| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
More beginner questions: cadence and technique
Many thanks for the helpful input on my previous questions, so maybe I can
ask another one: what makes for a good paddling cadence? I've spent some time looking at the various videos showing the forward stroke at different web sites, and they seem to show a very fast cadence (about one complete stroke rotation every second or even faster), while the printed advice seems to emphasize torso rotation and gliding between the strokes. Since I tend to focus on technique, I've been concentrating on a solid front plant (as far forward as I can without bending the body) around the toes, a steady rotation while keeping the paddle close to the side of the boat, and extracting the paddle near the hip. Doing this gives me a cadence of about one every two seconds or so. On a measured course, I did 8 km (5 miles) in just over 1 hour (no wind or current), and on a recent day paddle, I did 32 km (20 miles) in about 4.5 hours (10-20 kph wind headwind, for first half of trip, same as tailwind for return). My boat is a Current Design Sqall (plastic, 16'6" long) and I'm using Aquabound "expedition" paddles. All my paddling to date has been on flat water, although I like to go out when the wind is up. So, is my cadence a reasonable one for a "regular" paddler? Should I be shortening the stroke to increase the cadence? |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 22-Aug-2005, "PG" wrote:
So, is my cadence a reasonable one for a "regular" paddler? For a regular paddler, the correct cadence is the one you are comfortable with. Mike |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Michael Daly" wrote:
On 22-Aug-2005, "PG" wrote: So, is my cadence a reasonable one for a "regular" paddler? For a regular paddler, the correct cadence is the one you are comfortable with. Mike Thank you Mike, for a very "zen" answer.  Ok, forget the "regular" part. Much earlier in life (deep voice: many, many moons ago...) I used to run a lot, and while the enthusiasm was there, I wasn't keeping up with the older but better runners. One of them pointed out to me that my running style was rather short and choppy, and if I changed to a more flowing stride, rolling from heel to toe, it might help. It took several weeks before I felt comfortable with the new stride, but once I "got it", I covered more ground faster, with less fatigue and muscle strain. Not long after that, I got into long-distance touring by bike, and a similar evolution happened. A kind fellow traveller pointed out that my cadence was very slow due to use of too-high gears. After experimenting, I came up with a cadence of 70-90 rpm at a medium gear, which I could do for hours. Now that I have taken up kayak touring, I'm asking whether a slower cadence, with a longer power stroke is better than a shorter, higher-cadence power stroke, or whether a low-power but high-cadence stroke (as with a greenland paddle, I guess) will give me the ability to paddle all day, cover long distances, but be able to actually enjoy the area I'm paddling through from beginning to end. Paul -- Sent via Travel Newsgroups http://www.travelnewsgroups.com |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 24-Aug-2005, PG wrote: It took several weeks before I felt comfortable with the new stride, but once I "got it", I covered more ground faster, with less fatigue and muscle strain. I was thinking of a running analogy when I answered, and I know from many years ago when I ran that running at an "off pace" was more tiring than running at my own pace. Hence, paddle at your own pace. Now that I have taken up kayak touring, I'm asking whether a slower cadence, with a longer power stroke is better than a shorter, higher-cadence power stroke, or whether a low-power but high-cadence stroke (as with a greenland paddle, I guess) will give me the ability to paddle all day, cover long distances, but be able to actually enjoy the area I'm paddling through from beginning to end. Now this is a slightly different way of asking and the answer is - I don't honestly know. First of all - when using a Greenland style or a Euro, I find I use the same candence. Regardless of which paddle I use, I end up going the same speed as the others I paddle with. I'm not sure why so many folks consider the GP as requiring a faster cadence. I prefer a slower cadence so that I use a full rotation. Keeping that rotation with a fast cadence may be more efficient, but it would mean going faster, which would be exhausting. Increasing the tempo without increasing the speed would mean shortening the rotation. That wouldn't mean using more arm power, just less torso power per stroke. In terms of the degree to which the paddle blade draws or sweeps, a shorter stroke, with a catch not so far forward and an exit not so far aft would add less turning to the kayak and more of the work would result in forward motion. That along with the higher tempo would sound more efficient. (More significant with a low stroke than with a high stroke). However, it still remains that the most efficient is not necessarily the least energy use. It may be more efficient to go fast but that may require output that takes the fun out of kayaking. Similarly, if the most efficient is too slow, you won't get anywhere. I'm not aware of anyone really doing any meaningful tests of kayakers in non-racing (i.e. 500m - 1km sprints) conditions. There's been a lot of talk, but no data. Mike |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
