Fast Twitch Tri-FULL (Page 18)

DAVE -

GREAT qualitative feedback!  Moreover, your qualitative experiences jive really well with my own, in all three disciplines.

In the swim, my form can go to hell in a handcart quite quickly if I try to have a very fast turnover.  Of the many things I have tried in swimming, one has been a fast turnover to compensate for the fact that my kick is not very good.  my thinking was that I need more propulsion from somewhere, and once the legs are effectively removed from the equation, what's left is core and arms.  Now, I am slightly fatser with a higher turnover and more spl..but as I said above, that can be undermined quite quickly when I start windmilling or thrashing.  I have experimented some with "surging", which works really well on the run and quite well on the bike, but not so well in the swim.  I think that's because I have just one-adn-a-half swim "speeds", so a so-called "surge" has little effect.  So sad!

Your approach to running is ideal -- keep it light and smooth.  My former coach used to have a workout every three weeks or so with one goal:  "Run Pretty".   the thought is to emulate what one thinks is "good" running form, and it turned out for me that "light and smooth"  Is just about right.  And as you further describe your center of gravity emphasis, and the light landing, and especially the glide through push-off, it sounds like you could be a poster boy for Chi Running, maybe!

As for the bike, again I'm with you.  My sprint cadence is around 100, and down justa  tick or two for olys.  I too am comfortable with training at 90-95, and with resistance in the mix.  It took me a whole buncha years to get to that point, but when I'm In Season i can hold it indefinitely (well, up to about two hours, that is, and I will have to be all over my shifters to do it, but it gets done).   As for your comments about "faster" versus "harder", that's bangon, too -- right down to "harder" equating with cadence dropping and muscle tension setting in......and how they work against speed.  (Oh, nooooo......) 

Cadences… let's see.  I don't have all of them, but what I can figure is below - excuse the stream of consciousness...

Bike:  Sprint (town line) is 103-107ish. Sprint tri or FTP is 90-95 (93 being most common, oddly), as is a longer fast ride (same cadence, but maybe down one gear for the lower power output).  Long, slower ride is high 80's.  I occasionally train at much lower on some hills (50's, big gear, mashing while trying to be smooooth) - not sure, but it feels like a good straight up muscle (not endurance) builder.  I do have a power meter and did most of my Time Crunched program based on holding Wattage (loved it, as it was like a cross between skiing and flying a plane - at least to me!).

Definitely feel like I can maintain better speed over longer distance with a higher cadence - even though the wattage is the same.  I liked the analogy of "lungs and legs burning at the same rate/time" (paraphrased, clearly), as it does feel like the higher cadence shifts some burden from the quads to the alveoli...

Swim: went to the pool tonight for a recovery swim (HM yesterday, so I wasn't gonna run!) and wanted to check this out.  Did just a bit over 2,000 @ 1:52 (no stops - just hopped in and swam easy until I felt like checking distance - saw 2025 and thought that felt about right for the night. Felt great not to do sets for a change… ahem - back to the regularly scheduled programming now&hellip.  At that pace - an easy "go all day" pace - I was stroking at 18.5 per minute on the Garmin, which I think corresponds to 37 by the way you are counting (?).  I looked at some faster previous swim sets, and when I'm down in the low 1:20s or high 1:teens (as fast as I EVER get - until next season… mwahahahahaaaa), the rate jumps to the high 40's (45-48).  In my last tri, the 910 seems to be saying I was at 63 spm!  Not sure if it records OWS strokes as each arm and laps as one side, but that might explain some of the "breathlessness."     Not sure that is accurate or possible for me...

I'm not sure that just stroking faster is efficient, though - not yet sure where those lines (speed/efficiency) cross and optimize both (rather than maximize either).  I guess that's what this next year is for!

As for the run, I remember counting a few times, but don't remember the number.  I'll definitely count on my next run (and know it's faster when I'm off the bike, as that seems to be the only way to get the "run" idea back into my legs and brain quickly).

