Running Mania

One thing people overlook is that a faster pace generally results in more folding of the leg in the swing phase which makes it relatively easier to move the leg forwards since it is essentially folded in half.
Since slower paced runners don't tend to bend their legs much at all they are trying to swing a long heavy object faster rather than getting their heels up to help that process..

ian wrote:

Jwolf wrote:I'm still not sold on whether the cadence-efficiency relationship is causal or simply a correlation.

I suspect it's a bit of both. In my own experience, the main benefit of increased cadence was increased endurance in order to run the second half of marathons without slowing down. This effect isn't captured by simple cadence vs. speed measurements.

But you still need the fitness- this is where I'm confused as to whether you can actually improve your running by working on your cadence, or whether cadence will naturally get faster as you improve your fitness.

It is sort of like other running drills, I guess.

Jwolf wrote:But you still need the fitness- this is where I'm confused as to whether you can actually improve your running by working on your cadence, or whether cadence will naturally get faster as you improve your fitness.

For my own history from about 2006-2008 (when I started working on cadence), I'd lean toward the former. My reasoning is that if it was fitness alone that was improving my running then the improvements should have manifested themselves somewhat evenly across all distances. In reality, my 5K/10K/21K times only improved slightly (~5%) whereas my marathon times improved dramatically (~20%), in large part because of the ability to eliminate the second-half fades which had a lot to do with poor mechanics. In other words, the inefficiencies that "don't really matter" when jogging can become limiting factors in exhausting energy stores and muscle stamina later on in a long race.

You can't learn how to do something by not doing it.

Checked my cadence to help pass the time on the tm today. I ranged from 164 to 170. My pace ranged a bit - 8:34 to 8:20 min/mile. The quickest cadence was at the fastest pace. I'll try again outside - it'll be interesting to compare.

I've never paid much attention to cadence. But at this point in my running life, I'm open to anything that might make me stronger in the 2nd half of the marathon .

Jwolf wrote:

ian wrote:

Jwolf wrote:I'm still not sold on whether the cadence-efficiency relationship is causal or simply a correlation.

I suspect it's a bit of both. In my own experience, the main benefit of increased cadence was increased endurance in order to run the second half of marathons without slowing down. This effect isn't captured by simple cadence vs. speed measurements.

But you still need the fitness- this is where I'm confused as to whether you can actually improve your running by working on your cadence, or whether cadence will naturally get faster as you improve your fitness.

It is sort of like other running drills, I guess.

I've helped quite a few runners develop a higher cadence and each of them found it worked better... after they got used to it. At first they had a tendency to speed up, and when they forced themselves not to they tended to get bouncy or "mince" (take tiny little steps). When I got them to simply match my cadence as we ran then they got the feel of it. After a few tries they could replicate it without a partner, and ultimately all of them I know about did find it helpful.

For those who cycle, think about what gear you push: you can switch to a gear where you shift all your effort to power and pedal slowly, or to a very easy gear and "spin". In my experience the latter switches the effort to more aerobic, and it is more sustainable: I'll be breathing harder at that pace (if it is fast) but I get that exahusted leg feeling. I feel it is similar in running. It isn't a panacea, but it can make a difference.

It really should be simply how hard you push off (forward) that controls your pace: you need the same height off the ground going fast or slow.

This has been a very interesting thread. I had no idea what my cadence is, but thanks to this thread I counted it on the TM today. Twice, both while running at around 5:00 min/km, which for training purposes is what I call my "race pace". Both times it was 190. It will be interesting to check out if there is a difference when running outside or on the indoor track.

Jogger Barbie wrote:This has been a very interesting thread. I had no idea what my cadence is, but thanks to this thread I counted it on the TM today. Twice, both while running at around 5:00 min/km, which for training purposes is what I call my "race pace". Both times it was 190. It will be interesting to check out if there is a difference when running outside or on the indoor track.

I would say your cadence would be different off the treadmill - the constraints of the treadmill artificially force you to increase your cadence to increase speed because other factors like horizontal travel distance from push off are limited.

marymac442 wrote:

Jogger Barbie wrote:This has been a very interesting thread. I had no idea what my cadence is, but thanks to this thread I counted it on the TM today. Twice, both while running at around 5:00 min/km, which for training purposes is what I call my "race pace". Both times it was 190. It will be interesting to check out if there is a difference when running outside or on the indoor track.

