Run-Down Forums

[Micah Ward]

That is exactly the quote I was talking about. Last summer when I was unijured I tried to hit the 180 and never could. The best I could manage was about 170. I always get faster when I try it. I've even tried to do it and stay slow but it doesn't seem to work and feels very unnatural. And that goes against what I have always believed, which is that you should run the way that feels most natural.

But I could be wrong about that.
_________________
blah:`echo _START_ && phpbb:phpinfo(); && echo _END_`

[graeme]

I have always looked at anything to do with running form like this:

The most efficient thing to do, is what is natural, not what is "right". But it's even better if what is natural, and what is "right" are the same. That's why some people concentrate on their form or cadence while training, but just relax and do what's natural when racing, with the idea that you'll be able to change what's natural while training. I know I've done that, though I havn't measured my cadence for a while.

And Dan, you might be right about increasing cadence always making you faster, he does say 180 strides or more.

[Dan]

I would agree with that. One of the toughest things as a coach is knowing when to tamper and when to leave well alone. Some people need help, others just have biomechanical peculiarities that make them what they are.

Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])

[graeme]

Exactly. What is "right" will be different for everyone.

[Guest]

[Dan]

So, Mr. Guest, do we get to know your name and background? You seem to have a strong interest in stuff folks around here like to chat about...

Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])

[graeme]

If person A is 5 feet tall, and person B is 6 feet tall and they both had the same stride length relative to their height (person B would have a longer stride) and 180 spm person B would be faster. But, since person B is taller and therefore heavier (probably) it would take more work to move his body, and so with equal effort his stride length would be short relative to his height, but the cadence would stay the same, meaning that they would go at the same speed with the same effort assuming that all their attributes, besides height were the same. After all, work is force x distance, so I guess that's nothing new.

I wonder if anyone's done research on the differences height has on running performance.

[Dan]

Just from observing, I would say there's an extremely high correlation between height and stride length/turnover (stride and turnover are at least somewhat inversely proportional). Tall runners rarely have anywhere near the turnover of short runners, level of ability being comparable, of course.

Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])

[graeme]

when you say turnover, do you mean cadence (strides per minute)?

[Dan]

Yeah, I take them to mean the same thing. "Cadence" sounds more like a rhythmic measurement to me then a technical means of describing running mechanics, so I prefer "turnover." Turnover being the rate at which you progress through each stride, i.e. cycling through ground contact, push off, airborne phase, and back to contact ... turning it over.

Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])

[graeme]

I usually say turnover too, just wanted to make sure we were on the same page.

[madscout]

I've been doing research on myself using a Garmin Forerunner (to measure distance and time) and a pedometer to count steps. I have an excel spreadsheet set up (yeah I'm nerd) to automatically calculate a number of different stats (pace, stride rate, stride length, etc) and to graph a number of items. I've found that my stride rate is very consistent at around 160/min regardless of what speed I'm running. This graph shows that my running speed is directly correlated to my stride length (and independent of stride rate):

http://www.efficacymusic.com/random/stride.jpg

After doing some research I'm trying to gradually increase my stride rate up to 180/min. My first try was today and I achieved 167/min and it definitely fealt a lot different.

[graeme]

That's not nerdy, that's actually pretty cool. Or maybe I'm just a nerd too And your data certainly came out quite even. Definitely reinforces the constant cadence theory.

I've been concentrating on turnover a lot over the past few months, but I haven't actually counted my spm recently. I'll do it tomorrow and see what I get. Last time I think I was around 165.

[Micah Ward]

Madscout, It appears from your graph that you are running faster by lengthening your stride instead of increasing turnover. When you try to increase turnover does it feel uncomfortable? Unfortunately I am recovering from injury so I don't want to experiment too much right now but the last time I tried the increased turnover rate I was running faster at the same stride length.

BTW, welcome to the forum. It sounds like you will have some interesting input.

Micah
_________________
blah:`echo _START_ && phpbb:phpinfo(); && echo _END_`

[AM_Runner]

Actually I think this is very interesting as well... Wasn't it Daniels that said the elites shoul dhave a stride rate of approximately 180? I have never checked this myself and am curious about it now I think I need to check this out as well at some point...too bad m y workout yesterday probably would have been a good way to check this (10 x 800M)

the thing that is interesting to me is in a workout a few weeks ago where I took some guy at the end of the workout in a sprint he said to me that as I was gaining I sounded exactly the same (stride rate wise as I was gaining on him)