Definitely gets me thinking about both the run and the swim.  I started riding pretty much in the low 90's, as a work colleague is an insane cyclist and impressed the need for (pedal) speed upon me early.  So, I just thought that was how one did it and rode this summer that way.  The other two sports are more of a mystery, as yet…  Odd, as running is what I've been doing (slowly and low distance-ly) for the last bunch of years.  Oh well, lots of room to improve.  

MATT -

So how did the HM go???

I am just doing a quick skim-and-leave, but saw your comment about stroking faster on the swim and possibly less efficiency.  I haven't done any "tally" of responses yet, but, that seems to be a concern in several -- I'm thinking of JASON, and QUINCY, and me, who I think used words such as flailing, thrashing, windmilling.  And yet -- for those of us who use high cadence on the bike and run, we hardly feel that at all; the oposite, in fact, I think. 

Good thought-line from you:  "......where those lines (speed/efficiency) cross and optimize both (rather than maximize either)......"

And the follow-up line is where my thinking is:  "I guess that's what thias next year is for."   Except for me and swimming, although I still work at IT (various stroke rates) and other things (bilateral; breathing even less frequently, such as 4th, 6th, even 8th stroke; high elbows on pull; arm/hand angles on pull; hand extention at finish of pull).........I have no big hopes that ANY of it will affect any significant change.  Big improvements happened with big work with cycling and running, but never materialized that way with the swim.  Alas and woe!!

More later --- but not until you tell a tale or two from the HM!

Every 4th, 6th or 8th stroke?!?!?     How on Earth can one go that long without breathing if you're working hard? I look at every third (just to practice and get a bit more fluid - I breathe about as comfortably to one side as the other... comes from growing up swimming around boats, I think - you need to be able to avoid whitecaps to the kisser!) as a long time without O2.  I can't imagine 6...

As for the HM, it went very well, thanks!  I got a lot of advice off the tri talk thread on clothing, hydration and how close to LT to consider running.

It was a blustery start to the day - under 30 with wind chill, but sunny and a stunningly gorgeous route.  A bit hilly, but not crushing.  One of those runs where you're not ever hot (if dressed right) but start to FREEZE within about 8 seconds of finishing - and I guessed right on attire (was cold within a minute of finishing, but never hot on the run - unusual for me, as I run a bit warm usually!).

Clothes and hydration in a well supported race can be dealt with/optimized on the fly (Kim and the kids were at the 6mi mark and finish - and gave me a fresh 10oz of NUUN - and I could drop clothes with them or toss in the woods and collect later, as this was local for us - Wayland start then through Sudbury and back, and we live in Concord, for those who know the area).  What was my real challenge was what I should shoot for in terms of pace!  Hadn't ever raced a HM and my marathons are over 15 years remote, with only a 5k early this year and my sprint runs to peg off - not great comparators...

I had run a 1:56 for the HM distance on my last training run the week before, and felt good but that I'd pushed for a training run.  So, my goal was to break 1:50.  My stretch was to break 1:45.  These seemed like a good push, especially as I only spent about 5-6 weeks actually prepping post-tris (did the back 45% of Higdon plan, mostly advanced, with a couple days of concessions to not ramping too quickly and getting some biking and swimming in).

For HR, I was going to try to do the first mile at Z2, next 7 at Z3 and final 5 in Z4 with a Z5 kick to the finish.

Ran Z2 for 1.5 minutes.   Then Z3, from low to high, for ~38 minutes.  Z4 for 1:02 (from low to high) and the last couple minutes right in Z5 (which felt great - a youngster whizzed up on my shoulder and I stuck with him long enough to "draft" up to the oldster - as in my age - 100m up the road I'd been chasing for 3 miles and finish 100m ahead of... yes, that's how I race - picking off people in front through the back half).  A nice steady increase in HR and suffering.  Loved it!

For time, I ran the whole thing in about 1:43 and a half or so (official was just under 1:44, and 910 had 1:43 and a couple seconds - but between a slow herd start to get to the line and some operator error in hitting "start" and "stop" - such confusing buttons... - I figure splitting the difference is about right).  So, VERY happy with that, especially as I think that with training I could get faster (felt like my legs were the limiter, not lungs - which for me is encouraging!).