I would say your cadence would be different off the treadmill - the constraints of the treadmill artificially force you to increase your cadence to increase speed because other factors like horizontal travel distance from push off are limited.

Ideally, though, it shouldn't be different.

Although it seems like travel distance is limited, it really isn't because distance travelled is relative to the belt moving. You aren't actually moving forward in space but you are moving forward relative to the belt. So you still need to adjust your stride as the belt moves faster.

So just like outdoors, if you keep your cadence the same you adjust your speed (or adjust to the treadmill speed) by changing your stride length.

If you watch good runners on the treadmill you can see that their form is pretty much the same as outdoors.

Pat Menzies wrote:One thing people overlook is that a faster pace generally results in more folding of the leg in the swing phase which makes it relatively easier to move the leg forwards since it is essentially folded in half.
Since slower paced runners don't tend to bend their legs much at all they are trying to swing a long heavy object faster rather than getting their heels up to help that process..

I was lurking around reading, and was logging in to make this very point, and then saw that Pat made it. Bend your leg more, and the pendulum you're swinging is shorter.

(There's actually a theory that slim ankles are part of the reason that certain Kenyan tribes dominate in marathons - less weight swinging at the end of their pendulum.)

fingerboy wrote:Run hard down a steep slope! Its good practice IMO to get the feeling of high cadence.

One caution with this: We all have a tendancy to run downhill with big, long strides, because it feels fast (and fun). You will need to focus on keeping your strides short so that you're not overstriding (unless/until you can lengthen them with a stronger push-off). As you run downhill, it's still - or maybe even more - important to land with your foot under your body weight, not in front of it, as that causes you to brake a bit with each step and adds to the impact. Downhill running with shorter strides, in my experience, CAN really help your cadence. I have one trail running friend whose steps are so short, fast and light running downhill that we've called him Riverdancer. He gets down those hills FAST. It's different on road, of course, but you still shouldn't be overstriding, especially if your aim is to increase cadence.

Well, two cautions... don't trip and fall.

bruyere wrote:One caution with this: We all have a tendancy to run downhill with big, long strides, because it feels fast (and fun).

+1, first race I ever ran was a 10k that had a steep downhill and I ran it with big floaty strides. Buggered up my knee for months.

I downloaded a metronome app, I'm going to try it out.

Joe Dwarf wrote:

bruyere wrote:One caution with this: We all have a tendancy to run downhill with big, long strides, because it feels fast (and fun).

+1, first race I ever ran was a 10k that had a steep downhill and I ran it with big floaty strides. Buggered up my knee for months.

I'm the opposite. My very short stride was always perfect for going downhill. Jo-Jo can verify that everyone used to get out of my way when it was time to head downhill.

bruyere wrote:

Pat Menzies wrote:One thing people overlook is that a faster pace generally results in more folding of the leg in the swing phase which makes it relatively easier to move the leg forwards since it is essentially folded in half.
Since slower paced runners don't tend to bend their legs much at all they are trying to swing a long heavy object faster rather than getting their heels up to help that process..

I was lurking around reading, and was logging in to make this very point, and then saw that Pat made it. Bend your leg more, and the pendulum you're swinging is shorter.

(There's actually a theory that slim ankles are part of the reason that certain Kenyan tribes dominate in marathons - less weight swinging at the end of their pendulum.)

fingerboy wrote:Run hard down a steep slope! Its good practice IMO to get the feeling of high cadence.

One caution with this: We all have a tendancy to run downhill with big, long strides, because it feels fast (and fun). You will need to focus on keeping your strides short so that you're not overstriding (unless/until you can lengthen them with a stronger push-off). As you run downhill, it's still - or maybe even more - important to land with your foot under your body weight, not in front of it, as that causes you to brake a bit with each step and adds to the impact. Downhill running with shorter strides, in my experience, CAN really help your cadence. I have one trail running friend whose steps are so short, fast and light running downhill that we've called him Riverdancer. He gets down those hills FAST. It's different on road, of course, but you still shouldn't be overstriding, especially if your aim is to increase cadence.