....stuff deleted Now that I have taken up kayak touring, I'm asking whether a slower cadence, with a longer power stroke is better than a shorter, higher-cadence power stroke, or whether a low-power but high-cadence stroke (as with a greenland paddle, I guess) will give me the ability to paddle all day, cover long distances, but be able to actually enjoy the area I'm paddling through from beginning to end. Paul Paul is onto the basic idea. Muscles fatigue for two reasons: - overuse from repetitions at a high rate of speed - overuse from few repetitions against force at low speeds You can replicate these by doing the following: - open and close your hand as fast as you can (no resistance) - climb a steep hill (10 % + grade) on a bicycle In both cases, you will fatigue within a couple of minutes. Depending upon conditioning, you may be able to continue to climb the hill, but it is unlikely that you can continue to open and close your hand after about 2 minutes. After climbing the hill, however, you will need more time to recover from the cycling than you will from the hand exercise, so there is a difference in the two types of fatigue (i.e. hard work against low resistance tends to produce soreness, while fast repetitions do not). Thus, there is an obvious mid-point of optimal performance before fatigue sets in. Surprisingly, however, the physical studies suggest that this optimal performance point results (for most) in a cadence that is too slow (not a universal truth - I know a few distance cyclists who prefer a cadence closer to 60, but most, like me, prefer a rate closer to 90). Cyclists and paddlers will (tend to) find a cadence that is a tad faster than that optimal performance point. The last study I read suggested that this is because at the optimal performance point, the muscles fatigue from both methods of overuse. Paddlers can adjust cadence by shortening the shaft and narrowing the paddle blade, with the short shaft having a more drastic effect (a fat blade is similar to a high gear in that it increases resistance, and weight, making each stroke a tad more difficult to do). In any case, the right cadence is fully dependant upon the choice/comfort of the paddler. Hope this helps (rather than muddies) understanding. Rick |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Rick Donnelly" wrote in message m... ...stuff deleted Paul is onto the basic idea. Muscles fatigue for two reasons: - overuse from repetitions at a high rate of speed - overuse from few repetitions against force at low speeds You can replicate these by doing the following: - open and close your hand as fast as you can (no resistance) - climb a steep hill (10 % + grade) on a bicycle In both cases, you will fatigue within a couple of minutes. Depending upon conditioning, you may be able to continue to climb the hill, but it is unlikely that you can continue to open and close your hand after about 2 minutes. After climbing the hill, however, you will need more time to recover from the cycling than you will from the hand exercise, so there is a difference in the two types of fatigue (i.e. hard work against low resistance tends to produce soreness, while fast repetitions do not). Thus, there is an obvious mid-point of optimal performance before fatigue sets in. Surprisingly, however, the physical studies suggest that this optimal performance point results (for most) in a cadence that is too slow (not a universal truth - I know a few distance cyclists who prefer a cadence closer to 60, but most, like me, prefer a rate closer to 90). Cyclists and paddlers will (tend to) find a cadence that is a tad faster than that optimal performance point. The last study I read suggested that this is because at the optimal performance point, the muscles fatigue from both methods of overuse. Paddlers can adjust cadence by shortening the shaft and narrowing the paddle blade, with the short shaft having a more drastic effect (a fat blade is similar to a high gear in that it increases resistance, and weight, making each stroke a tad more difficult to do). In any case, the right cadence is fully dependant upon the choice/comfort of the paddler. Hope this helps (rather than muddies) understanding. Rick Rick, I once played the role of a "trained athlete" (all together now... many moons ago) in which I and a "sedentary" individual were compared in terms of physiologic responses to increases in exercise rate (this to a class of med students doing a course on exercise physiology). We both rode stationary bikes, and were hooked into an ECG machine, ventilator and gas analyzer. The protocol was for us to both ride the bikes for five minute intervals, first at no resistance, then at successively increasing resistance levels. The machines measured the work output, the heart rate, the amount of air being breathed in and out, and the gas composition (c02 and O2 ratios). While the levels at which I and the other individual "topped out" were different, the physiologic responses were similar. In essence, the exercise demonstrated that as the amount of work increases, the body adapts by increasing heart rate (oxygen delivery), ventilation volume (oxygen uptake and carbon dioxide exhaust), and oxygen consumption up to a certain level (which, if I remember correctly was termed VO2max). Energy consumption up to this point is purely aerobic. As the effort level increases past this point, the muscles start producing energy anaerobically (accumulating lactic acid as a by-product). Anaerobic work cannot be carried out for long as the accumulation of lactic acid starts becoming very painful, and the breathing pattern collapses into gasps. If the work is spread out over a number of muscle groups, then the overall work level is increased (up to the limit of maximum ability of the heart/lungs to deliver the oxygen). How this applies to kayaking is to use technique to balance the paddling workload over the maximum number of muscles, so that no one group gets overloaded. So in essence, that is what I am trying to figure out - how to achieve maximum output (without crossing into the anaerobic territory) and which combination of techniques to use. How this relates to your defining the two types of exercises (high resistance & low cadence, vs. low resistance & high cadence), is that the soreness caused by the high