If I am producing 225w at 110rpm vs same wattage in different gearing at 90rpm, what does this tell me?

Do I have to look at HR to see what is best?

What determines what is optimal, if wattage output remains static, while cadence is dynamic?

just seems like a missing link to me.

So then, as a defined wattage can be achieved with different rpm's, it's subjective what the optimal cadence is to get to that wattage?

Ie, if I am doing an indoor trainer session, and I want to maintain a defined % of FTP, let's say 200w, there is no 'right' cadence to produce that wattage?

It's just something I will have to play around with over time to find out which cadence gives me the desired wattage output & speed, yet also leaves me with enough gas in the tank to still run?

Thanks for your help.

Purchased a PowerTap a few months back.

What determines what is optimal, if wattage output remains static, while cadence is dynamic?

It's actually not at all that I am looking for optimal cadence.
As I said, I'm just in the learning phase of power, and it's all very new to me.

However, I realized while riding on the trainer & trying to follow some %FTP workout sessions, that I could hit that % either by spinning fast in a high gear, or spinning slow in a lower gear, and I wondered if there was a right/wrong.

It's actually not at all that I am looking for optimal cadence.
As I said, I'm just in the learning phase of power, and it's all very new to me.

However, I realized while riding on the trainer & trying to follow some %FTP workout sessions, that I could hit that % either by spinning fast in a high gear, or spinning slow in a lower gear, and I wondered if there was a right/wrong.

you would then want to look at heart rate to tell which of the 2 cadences might be most efficient for you physiologically.

That you are producing 225 W.


Heart rate is simply a dependent variable that reflects cardiovascular strain - so, no.

Ugh, if one were interested in minimizing the "cardiovasucular strain" at that 225 watts (or any watts but why on earth would anyone want to do that?)

Heart rate is not a measure of efficiency.

it does, under most circumstances, correlate pretty well with oxygen consumption.

From that (with a few basic assumptions) efficiency can be calculated.

Again, the question is > > > Since I can produce the desired wattage many different ways, does it matter which one is chosen??

"Ugh" - yes, that is the question.

In a laboratory-style setting, yes. In the field (or in someone's basement/garage), not so much.

It doesn't? Do you have a reference to support that claim?

one time I was pedalling really hard and my legs burned so bad I had to stop by my heart rate wasn't that high.

sooo, i think andrew is trying to say theres plenty of times in cycling when cardio isn't the limiter

and your cadence affects that
and so on

"it depends" in other words. if you always try to make 225 watts at minimal heart rate, you might be introducing fatigue of other kinds.

Perhaps. Is there any scientific evidence (your anecdotal evidence doesn't count) to support that view? I mean, Dr. "power is more important than speed" is talking about using perceived effort and ignoring cadence as a race metric to judge efficiency.