Well, two cautions... don't trip and fall.

Good post! You summarize some excellent points here.

Habs4ever wrote:I downloaded a metronome app, I'm going to try it out.

I had the app playing a constant 90 bpm and tried to have my left foot land on each beat. I was surprised at how easy it was to keep that cadence at all different speeds, (I was on the treadmill). I'm anxious to try it outside and see how I do.

Habs4ever wrote:

Habs4ever wrote:I downloaded a metronome app, I'm going to try it out.

I had the app playing a constant 90 bpm and tried to have my left foot land on each beat. I was surprised at how easy it was to keep that cadence at all different speeds, (I was on the treadmill). I'm anxious to try it outside and see how I do.

Apparently counting steps or trying to land on a beat is a good way to get injured. People subconsciously stamp down with the foot they use to keep time.

I checked my cadence during my last 2 runs and was consistently at 196. Same number when I did strides. I lack in speed relative to my marathon times so there are other things I need to work on to get faster.

Pat Menzies wrote:You can't learn how to do something by not doing it.

I agree completely. At a certain point one has to come to the conclusion that if it has not magically happened then maybe it is time to actually try and work on it. At worst one will discover cadence is not an issue and they can try to fix other things. For me, it was 1 K repeats with as much rest as required between repeats in order to keep a good cadence so at least my body knew what was suppose to feel like. It was hard and uncomfortable at first but eventually I broke out of my comfort zone and increased my speed.

Pat Menzies wrote:You can't learn how to do something by not doing it.

I'm not sure if you're referring to my skepticism here...

But my point was that it seems many people do run a high cadence for faster runs and slow down their cadence for slower runs.

What I don't get is whether consciously trying to increase cadence at slower speeds will actually carry over to better running at faster speeds- if you're already doing the higher cadence at the faster speeds.

Pat Menzies wrote:

Habs4ever wrote:

Habs4ever wrote:I downloaded a metronome app, I'm going to try it out.

I had the app playing a constant 90 bpm and tried to have my left foot land on each beat. I was surprised at how easy it was to keep that cadence at all different speeds, (I was on the treadmill). I'm anxious to try it outside and see how I do.

Apparently counting steps or trying to land on a beat is a good way to get injured. People subconsciously stamp down with the foot they use to keep time.

But then how are you supposed to know how many steps you're taking if you have nothing to measure it against or if you're not supposed to count.

@purdy65

I thought you might like this.

http://www.pawbonito.com/pitbull-puppy- ... treadmill/

I read this thread and I was really curious to see where I stand as a slow runner and I got 160 everytime I counted. It wasn't complicated and I followed this from upthread and counted 40 steps in 30 sec.

(1) Strides -- Run quickly (not quite sprinting) for 45 steps (counting off one side) and expect to be near 30 seconds (corresponding to 180 total steps per minute).

I noticed that when I tried to get more steps in my pace was increasing. Anyway, I'm nowhrere near my top fitness so I'm not sure I should spend time on that!

Pat Menzies wrote:Apparently counting steps or trying to land on a beat is a good way to get injured. People subconsciously stamp down with the foot they use to keep time.

Are you being facetious? I've never heard/read that.

I "naturally" have a single-foot cadence of 86 (so 172 for both feet). I had to force myself to run at 90 this morning, and it felt really weird. I suppose it will take a lot of time and practice to get right.

jgore wrote:

Pat Menzies wrote:Apparently counting steps or trying to land on a beat is a good way to get injured. People subconsciously stamp down with the foot they use to keep time.

Are you being facetious? I've never heard/read that.

Maybe you're thinking about the study that said breathing out while always on the same foot contributed to injuries? I thought that sounded weird too.

Anyway, when I count, I count both feet so that wouldn't even apply.

Some metronomes click every beat, too. You can also use this "click track" which clicks every beat (180 clicks per minute for 5 minutes):
https://s3.amazonaws.com/rybq-audio/180-click-track.mp3