I suppose I could have shaved a minute or two by pushing the pace up earlier (my last mile was a 6:45, with my average a 7:5x - so maybe I would have been better pushing earlier?), but not sure if that would lead to a blow up at the end. 

I'm psyched to race more and at different distances so that I can really get a feel for how to pace each for the best times I can turn in, given fitness level at that time and specific training, etc.  Right now, it's all guesswork (scientific WAGs) - but fun.

My challenge NOW is to figure out what the heck I'm going to do this winter.  I like to have a target to shoot for, but there aren't that many races until next spring 'round here.  As a newb to tri, I'm not as comfortable just picking a plan and grinding all year, as that seems like a long time to trust a "plan" without knowing the race specific progress. 

Man alive, it's easier with only one sport at a time!  At least that's rationale for why all those "single sportsters" crush me on the run (but I get less crushed on a tri). 

That's all I've got - no drama.  Just a great race for a great cause on a great day with great support from my family and what felt like a solid effort.  So, a solidly great day!

GANG!

Coupla things:

1. Sorry about being AWOL yesterday.  Every so often and for no obvious reason, we have a day or two in which maintaining a computer connection is difficult.  We are rural and on satellite, and it is not 100% perfect; yesterday was one of those days.
2. As down-days for the computer go, yesterday was no bad -- there happened to be the small matter of an election, and  that allowed my attention to rest contentedly elsewhere.  (That I didn't go to bed until 2:25 a.m. or so will carry repercussions for a few days, however!)
3. Big emphasis on cadence thoughts on the swim and bike, less so on the run.  Curious!   I brought up the topic of cadence because it is great stuff to work on during the off-season, especially on the swim and run.  (For the bike, it's harder to do for those of us who are stuck cycling indoors for the next 4-6 months.)  It's time to summarize group thougths on the bike and swim, maybe, and then turn a more focused eye on cadence on the run.
4. I'm really interested in QUINCY'S observation that short-course training is (or can be) more "complex" than training for IM and ( I would say) even HIM.  I had never thought about training differences in terms of being more or less "complex", but as soon as I read it, it resonated with me.  More on that later (and sooner, as opposed to later-later!)

Even with a (seemingly) working computer again............Iam off to Ottawa to do a swim, and a Yoga class.........and won't be back until this evening.  See you then!

MATT -

Quick for now, with much more later.....

I can't sustain 6th or 8th in a race, and too often I fairly quickly drift back to every other breath (that implies, of course, that I am unilateral).  This happens in a crowd, or even a semblance of a crowd, but if I am out there mostly on my own and working entirely to my own rhythm, I can make it every 4th breath quite comfortably. 

I "train" for this by doing something like ladderes in the pool --- start with every 8th, do that just once usually, then the next breath or two will be taken on the 6th, then the next three or four breaths will be on the 4th, and then I'll hit a breath at the 2nd stroke before starting to climb back up the ladder -- a few at every 4th, one (at this point) at the 6th, one painful one on the 8th. 

I usually do these as low-intensity 100s, focusing really on complete and even exhalations underwater, and then a quick grab of breath.  I'm not sure where all it gets me; maybe it's just an excuse to keep at low-intensity!

I think of this as "brerathing fartleks", especially as a 100 progresses and I'm not too sure of where my oxygen balance sits! 

MIKE and WAYNE -

I still owe you two from a couple of days ago!

AMY -

I am ready to divulge my hip history ("hipstory"?).  For better or worse, I think I have stabilized from the injection last week. 

MIKE -

Are you saying that your run cadence is faster off the bike than just plain old running?  If so, that's good -- better to have it when you need it than to just be able to do it when it doesn't "count".  

Presumably, though, you could knock off a higher cadence in training.....if you were inspired?  I'm guessing/wondering if you can pick it up in a tri just through a sense of competitiveness; makes sense, i think.

What was your injury that affects your cadence?  I will try to find that info in your bio, but until thyen let me guess below-the-knee, with three choices in order of descending likelihood:  Achilles; calf; plantar fasciitis.  Yes to any of those?

