Advertisement

European Journal of Applied Physiology

, Volume 94, Issue 1–2, pp 188–195 | Cite as

The generalized force–velocity relationship explains why the preferred pedaling rate of cyclists exceeds the most efficient one

  • Götz KohlerEmail author
  • Urs Boutellier
Original Article

Abstract

The most efficient pedaling rate (lowest oxygen consumption) at a workload of 50–300 W has been reported to be in the range of 42–60 rpm. By contrast, most competitive cyclists prefer a pedaling rate of more than 90 rpm. The reason for this difference is still unknown. We assume that the high pedaling rate preferred by cyclists can be explained by the inherent properties of muscle fibers. To obtain statements which do not depend on muscle’s cross-section and length, we generalized Hill’s characteristic equations where muscle force and heat liberation are related to shortening velocity. A pedaling rate of fηmax yields to maximal efficiency, whereas the higher pedaling rate fPmax leads to maximal power. The ratio fPmax/fηmax between these two pedaling rates ranges from 1.7 to 2.4, and it depends on the muscle’s fiber-type composition. In sprints and competitions of very short duration, fPmax is more advantageous because energy supply is not the predominant limiting factor. The price to be paid for the most powerful pedaling rate is lower efficiency and higher energy cost. In longer exercises, economy is more important and the optimal pedaling rate shifts toward fηmax. We conclude that the optimal pedaling rate, representing the fastest race performance, is not fixed but depends on race duration; it ranges between fηmax and fPmax. Our results are not only of interest for competitive cyclists but also for investigations using cycle ergometers: maximum power might not be reached by using a pedaling rate near the most efficient one.

Keywords

Force Power Efficiency Optimal pedaling rate Cadence 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge Professor Pietro di Prampero’s helpful discussions during the preparation of this article.

References

  1. Baron R (2001) Aerobic and anaerobic power characteristics of off-road cyclists. Med Sci Sports Exerc 33:1387–1393Google Scholar
  2. Beneke R (2003) Methodological aspects of maximal lactate steady state—implications for performance testing. Eur J Appl Physiol 89:95–99Google Scholar
  3. Di Prampero PE (2000) Cycling on earth, in space, on the moon. Eur J Appl Physiol 82:345–360CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Dorel S, Bourdin M, Van Praagh E, Lacour J-R, Hautier CA (2003) Influence of two pedalling rate conditions on mechanical output and physiological responses during all-out intermittent exercise. Eur J Appl Physiol 89:157–165Google Scholar
  5. Faulkner J A, Claflin D R, McCully KK (1986) Power output of fast and slow fibers from human skeletal muscles. In: Jones NL, McCartney N, McComas AJ (eds) Human muscle power. Human Kinetics, Champaign, Ill., pp 81–94Google Scholar
  6. Gotshall RW, Bauer TA, Fahrner SL (1996) Cycling cadence alters exercise hemodynamics. Int J Sports Med 17:17–21Google Scholar
  7. Hill AV (1938) The heat of shortening and the dynamic constants of muscle. Proc R Soc Lond 126:136–195Google Scholar
  8. Hill AV (1964) The effect of load on the heat of shortening of muscle. Proc R Soc Lond 159:297–318Google Scholar
  9. Macintosh BR, Neptune RR, Horton JF (2000) Cadence, power, and muscle activation in cycle ergometry. Med Sci Sports Exerc 32:1281–1287PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Martin JC, Spirduso WW (2001) Determination of maximal cycling power: crank length, pedaling rate and pedal speed. Eur J Appl Physiol 84:413–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. McCartney N, Heigenhauser GJF, Jones NL (1983) Power output and fatigue of human muscle in maximal cycling exercise. J Appl Physiol 55:218–224PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Nielsen JS, Hansen EA, Sjøgaard G (2004) Pedalling rate affects endurance performance during high-intensity cycling. Eur J Appl Physiol 92:114–120CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Sargeant AJ (1994) Human power output and muscle fatigue. Int J Sports Med 15:116–121PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Sargeant AJ, Hoinville E, Young A (1981) Maximum leg force and power output during short-term dynamic exercise. J Appl Physiol 51:1175–1182PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Vandewalle H, Pérès G, Heller J, Panel J, Monod H (1987) Force–velocity relationship and maximal power on a cycle ergometer. Eur J Appl Physiol 56:650–656Google Scholar
  16. Wendt IR, Gibbs CL (1979) Recovery heat production of mammalian fast- and slow-twitch muscles. Am J Physiol 230:1637–1643Google Scholar
  17. Widrick JJ, Freedson PS, Hamill J (1992) Effect of internal work on the calculation of optimal pedaling rates. Med Sci Sport Exerc 24:376–382Google Scholar
  18. Wilkie DR (1960) Thermodynamics and the interpretation of biological heat measurements. Prog Biophys Mol Biol 10:259–298Google Scholar
  19. Williams PE, Goldspink G (1978) Changes in sarcomer length and physiological properties in immobilized muscle. J Anat 127:459–468Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Biophysical Chemistry, Biocenter of the UniversityUniversity of BaselBaselSwitzerland
  2. 2.Exercise Physiology, Institute for Human Movement SciencesSwiss Federal Institute of TechnologyZurichSwitzerland
  3. 3.Institute of PhysiologyUniversity of ZurichZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations