Cycling
Myths and Realities of Cycling Technique
September, 2011
Each year during the Tour de France I love to hear about the training that each cyclist undergoes to compete in such a grueling event. While discussing the tour with friends and my athletes I'm always asked the questions: "Should my pedal technique mimic the pros?" or "Is there an ideal cadence that will make me a more efficient rider?" Makes you think, right? Whether you're training for triathlons, time trials, or tours, you have to put in the miles on the bike. The questions asked above are great. Why pedal all those miles if you might be doing it wrong? So what is the most efficient cadence and method of pedaling?
As always, we want to look to science to understand what it has to offer regarding cycling technique. It has been analyzed many times; many studies looking at cadence and pedal stroke and their affect on performance.
First we need to look at efficiency. Efficiency is a word that is often used, but in many circumstances used incorrectly. We use it to express the ratio of the amount of work you are doing to the amount of oxygen you require to do that work. Imagine two riders of equal ability decide to do a 40k TT. Rider A is using 3 liters of oxygen to hold 200 watts while Rider B is using 4 liters of oxygen to hold 200 watts. Rider B is clearly less efficient because he is consuming more oxygen and working harder to achieve the same task as Rider A. Keep in mind that we cannot truly measure efficiency in running or swimming, because your work cannot be measured directly. In these circumstances, we use the word economy rather than efficiency.
So how can we become more efficient cyclists?
Let's first take a look a cadence. Often cyclists hear anywhere between 80-100 rpm is the most efficient. Unfortunately, there is no one magic number for everyone. We naturally tend to select our own cadence, and this normally falls around 60 rpm. But is this truly the most efficient? Dr. Phil Skiba of Physfarm Training Systems points out that we should not necessarily ask what cadence is most efficient, but what cadence is best for optimal performance. It would seem that 60 rpm is a fairly low cadence and requires a bit more effort. You can ride while putting out 200 watts at either 60 or 80 rpm; but while riding at 60 rpm you are working harder, because it requires more force to push 200 watts around 60 rpm versus 80 rpm. The extra force used to hold 60 rpm will use more of the rider's fast-twitch muscle fibers. This will require an increased carbohydrate burn, which will in turn cause a rider to fatigue more quickly. When pedaling at 80 rpm, more slow-twitch muscle fibers are being utilized that burn a mixture of fat and carbohydrate; therefore the rider will not fatigue as quickly. In this case, 80 rpm is more ideal and optimal for performance. As a coach, I would only change my athlete's cadence if it was way too low or high, and would never suggest a specific number.
The next thing we should analyze is pedal stroke. Maybe we could take a page out of the Pro's book and mimic their pedal strokes. Unfortunately, no professional athlete pedals the exact same way! If there were one pedal stroke that was the most efficient then every professional would most likely pedal the same way! We know this is not the case.
Pedaling stroke appears pretty simple, right? But there are many different trains of thought on how to approach this. Do I point my toes up? Down? Do I drop my heels? Should I perform one-legged drills to improve efficiency? Interesting enough, research has shown that cyclists that push down harder go faster! It's that simple. There has been no evidence that pointing your toes, doing one-legged peddling drills, or applying the same pressure throughout pedal stroke makes a cyclist more efficient. Simply focus on the down stroke.
You can also think of it from a musculature perspective. Your quads are a very large muscle group and are very close to perfect position to put out a lot of power on the down stroke. The hip flexor is a smaller and much weaker muscle, and not as large as the quadriceps. What would make more sense: Altering your pedal stroke to apply even amount of force throughout the pedal stroke (pedaling circles)? Or is training the much more powerful muscle the best choice? It's fairly obvious that we want to take advantage of the more powerful muscles and focus on using them to the maximum capacity. Keep in mind, in some cases focusing on training the hip flexors is acceptable for all out sprints and fast hill climbs, but for the most part not ideal.
There have been special cranks designed to allow each foot to pedal independently, like power cranks. These are designed on the basis of making cyclists more efficient riders. However, a 2009 study from International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance showed no difference in performance improvements in cyclists that used coupled (standard) versus uncoupled cranks.
When you look at all the data and research currently available, it is clear that there is no magic cadence number, or perfect pedal stroke. If you want to become a more efficient rider, you need to spend more time in the saddle and keep progressively increasing your volume and intensity.
- Head Coach Jason Kilderry
References:
Kautz and Neptune. Biomechanical determinants of pedaling energetic: internal and external work are not independent. Exerc. Sport Sci. Rev. 30(4): 159-165. 2002.
Ahlquist et al. The effect of pedaling frequency on glycogen depletion rates in type I and type II quadriceps muscle fibers during submaximal cycling exercise. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. Occup. Physiol. 65(40): 360-64. 1992.