FWIW,  conventional speedwork always stands a god chance of aggravating my Achilles, although -- fortunately!! -- running at 90+ does not fit that bill.  Well, it does if 90+ really encompasses 94-and-higher, which is where I can (stupidly) get to doing serious speedwork.  But in races I can keep it at 89-91 indefinitely, and that gets me out of the danger zone of 94+ (which I cannot sustain, even if it didn't "hurt" me).

To accommodate my Achilles, i no longer do conventional speedwork, keeping "speed" sessions to tempo runs, and some laid-back fartlek stuff.  Not 100% ideal, but it keeps me in the game instead of on the shelf.

Good on the trainer efforts, and real good to have a swim technique that keeps you under 2:00/100.  Just curious -- if you were to aim for 1:45/100......how many 100s could you do at that pace.  (Answer for me --- about three, on a good day, and with some discomfort!)

MATT -

Cadence responses first, and later about your mighty fine HIM!!!

I agree 100% about hill work on the bike being more of a muscle-builder than an endurance-builder.  I think it shoudl be like that........but I'm not sure.  Well, I suppose in a sense, yes it should be endurance-enhancing.  I would think of something such as training for IM Lake Placid, where one would hope to do enough hillwork in training to be able to survive (and even prosper??) on the hills of both loops.  But that's maybe a fine line between having straight-out endurance, and having increased musculature to make those hills less nasty. 

I neither ski nor fly planes, so I am letting my mind run wild trying to fit that image into training with a Power Meter.  Sounds beneficial, anyhow -- maybe because both flying and downhill skiing will usually be faster than cycling!

I would guess that 93 is my best sweet spot on the bike, at least in short-course.  What is it about 93?  Whatever -- ALL POWER TO 93!!!!

I just asked bike about why he has higher cadence running off the biek......and maybe your answer also speaks for him.  That would be where you say ".......to get the 'run' idea back into my legs and brain quickly".   I now wonder if it works the opposite for me, that a couple of "tricks" I use at the end of my race-rides set me up for a high run cadence without thinking about it at all (other than to DO it!!).  I'm sure that's the case, and it's what those tricks are all about.  (More on thsoe later!)

WAYNE -

Going from 10:00/mile pace for along run down to 9:15 is enormous, and the 9:20 off a negative-split ride is likewise impressive --- as is the 9;32 for 8.6 miles.  It seems all your "lot more" running has veritably catapulted you any plateau you may have been on!

As for your brick run feeling "odd and slow", but turning out okay..............that's one of the nifty things about running.  I would say that 80% of the runs I do that feel unnervingly "ponderous" (which probably equates to your "odd and slow") are, in fact, not good runs.  But then there are those in which I feel just as ponderous, and I complete them under a clowd of self-flagellation --- only to check my tiem at the end and see that it was really quite good.  Son of a gun!

I don't know quite how that works, but -- thank god for small mercies -- it plays out even more frequently like that in races.  That is, i can set out on a race-run and feel not quite all together, and then I get to the first mile in a pretty sweet time.  I will, of course, figure that the marker for that first mile was misplaced, only to see the same pace applying to the next mile.   While that is a really fine way for things to turn out, there are times in which I feel ponderous --- and perform in kind. 

So it goes, and while it's depressing at the time, I've done this long enough to take the long view of things and realize that not all races will be sweetness and light.  Just like any sport, i guess.  Dez Bryant drops every ball thrown at him.  Kevin Youkilis striks out four times in a game.  Paul Pierce misses his first nine shots from the floor.  So it goes!!

As for your 5km...........just hang out a bit and one will stumble your way.  They're about as common as the 4-5-6 subway in NYC (when the system is nice and operational, that is), and one that suits your wants and needs can't be too far away! 

WAYNE again -

No, what I wear under tights are tri shorts, the same as I wear in races.  No bunching that way, and they are, of course, very tight, so conserve heat in potential "problem areas" when it is potentially dangerously cold. 