resistance exercise is due to lactic acid accumulation. Recovery is also slower because the lactic acid is an intermediate oxidation product, and must be oxidized to CO2 to be eliminated, and the "oxygen debt" that is incurred while producing lactic acid is then repaid during recovery. Increasing cadence (while reducing the load) works to a certain point, but as the cadence increases more we get into neuro-muscular control issues - it becomes harder and harder to coordinate smooth muscle motion and the motions become more "ballistic", until you cannot keep the motions coordinated and it all falls apart. The sweet spot I'm looking for is where the cadence is high enough that the work level is within the aerobic capacity of my system. Now, do the maximal exercise long enough, and you run into another limitation - that of your liver's ability to deliver glucose to the bloodstream at a sufficient level to support both work generation and brain function. Once your liver depletes its stores of glycogen, the blood sugar level drops rapidly, and you get the infamous "bonk" where the athlete runs out of energy and becomes sluggish and uncoordinated. I've had that happen to me twice during my cycling phase - and it is not a pleasant experience. Fortunately, I haven't yet reached that level in paddling. Regards, Paul |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
PG wrote:
Many thanks for the helpful input on my previous questions, so maybe I can ask another one: what makes for a good paddling cadence? I've spent some time looking at the various videos showing the forward stroke at different web sites, and they seem to show a very fast cadence (about one complete stroke rotation every second or even faster), while the printed advice seems to emphasize torso rotation and gliding between the strokes. Since I tend to focus on technique, I've been concentrating on a solid front plant (as far forward as I can without bending the body) around the toes, a steady rotation while keeping the paddle close to the side of the boat, and extracting the paddle near the hip. Doing this gives me a cadence of about one every two seconds or so. On a measured course, I did 8 km (5 miles) in just over 1 hour (no wind or current), and on a recent day paddle, I did 32 km (20 miles) in about 4.5 hours (10-20 kph wind headwind, for first half of trip, same as tailwind for return). My boat is a Current Design Sqall (plastic, 16'6" long) and I'm using Aquabound "expedition" paddles. All my paddling to date has been on flat water, although I like to go out when the wind is up. So, is my cadence a reasonable one for a "regular" paddler? Should I be shortening the stroke to increase the cadence? A hint: watch your kayak´s bow. As long as it stays steady, you are doing fine. If you paddle too fast for your ability or pull too long strokes, your bow starts going either up and down or moving sideways. Then it is time to slow down/shorten the pull. Jaakko o~ (____/____) / |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Jaakko" wrote in message ... stuff deleted A hint: watch your kayak´s bow. As long as it stays steady, you are doing fine. If you paddle too fast for your ability or pull too long strokes, your bow starts going either up and down or moving sideways. Then it is time to slow down/shorten the pull. Jaakko o~ (____/____) / Since the bow of my kayak is curved rather strongly (I guess to allow it to go over waves), I get a nice bow wave appearing once I get to about 4 mph. As I go faster, the wave gets bigger. The bow does go up on the wave as I go faster, but what I find most noticeable is the size of the wave. Lately, I've been using that as the indicator of speed and every time the wave starts going down from its "usual" height, I know I'm slacking off. |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
PG wrote:
"Jaakko" wrote in message ... stuff deleted A hint: watch your kayak´s bow. As long as it stays steady, you are doing fine. If you paddle too fast for your ability or pull too long strokes, your bow starts going either up and down or moving sideways. Then it is time to slow down/shorten the pull. Jaakko o~ (____/____) / Since the bow of my kayak is curved rather strongly (I guess to allow it to go over waves), I get a nice bow wave appearing once I get to about 4 mph. As I go faster, the wave gets bigger. The bow does go up on the wave as I go faster, but what I find most noticeable is the size of the wave. Lately, I've been using that as the indicator of speed and every time the wave starts going down from its "usual" height, I know I'm slacking off. It also means that you're near the maximum hull speed for your boat and that you're probably wasting energy trying to push past it. It's a very inefficient way to paddle, as once you reach this point, the energy requirements to increase your speed go up exponentially. Here's a link to an explanation and a calculator: http://www.cncphotoalbum.com/technic.../hullspeed.htm There is some debate at to whether the formula is accurate for kayaks, since racers routinely exceed the theoretical maximum speed for their boats, but fundamental premise is still applicable. It sounds like you need a higher performance boat that's better suited to your paddling style. Worrying about the most efficient cadence is rather pointless when you're throwing away massive amounts of energy due to an inefficient boat. It's the functional equivalent of riding a bike while towing a parachute. "Penny wise and pound foolish", so to speak. The most efficient way to paddle your Squall is to slow down to below the maximum hull speed where the wavemaking drag on the boat is dramatically lower. Don't get me wrong, the Squall is a fine boat for what it is, it's just not what you want if you're serious about efficiency and going fast. You should be looking at racing boats or "race-inspired" touring boats. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
