Running Cadence

Brian:

I had always heard (from my marathoning days) that ideally 180 strides (steps) per minutes was the correct cadence.(I think I read that in Jack Daniel's "Running Formula".  I've tried to work towards that, but have never felt comfortable running at anything more than 174.  Interestingly, the few times they've shown marathons on TV, I've counted turnover on the leaders and they pretty much varied between 175 and 185, but most were right around 180.

Chris

I interpret his posts as only counting one leg:

counted the number of times my right foot hit the ground over 30 seconds and multiplied by 2 to get the total number of beats per minute. I averaged over the run about 98 to 100 footfalls per minute.

I was just counting one leg.

That's how I read it to Bear.

I've never actually considered running cadence.  I'll have to check it out next time I'm out running.  However, I pose the question, wouldn't running cadence be strongly determined by the runners height.  For example, I'm only 5'6" and if I want to keep up with a runner who is 6'6", then I imagine my cadence has to much higher than his to keep pace with him.

IMHO sometimes I think we over analyse things far, far too much!!

I'm assuming each time either foot hits the pavement that counts as a stride, so if you were counting just one foot, then it would be a candence of 90.

And I've noticed the same thing Brian, someone like Khalid K. (who is somewhere in the range of 5'5" has the same turnover as someone a half foot taller.

Chris

My understadning is that 98% of the population will have cycle and run cadence between 90-100, so is 98-100 really off the charts?

Chucky's original post asked "So the question is, am I too high? Should I be trying to bring it down to 90?" My cycling cadence stays between 95-105, and I would never advise a cyclist who was comfortable at that rate to back off. Got to remember that we're people, not machines, and there will be some variance among us as to what is most efficient and most comfortable. So, no, IMHO, 98-100 isn't "really off the charts."

Hi,

My dog is bugging me for a run but I haven't finished my coffee. Let's make him wait a bit and talk about why you want a running cadence of 88-95, in my opinion.

How to measure running cadence
I count the number of times my left foot strikes the ground for one minute. I'm usually 90-94 rpm. You can count foot strikes for 20 seconds, or 30 seconds. Just do the math. I HIGHLY recommend you set your watch to beep every 5-10 minutes and then count your cadence for 1 minute. This will force you to focus on your form and cadence at regular intervals. You can also get a...crap, what it's called....you can buy it from a swim shop. It's like a digital metronome you can set to beep at a prescribed rate per minute. You can set it to beep at 92rpm, for example, and then run in time to the beep. About $30.

Why do you want to run at a high cadence?
Let's talk about how people typically run. If you open up a running magazine or catalog you are presented with what running form "should" look like. You see some dude with a HUGE stride, a very dynamic, explosive picture of running, with the athlete pushing forcefully against the earth to move himself forward. Most notably, his long stride dictates that he lands on his heel, very hard. I believe this is bad. Why?

Let's play a game. Take your shoes off and find a hard surface. Concrete or asphalt is best. Now jump up and down very quickly. I'll bet $100 you were springing lightly on the balls of your feet, using your calves, achilles and arch as a natural spring. Now jump up and down and land on your heel. Not so fun, huh? If you were were barefoot and running across a pool deck, would you run on your heels or the balls of your feet.

Let's talk about what hapens when you heel strike:

1. First, when you heel strike you plant your heel forward of your body. You've put something on the ground forward of your body and that something acts as a brake, slowing you down. Drill: go to the track and sprint 100yds. I'd don't care about your form for the 100, but how did your form change when you finished the interval? You threw your heel out forward of your body to slow down. When you over-stride and heel-strike you are slowing yourself down with every stride.
2. Think back to when I had you bouncing up and down on the natural springs in your legs. These structures and made to absorb and return energy through elasticity. However, when you throw that heel out there and brake, you're absorbing that energy with structures that are not design to take that kind of force: the muscle on the top of the shin, knee, quads, lower back. Heel-striking can be very injury prone.
3. Ok, heel is forward of my body. Before I can push off the earth, lift my planted foot, whatever, I have to wait until my body is directly over my contact point. While I wait I'm just wasting time.
4. When my body is over my contact point, the picture in the running mag says I'm suppose to push off forcefully against the earth, throwing my body forward. So I do that, throwing my body forward. But I've left my leg back there at the contact point. I now have to swing the hunk of meat forward, using my hip flexor, very quickly so it's back in front of me in time to over-stride, heel strike, brake myself, absorb all that shock through my shin, knee, etc. This is a tough way to run!!

Hopefully by now I've sold you on how not to run. Let's talk about fixing it. I believe the secret is a high cadence running style. As your cadence increases your stride length will naturally begin to decrease.

1. Your footstrike begins to move from the heel, to a neutral foot (flat, neither ball nor heel) to "midfoot," (on the balls) to maybe even on your toes. Your contact point moves forward on your foot, engaging the natural springs in your lower legs. These structures are designed to store and return energy, through elasticity.
2. Cadence increases, stride length decreases, contact begins to move backward towards my body. That brake I used to have begins to go away.

And so high cadence works my manipulating the location of my contact point relative to my body. I want that contact point to be directly under my body. Why? Drill: Run in place, with quick legs. Now, THINKING ABOUT RUNNING FORWARD, I want you to lean your entire body forward, "from the ankles," not bending at the waist. If you did it right you began to "fall forward," not run forward (pushing off against the earth to push your body forward).

With my contact point directly under my body I'm now in a state of balance. I'm not falling foward or backward. To move forward, all I have to do is lean forward very slightly and pick lift my foot, my contact point. I've disrupted that balanced state and begin to fall forward. I stop that fall by....planting my other foot directly under my body. I lift it straight up again, disrupt balance, fall forward, plant my next foot, etc. If done correctly, running is nothing more than falling forward, using gravity instead of muscular force.

Ok. I just had a friend come over, now I'm back but I've lost my train of thought. Let me go for a run and finish this is up. In the meantime, I know I've just dropped a Pose Method running form grenade in the house. Just chill for about an hour and don't go nuts. I'll be back soon to refine these ideas a bit, based on my experience and hopefully I can pull it all together for you.

Cheers,

Like "In-Your-Face" alert! May I recommend the de-caf?

Did you take that picture yourself, with the camera held at arm's length?

;-)