I try to make it as long into the winter in just tri shorts as I can --- just because, really.  Any way that I can stave off the accoutrements and accessories of winter just makes me feel less victimized by it, so I persist as minimally as I can for as long as I can.  Basically, i win a bunch of battles, but lose the war.  Every year.  Sigh.

Excellent for you on avoiding injuries thus far, and being conservative and taking your time ramping up distance and time is a certifiable good way to help stay injury-free.  I can stand before youa s Exhbit A,B,C,D...............K,L,M, and N as to what happens when one doesn't have a "bionic" body, but likes to train as if he does.   Some people can knock off big miles with to-die-for regularity, but i never could.  I have maybe done eight 45+-mile running weeks in all my time doing this, and never managed to pull off three in a row; some injury always put me one the shelf.  Again -- So it goes!

That's good for your daughter that she dumped her ITB issues.  I have never suffered form it up high, but the few times it has hit me where it should, at the knee attachment, it is very painful -- especially navigating stairs.  Oh, and any running, too!

Try the treadmill.  I started working with my former coach in Feb '03, and every training block (of 3 weeks) he would have at least one 'mill run in it.  He knew I didn't belong to a gym and had no access to a 'mill, but he kept putting them there to prod me mostly.  Come March '05 and I FINALLY joined a gym.............and tried one of his prescribed workouts on it.................and worked like I had never worked before.   I had convinced myslef that it was all fine to "subsistute" an outside run for one of his 'mill runs, but in rality NOTHING can keep you as honest as following an intense workout on a treadmill.  That's not to say that every 'mill run needs to be at Z4 or Z5, and in fact relatively few should (just as most outside runs should not be killer speed or intensity sessions), but when one is called for..............and if you follow the protocol of the plan, it'll have you working harder than you thought possible.

That's just an aside to the garden-variety benefits -- 'mill running keeps you warm when it's cold, dry when it's pouring, and safe from road hazards if your roads are patently unsafe at the tiems you need to do your runs.

QUINCY -

You say you didn't train for short-course specifically, and with that in mind -- and looking at the colossal improvement from '11 to '12 on the same course -- I can see why you want to push the edges of training for speed. 

The data for the two races are stunning:

• a time improvement of 4:41 -- which for short stuff is almost unheard-of
• massive jumps in the three "places" -- especially gender and divison (and that's not at all to sell short the overall pacing!)
• a two-minute faster swim (I should be so fortunate!)
• going from 21.3 to 22.4 is a mega-jump, when one gets into that range of speed/pace
• and in doing so, you had a better run in '12, too.
• oh, yeah -- better transitions as well (FREE TIME!  FREE TIME!!  FRE TIME!!!)

Onwards!

As for swimming, 1:45 for 100 meters is just about all-out for me, my PR 100y time is around 1:34 (push off wall but no flip turn).  Given a minute or so rest between intervals I could probably hold that pace for maybe 6-8 intervals, less with less rest obviously.  And YES, there would be some (a lot) of discomfort!. 

Thanks Steve!

I'll look for long sleeve tech shirts and tights.  Temps in the upper 30's this morning and that did not sound like running weather to me.  Need to get some gear to help me through it.  Other than a brick or tri I haven't run in the tri shorts.  I need to try that out to see how that can help with cool weather.

In my youth I was at times rather abusive to my body, but being young and healthy meant I bounced back from just about anything in hours to days.  Recovery is not as fast as one gets older.  I'm not a professional athlete, so no reason to injure myself pushing too hard.  And that would be counter to my goal of getting and staying in better shape/health

I figure I'll get on the treadmill soon and see how they operate.  The weather is rapidly turning to winter here in Atlanta.  We were 9 degrees below average yesterday.  I've made good progress in my running this year, so I'd rather not lose it and have to start over again.  1) it will help me to continue running on days I'd bail on it due to temps, 2) I think it may help me get a good solid feel for different paces.  Unlike the variations of running on the road a treadmill can give a solid non-varying pace.  No changes in wind, slope, footing or traffic.  It should help me know what a 7:45, 7:30, 7:15 pace feels like.

