Don’t forget the graduate students.
1 Like
I’m not sure if you know but in geology there are “hard rocks” and “soft rocks”. Sandstone, limestone, shale, etc. are “soft”. Granite, schist, basalt, etc. are “hard”. I like hard rocks.
1 Like
A lot of people, including Lance Armstrong and Sebastian Weber, have said low cadence riding is an effective way to improve fatigue resistance.
Are they wrong?
If they are right, what’s the underlying mechanism on why low cadence training is effective at improving fatigue resistance?
What is the evidence that it increases fatigue resistance?
Thanks. The mohs you know…
3 Likes
What is long enough?..this seems the key to the answer to this topic. Kindly provide some references if any. Thanks.
What is the evidence that it doesn’t? 
Focusing specifically on trained cyclists, in keeping with the gist of this thread.
Here’s a study showing measurable depletion of glycogen in about 1/3rd of type II fibers after 140 minutes of steady-state exercise, which is magnified during variable-intensity exercise at the same average power output. The intensity was 58% of PPO (MAP), which in the TR world equates to an IF of 0.77, or zone 2.
1 Like
I agree. I listen to many podcasts,from Triathlon to MTB .I have tried various supplements, most of which were a waste of time and money, after listening to various debates about these. Everything is about marginal gains, and for the average Joe/Joanne, that is not going to be relevant.
I am very interested in the science, and love listening, but I no longer apply it to myself. Having lived with myself for 60+ years, my body seems to know exactly what I need, and what makes me successful as an athlete, but also keeps me enjoying the sport.
2 Likes
Interesting. Thanks. 0.77 IF is borderline, most scales have that as low tempo. Wonder what long enough is for 0.55-0.65 IF.
According to this article, an IF of 0.77 would be on the low end of zone 2 for endurance-paced rides.
But regardless, obviously the easier you go, the longer you would have to go before you’d start calling upon your fast twitch fibers. (You could, though, shorten that interval by starting with low glycogen stores.)
I was waiting for someone to ask.
It’s worth noting, though, that “recruiting fast twitch fibers” and “enhancing fatigue resistance” aren’t necessarily the same thing.
This is pretty much where I am, too. I love the deep dives. I dig the science of those marginal gains, but I’m not going to be too sad that I can’t afford ketone esters to take 30 seconds off a 40k TT! Consistency and losing a bunch of kgs is a more sensible approach.
Instead of getting hung up on ‘fatigue resistance’ I’d suggest asking if low cadence work has any benefit. My own data suggests the answer is yes, and I do them on climbs (as a result of having low W/kg) and in the flats/headwind (to simulate climbing).
Your preference is PubMed, my preference is hearing from coaches that have some longitudinal data working with thousands of athletes. Here are two:
Carmichael Training:
Note the use of “may” and “likely”
FasCat:
I won’t be surprised if you dismiss those points of view. Wouldn’t be the first time we agree to disagree.
2 Likes
Actually, my preference is my own race results.
But, it was @DaveWh who initially suggested that they were beneficial - my point was that they don’t enhance fast twitch fiber use.
My results sure seem better when I do a lot of low cadence climbing or simulated climbing on the flats into a headwind.
1 Like
I think that is an excellent summary. Really clear. I would add something about progression/overload, which helps the answer the ongoing questions about how much training you need.
Also I have started to consider when to use the word adaptation rather than recovery when talking about the purpose of rest/easy days.
1 Like
In the same vein as not ignoring the repository of coaching knowledge, I’m a big believer in the ‘success leaves clues’ idea; that is, when the majority of those who have been very successful in a particular field have taken broadly similar routes there, that’s a suggestion that said route is, at the very least, worthy of consideration.
In this case, that tends to be lots of volume with some shorter, harder efforts (either POL or PYR). Of course, where this falls down rather is the timed-crunched individual who has very limited time to train in.
1 Like
My original point was as follows, and not solely about low cadence.
Quoting from the notes of the That Triathalon Show podcast with Sebastian Weber.
“It’s important to understand the principle of glycolysis.
The vast majority of glycolytic energy production is happening in the fast twitch fibres.
The fast twitch fibres have a higher threshold for recruitment.
If you’re only going super easy (e.g. 40% of threshold), you are not recruiting those fibres.
If you’re not recruiting the fibres, you are not expecting them to adapt.
Practically, this means you need to have a training intensity in the range of 80-90% of threshold (60-70% of VO2max). This is when you start using your fast twitch fibres.
The sweet spot training, a little below threshold, trying to do endurance exercises at this intensity will help a lot with decreasing your VLaMax.”
It’s not in the notes, but on the podcast they mentioned that doing Tempo / SS work at low cadence helps recruit fast twitch fibers more than regular Tempo/SS work.
Mine also.