I’m not convinced that’s the case either. To be clear, I’m neither defending nor espousing the lower cadence route. I’m exploring it under the premise we’re not running 138mi (112mi bike in a ‘running position’ + marathon… as in we’re told the tri position is to use our legs like runners, or at least that’s what I heard at the turn of the century in my first tri career) but cycling and then running.
Is this Jan Ulrich v Lance Armstrong? If you need to lift 100 lbs, would you prefer to do it in one go, or lift 50 lbs twice, or 25 lbs four times, or 10 lbs ten times? That’s what I used to explain to runners when I coached for higher cadence running, but that’s a weight-bearing activity, but are / aren’t the same principles applicable to the bike? Am I now arguing against myself?
On the knees, no hint of stress. Don’t know if that’s from ultramarathons (3 of 8 events last year were ultras, and 4 of 5 the year before) that are often time on feet slogfests or what.