Then I'll check out the spin bikes.  Figure out how they operate and adjust to fit the rider.  Then I'll print out Jorge's winter bike plan and use my HRM with a spin bike to keep my riding in shape.  Between the short days and cool temps, it's going to quickly get hard to get any biking in without a significant change in attire.  I picked up a fair amount of speed this summer in a pretty short time, so while I can do it again I'd prefer to build on it instead of rebuild.

And with the kids in tennis and track in the spring I'll have a bunch of events to attend.  Gotta keep at it over the winter as my schedule could be a jumble in the spring.  Fortunately the morning temps will be back up, so I'll be able to do runs in the morning easily and that doesn't conflict with anything else.

Ok, sounds good. See, I'm easy. I'll take a look at it in the next few days. This is different than Jorge's plan, yes?

In fairness, I thought it was a massive improvement too, but then looking at some of my overall placement (vs everyone, including the men) I actually fell a couple of places. Which means....well who knows what it means exactly. The best part was the run improvement, because even if I didn't actually improve as much as I would like to claim, the run you can't fake. (the swim in 11 was choppy). Either way, you are right...the prospect of actually training for short course instead of just getting what I get on non-specific training is what is so interesting to me.

Hey all, I figured I would ask this here since you guys seem to have good advice. I've been having back problems for several months, and my chiropractor had me feeling really good, and he's giving me the ok to run again. I ran 2 miles this past Saturday then was on my feet shopping much of the rest of the day, and now my back is acting up again.  It's my L4 that is compressing the disc and putting pressure on the nerve, causing spot and some radiating pain across my back. It doesn't hurt at all when I'm running, but tightens up if I stand still, and aches when I sit. 

Basically does anyone have advice on how I can start back running and be easier on my back? I'm running in shoes with less padding than most, so I think it's time to go back to some thicker padded shoes. I also ran offroad, hoping that would help. Does anyone have any back strengthening exercises that are good. I also run slow... like... really slow. 12:00 mile slow. Running that slow feels like it causes more pounding than when I do interval or tempo runs that are 10:00 mile or faster, but I don't have the confidence to keep up that pace. Since I'm practically starting over should I work on lengthening and softening my stride and go a bit faster? It almost feels like a shuffle sometimes. I feel like I have decent form most of the time, but I worry that I arch my back a bit much with my chest puffed out too far, which compresses my spine backwards, kinda like laying on your stomach with your torso on a pillow.  I'm hoping to be back running around Thanksgiving, right now I'm biking mostly and getting in a few swims. 

Q -

Hmmm.  I'm seeing Overall as 143/2286 this year, as opposed to 154/1889 in '11, which translates to top 6% this year vs 8% in '11.  Nice!!!  Your % improvements in Gender and the (all-important) Divison were at least as good, with Divison finding your at the top 3% --- and oh-so-close to the podium.  And that's against 117 of your a.g. cohort, which is an enormous field to do so well against.

Anyhow, i'm just wondering what I'm missing in the Overall.  You say you fell a couple of places, but, again, I see not only going from 154th to 143rd --- but in a field that was larger by a whopping 397 people.

I ahve thought quite a bit about your comment about short-course training being potentially more "complex" than for long-course, and I will get some thought here very soon.  I'll just say for now that I agree completely, especially for people with pretty serious performance goals --- and that would be you!

I hope to get to that within a day or two, along with a summation of sorts about where cadence work can play into short-course training.  No rest for the weary ( or is the wicked??).   Noooooooooo..........

Steve, I did do some internetting after the cadence discussion and came to a realization and another question. First realization is that I probably under reported my cadence. It is slow but not grinding slow...just not one of those spiffy 95-100 types that seem to be the "ultimate" in cycling. And the other question I have is whether increased cadence is the chicken or the egg? IOW, is it getting strong on the bike that increases your cadence or is it working on increasing cadence that gets you strong on the bike? I am not assuming you know for sure, but it is worth more research and thought I think.

