This spinning thing...I think it's working!
I did most of the route around Lake Sammamish today keeping my cadence above 90 (except when chatting with my girls Aleks and Regan...at those times we might have been pedaling 12 mph flat at 60-70 cadence, who knows. Sometimes you have to just enjoy it. Better we be pedaling slowly than drinking fruity girly drinks in a bar, right?). It always starts out hard to get the cadence that high...then it gets easier. Then it gets too easy and I get to shift...sometimes even into my big ring!
I checked a couple of times to see what my pace was...up the shallow grade at the end it was over 19. Good. A couple of weeks ago when I "raced" that guy around this side of the lake, I managed 24, but I was pushing really hard and I wasn't willing to do that this week. I'm still in theory trying to recover and take it easy.
So no pain or problems on the bike and I was able to fly some of the time. After I conquer this cadence thing, the next step is to get me to do it in the aero bars. For some reason I still really want to mash in the aeros - perhaps a proper fit of the aero bars would help. I'm pretty dumb for not doing it. I have to remind myself that a bike fit isn't just about fixing pain; it's about producing power, and it's possible I'm not in the best possible place to do that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I hear you on the spinning. Using the "granny ring" from time to time actually seems to help out with the higher cadence, especially on hills. Stronger's blog had a post where her trainer was telling her to not go into the small ring under any circumstance on some of her training rides, and I am kinda torn between the two arguments. I know that training to stay in a higher gear builds strength and speed, but in a triathlon, you still have to run after you get off the bike, so what is the point in completely destroying your legs beforehand. Just spin it out. I guess it just depends on what school of thought you are looking at on this subject.
I have been looking at polar hrm's and I need to email and ask them whether or not their cadence sensor also has the speed readings on it. I am assuming it does, but when you read their technicial information, all it states is that it will tell you what you cadence is. Well I really don't want to have both a speed sensor and a cadence sensor on my bike, so we shall see what they say.
Since I did not see an email on your blog, I will just post my response in your blog. I don't know too much about cranksets and such down there on the bike, but I see that most tri bikes have a two ring system, and the big ring seems to be just a touch bigger than my big ring, and the small ring is sized in between my small and medium rings. I know that I have a road bike, but you can't fault me for trying to convert as much as I can.
I "suppose" I will go in and talk with one of the guys here soon (I am taking my bike in today for a tune up)and see what they have to say. Talk to you later.
You can email me at jessica @ jethereal . com if you want to continue this conversation. :-) Anyway, I think a regular double would be 53/39 (teeth), which would make it harder to climb hills, but easier to go way way fast. I definitely see the lure of a triple now that I have my compact double - I want to go faster on flats and downhill, but I still want the ease of going uphill. I'll probably switch to a regular double, though, in a year or so when I'm stronger (one of my goals for the off-season).
Post a Comment