So, my little ploy to try and get you to help me write this blog, and do some of this research has fallen flat — no response, no takers L   Not to worry, we intrepid pioneers are used to surprises good and bad, obstacles and nay sayers.  Heck, I no sooner had the first few blog posts up and the criticisms in the forums started.

Undaunted we press on.  However, in the face of apathy or opposition, I find that you must have a very compelling and even personal stake in the subject at hand.  Without that, your will and motivation to continue against a cowardly cloud of negativity will wane, and the lack of resolve will be your undoing; the study will end up incomplete or poorly executed.

Solve a Problem or Just Learn & Discover

Last post we talked about using some test subjects to help us form a statement of the problem we wish to solve or learning objective we hope to accomplish (yes, sometimes research is just meant to satisfy curiosity and the often insatiable desire to learn).  In lieu of a group consensus, we will pursue something recent and applicable to some of the training we are working with at Cycling Fusionâ„¢.  We (my partner Tom Scotto and I) have been trying to establish cadence and Heart Zone guidelines for Muscular Endurance and Tempo rides.

It is our contention, based on our collective experience in training for our own races, and training others for varying degrees of cycling, that these two components (heart rate and cadence) can be combined to insure a greater degree of training specificity, and that some of the specific training adaptations can be targeted by prescribing clear ranges for these parameters.

KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid)

While this acronym can apply to most of life, it is even more important in the field of science and scientific research.  Its application here is fairly clear right from the start.  To wit: since Muscular Endurance and Tempo rides target different adaptations, we will simplify our study by selecting Muscular Endurance alone as the subject of inquiry.  This is the second step in setting up a research study after selecting a topic that is to simplify your subject of inquiry before going any further.

The next tangible step is to come up with a clear statement or working hypothesis (more on that in the next post).  However, first we must do a relatively thorough review of the literature to see how much has already been done on the topic, and if that work is directly or indirectly pertinent.  Armed with that information, we will be in a better position to form our guiding statement or hypothesis.

The Process So Far

  1. Select a topic of study
  2. Simplify the topic
  3. Conduct a review of the literature

You are welcome to join me by independently researching “Muscular Endurance for Cycling” and specifically its relationship to cadence and heart rate.  We will report our findings in the next blog post.


Add Your Thoughts...