rate might be a better choice
Ernst Albin Hansen, PostDoc, who is a scientist and previous elite cyclist, has been studying choice of cycling pedalling rate for more than 10 years now. In a study from 2006 he included 9 trained cyclists who rode two rides of 2½ hours at 180W followed by a 5-min all-out trial. Results: There were no significant differences, but trends showing that choosing a slower pedalling rate might be attractive.
Test setup:
Ӣ 180W, freely chosen pedalling rate (avg. 95rpm) followed by 5min all-out.
Ӣ 180W, calculated pedalling rate (which averaged 73rpm) followed by 5min all-out.
The calculated pedal rate was supposed to result in a minimum oxygen uptake.
Results
When comparing the two setups, some interesting results were found:
Ӣ Peak VO2 was lower after riding with freely chosen pedal rate
Ӣ Perceived exertion were higher with freely chosen pedal rate (7-9%)
These results indicate that riding like Armstrong might not be the answer for optimal cycling pedalling rate. If some of you think this study is interesting, you could consider trying the tests mentioned above in the gym during the winter. It is guaranteed a good workout for you.
Tell us about your experiences – Post a comment below!
Source:
1: Hansen EA, Jensen K, Pedersen PK. Performance following prolonged sub-maximal cycling at optimal versus freely
chosen pedal rate. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2006 Oct;98(3):227-33. Epub 2006 Aug 12.
It is very difficult to train the hamstrings and hip flexors on a regular bike. Basically we use most of our efforts to push the pedals down and never to pull the pedals up.