|
24/10/2008 3:29:42 PM
|
Aaron Babb
Posts 14
|
There has always been alot of debate about if it exists or not and its a great way to start some discussion on the forum. I did a couple of small studys at Sydney uni about 4 years ago and found that one in fact did exist within a smal range. However no study is finite in its finding and just wondering what the general consensus is?
Cheers
|
|
24/10/2008 11:30:06 PM
|
Graham McArthur
Posts 15
|
Optimum cadence for what exactly?
|
|
26/10/2008 6:45:24 PM
|
Aaron Babb
Posts 14
|
Efficency... Sorry should have stated that important part 
|
|
27/10/2008 10:33:08 AM
|
Slow Cog
Posts 1
|
I believe it's tied to the physiology of the person. I figure that among the factors are the ratio of fast-twitch & slow-twitch muscle fibres in that rider's makeup. Ulrich & Armstrong have spent huge amounts of time finding their optimums, and there's a very obvious difference in their cadences. . . . but they're both being really efficient.
|
|
20/06/2010 6:55:20 PM
|
arkle
Posts 4
|
You could work out your optimal cadence by going to the gym at the same time every second day for 6 weeks and, wearing a Polar heartrate transmitter, do a "cardio" workout on the same exercise bike each time, where the bike automatically varies the load to maintain your heartrate at a stable level below LT, say 155bpm, and on each visit you increase your cadence from 80 to 120rpm in increments of 5rpm, and then plot a graph of cadence against energy output (calories between time, say, 5 minutes and 20 minutes) to find your peak efficiency.
But that gives you your optimal cadence only for 20 minutes of effort. If you wanted to know your OC for a 4 hour ride you'd need to extend the project.
SJH
edited by arkle on 20/06/2010
|
|
pages:
1 |
|---|