That being said, I am not opposed to doing high cadence work...I have in past, and I end up going to a higher cadence when I want to maintain a higher heart rate on the bike. I just think it's an interesting topic to delve deeper into. Sort of the same way I am not convinced the jihadists who preach run lots, mostly slow sometimes fast are preaching reality for what I want to do or am equipped to do. 

And yes, not only do I think training for sc is more complex, I think racing short course well is highly skill dependent. There are so many things that can go wrong or right that are "skill dependent" if that makes sense. Transition, bike handling, OWS, even pacing/passing/waiting on the run. I am sure everyone on this group could add more I haven't thought of.

There's a lot more to discuss on those types of topics. We could probably do a week alone on all things transition. 

Q

P.S. afa the chicago tri, the goal next year is to knock another 4 minutes off my time!!! That would be awesome. Two of my AG buddies were top 3 overall, otherwise I would have been 6th AG. Sick. It would be cool to podium such a big race like that. The other ones are so much smaller (and so much more competitive) it is almost impossible to even contemplate podium. 

Tiff, I may be able to offer a little help with the back soreness.  Like you, when I run, especially longer distances, I feel okay--it's the standing around (or shopping all day!) afterward that gets my back hurting.  I also tend to arch my back as you mentioned and that's just my posture, or postural disorder I should say!

What I've found from working with my chiropractor and a PT is that my quads/hip flexors are way over dominant and my gluts don't fire properly.  As a result, my back arches and I can feel it after running and especially after swimming (do you have issues after swimming also?).

I've added some PT inspired exercises to my repertoire and they seem to be helping.  The best one is a bridge, laying on your back with knees bent, feet flat on the ground and heels close to the butt.  With palms next to your hips, lift the hips as high as you can and squeeze those gluts.  Hold for ten seconds.  Repeat 3-4 times.  Even tougher, do this with the heels on top of a stability ball digging in for balance, knees still bent.  That stretches the hip flexor/quad while strengthening the gluts.

Let me know if that helps and I'll try to get some more of those PT exercises posted!

Steve, this thread grows so quickly.....did I miss it?  Or are you avoiding the question? 

IMHO, when it comes to the bike, people should experiment with different cadences during training, but your actual cadence during racing will be "self selected".

When I ride/race...I don't look at cadence at all on my computer.  I look at it after the race.  While riding, I monitor RPE and power.  I flip through my gears and find the gear that allows me to push the highest amount of power at the lowest RPE.  Cadence "is what it is".

On the cadence deal.  I stated before I use to race at a higher cadence >95 <105.  When I was first doing the BT cycling program I asked about doing the extended intervals at different cadences and was told its a great to break up the interval and expand your usable cadence range.  So now when I do the the longer intervals I break them up into smaller intervals anywhere from 1-5 minutes each, where I change the gears and maintain the power range the WO is after.  E.g. 20' session in 4' mini's at 90, 95, 75, 80, 85.  I sometimes go as high as 100 and others as low as 60 using 10 rpm steps.  I really think this has helped me all around.  I now race on either side of 90 but can go higher if needed (nice tailwind).  Besides small time targets are easier to go after when on the drainer.

I like to think before I started doing the program I was just a small naturally aspirated 4 cylinder engine before, with a peaky torque and power ban, had to get the rev's up otherwise I couldn't really go.  Now I'm like a turbocharged 4 cylinder engine of the same size but with a nice wide and higher torque and power band!

JASON -

Well stated, and for me even more true as I do not have any cadence readings on my computer.  On training rides, if I feel I am not riding all that well, I will do a "manual" count just as a check of my effort/output correlations.  But what I really rely on in a race is RPE and how that correlates with the pace I am keeping.  (It helps that in a race setting I can always get into that locked-in groove almost immediately.)

I really like the term "self-selected" as it applies to bike cadence.  Moreover, I like it as it applies to the process of getting to where one is most comfortable and effective, after having worked through myriad speed and paces and cadences in training.  I know as a general rule-of-thumb that roughly 80-100 is "optimal" -- which is a pretty big range.  I also know that for me, 90-93 works well.  and I also know that in any given race, some cat can blow past me pushing a cadence of maybe 80, tops.  And when that happens I think "All power to the power!"