Williams AD, Raj IS, Stucas KL, Fell JW, Dickenson D, Gregory JR. Cycling efficiency and performance following short-term training using uncoupled cranks. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2009 Mar;4(1):18-28
Skiba, Phil. “What does Cadence have to do with Anything.” www.physfarm.com Sept 2005
Myths and Realities of Cycling Technique
September, 2011
Each year during the Tour de France I love to hear about the training that each cyclist undergoes to compete in such a grueling event. While discussing the tour with friends and my athletes I'm always asked the questions: "Should my pedal technique mimic the pros?" or "Is there an ideal cadence that will make me a more efficient rider?" Makes you think, right? Whether you're training for triathlons, time trials, or tours, you have to put in the miles on the bike. The questions asked above are great. Why pedal all those miles if you might be doing it wrong? So what is the most efficient cadence and method of pedaling?
As always, we want to look to science to understand what it has to offer regarding cycling technique. It has been analyzed many times; many studies looking at cadence and pedal stroke and their affect on performance.
First we need to look at efficiency. Efficiency is a word that is often used, but in many circumstances used incorrectly. We use it to express the ratio of the amount of work you are doing to the amount of oxygen you require to do that work. Imagine two riders of equal ability decide to do a 40k TT. Rider A is using 3 liters of oxygen to hold 200 watts while Rider B is using 4 liters of oxygen to hold 200 watts. Rider B is clearly less efficient because he is consuming more oxygen and working harder to achieve the same task as Rider A. Keep in mind that we cannot truly measure efficiency in running or swimming, because your work cannot be measured directly. In these circumstances, we use the word economy rather than efficiency.
So how can we become more efficient cyclists?
Let's first take a look a cadence. Often cyclists hear anywhere between 80-100 rpm is the most efficient. Unfortunately, there is no one magic number for everyone. We naturally tend to select our own cadence, and this normally falls around 60 rpm. But is this truly the most efficient? Dr. Phil Skiba of Physfarm Training Systems points out that we should not necessarily ask what cadence is most efficient, but what cadence is best for optimal performance. It would seem that 60 rpm is a fairly low cadence and requires a bit more effort. You can ride while putting out 200 watts at either 60 or 80 rpm; but while riding at 60 rpm you are working harder, because it requires more force to push 200 watts around 60 rpm versus 80 rpm. The extra force used to hold 60 rpm will use more of the rider's fast-twitch muscle fibers. This will require an increased carbohydrate burn, which will in turn cause a rider to fatigue more quickly. When pedaling at 80 rpm, more slow-twitch muscle fibers are being utilized that burn a mixture of fat and carbohydrate; therefore the rider will not fatigue as quickly. In this case, 80 rpm is more ideal and optimal for performance. As a coach, I would only change my athlete's cadence if it was way too low or high, and would never suggest a specific number.
The next thing we should analyze is pedal stroke. Maybe we could take a page out of the Pro's book and mimic their pedal strokes. Unfortunately, no professional athlete pedals the exact same way! If there were one pedal stroke that was the most efficient then every professional would most likely pedal the same way! We know this is not the case.
Pedaling stroke appears pretty simple, right? But there are many different trains of thought on how to approach this. Do I point my toes up? Down? Do I drop my heels? Should I perform one-legged drills to improve efficiency? Interesting enough, research has shown that cyclists that push down harder go faster! It's that simple. There has been no evidence that pointing your toes, doing one-legged peddling drills, or applying the same pressure throughout pedal stroke makes a cyclist more efficient. Simply focus on the down stroke.
You can also think of it from a musculature perspective. Your quads are a very large muscle group and are very close to perfect position to put out a lot of power on the down stroke. The hip flexor is a smaller and much weaker muscle, and not as large as the quadriceps. What would make more sense: Altering your pedal stroke to apply even amount of force throughout the pedal stroke (pedaling circles)? Or is training the much more powerful muscle the best choice? It's fairly obvious that we want to take advantage of the more powerful muscles and focus on using them to the maximum capacity. Keep in mind, in some cases focusing on training the hip flexors is acceptable for all out sprints and fast hill climbs, but for the most part not ideal.
There have been special cranks designed to allow each foot to pedal independently, like power cranks. These are designed on the basis of making cyclists more efficient riders. However, a 2009 study from International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance showed no difference in performance improvements in cyclists that used coupled (standard) versus uncoupled cranks.
When you look at all the data and research currently available, it is clear that there is no magic cadence number, or perfect pedal stroke. If you want to become a more efficient rider, you need to spend more time in the saddle and keep progressively increasing your volume and intensity.
- Head Coach Jason Kilderry
References:
Kautz and Neptune. Biomechanical determinants of pedaling energetic: internal and external work are not independent. Exerc. Sport Sci. Rev. 30(4): 159-165. 2002.
Ahlquist et al. The effect of pedaling frequency on glycogen depletion rates in type I and type II quadriceps muscle fibers during submaximal cycling exercise. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. Occup. Physiol. 65(40): 360-64. 1992.
Williams AD, Raj IS, Stucas KL, Fell JW, Dickenson D, Gregory JR. Cycling efficiency and performance following short-term training using uncoupled cranks. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2009 Mar;4(1):18-28
Skiba, Phil. “What does Cadence have to do with Anything.” www.physfarm.com Sept 2005
Copyright © 2011 ETA Coach LLC. All rights reserved. | 
Follow Us on Facebook
Follow Us on Facebook