Told cadence is to high to be efficient. 190-200 during tempo runs

Are you injured? If not, then STFU and just keep doing what you're doing.

Sounds like your coach has been reading too many hobbyjogger publications lately.

It isn't. Sounds about right to me.

It's an individual thing, but I do tempos around 195 and my efficiency numbers are very good at that cadence. Specifically, wasted energy is lower, HR is lower for the pace, vertical oscillation and ground contact time lower, and leg spring stiffness higher. If you're doing tempos at 195 comfortably, you are probably also a natural high cadence guy.

I don’t know if it relates but I was always a high cadence cyclist also. 100-115 rpms for 2-3 hour race. It may not be relevant.

He was analyzing my Tempo run where the first 7 min at 8-10 seconds slower than threshold

22 min at threshold

3 at fast than threshold.

My cadence was 194 average with a high of 208

Yes is IT too much. Look at the 13:30/2:10 guys on Strava their cadence is ONLY that high doing 200s. They will run 150 on easy runs 8 minute miles and only start getting to 180 once they get down under 3:10/km. I've seen them doing 3:45 pace with 160. The cadence thing is bullshit, if it's too high you're just cutting ground contact short on purpose which means you're not letting your muscles fully contract and relax. You can get bad shin splints doing this as you build up so much tension in the shin muscles from not letting them load and spring naturally. Just run, don't force anything.

ohnoit'sbad wrote:

Yes is IT too much. Look at the 13:30/2:10 guys on Strava their cadence is ONLY that high doing 200s. They will run 150 on easy runs 8 minute miles and only start getting to 180 once they get down under 3:10/km. I've seen them doing 3:45 pace with 160. The cadence thing is bullshit, if it's too high you're just cutting ground contact short on purpose which means you're not letting your muscles fully contract and relax. You can get bad shin splints doing this as you build up so much tension in the shin muscles from not letting them load and spring naturally. Just run, don't force anything.

^ This guy has no clue what he is talking about, don't listen to him.

Here is a good place to start on running form and cadence:

Durant_runner11 wrote:

He was analyzing my Tempo run where the first 7 min at 8-10 seconds slower than threshold

He's a moron and you need to get rid of him.

Best is to coach yourself and find other supportive people to run with.

Most people have to be conscious of working up to 180 because they are below it. You are already over it. I see no reason to purposely lower it unless you start getting injured in a way that could be traced to lack of ground contact time. Most people would likely be jealous of how quickly your legs turn over. I suspect you'll have fewer injuries than your peers, in fact, because you aren't bobbing around so much on the weight of your body.

Paying devils advocate, 194 is higher than average for tempo pace. It would catch my eye if I saw it on paper, but I wouldn't draw any conclusions without seeing you run in person. What is your tempo pace? Height? I'd also be curious to know your cadence at 5k pace and recovery pace.

Tempo 6:01-6:18

My easier 7:30 runs are 184 average

I’m only 10 months back so I’m readjusting to running again. I have been running consistently since mid December between 50-84 a week.

I just can’t see how I’m going to slow my cadence down and keep the speed up! I’ll end up getting injured. I have handled the 70-85 mileage range pretty well for a back to running person after almost 19 years out of it. I feel like I want to be at 90-100 a week to get the full benefits to be able To run 10K as fast as this 38 year old body can handle. Hopefully by next winter I’ll be there if I haven’t quit. Now I’m doubting I’ll break 35 for 10K. Which seems stupid to even continue if that’s the case. I ran 10:01 for 3K off 35 weeks of 45-50 miles when I first came back.

I just don’t have power ground force wise I just turn over quickly. Same as when I cycled. Guys were running 80-90 rpms I could push those gears at that cadence I was alway 100-115 for hours on end. Probably why I sucked accerating out of turn in Crits but would spin up climbing at high RPMs

I’m 5’6”

another runner wrote:

ohnoit'sbad wrote:

Yes is IT too much. Look at the 13:30/2:10 guys on Strava their cadence is ONLY that high doing 200s. They will run 150 on easy runs 8 minute miles and only start getting to 180 once they get down under 3:10/km. I've seen them doing 3:45 pace with 160. The cadence thing is bullshit, if it's too high you're just cutting ground contact short on purpose which means you're not letting your muscles fully contract and relax. You can get bad shin splints doing this as you build up so much tension in the shin muscles from not letting them load and spring naturally. Just run, don't force anything.

^ This guy has no clue what he is talking about, don't listen to him.

Here is a good place to start on running form and cadence:

https://runnersconnect.net/running-interviews/train-movement-not-muscle-jay-dicharry/

Go on Strava and look at the fast kenyans from Iten then and you'll see what i said is true.

Durant_runner11 wrote:

Tempo 6:01-6:18

My easier 7:30 runs are 184 average

Totally fine. I'm similar.

38, M, 6 feet tall, 160 lbs.

My cadence for HM Tempo (6:26-6:35 pace) is around 197. Easy runs (around 8:00 pace) is around 188. I can't say whether or not that's a good thing. I tend to have a naturally high cadence. I'm not trying to shorten my stride or anything. I'm just running and not thinking too hard about it.

some numbers wrote:

It's an individual thing, but I do tempos around 195 and my efficiency numbers are very good at that cadence. Specifically, wasted energy is lower, HR is lower for the pace, vertical oscillation and ground contact time lower, and leg spring stiffness higher. If you're doing tempos at 195 comfortably, you are probably also a natural high cadence guy.

Have you actually had all that measured are you speculating?

ohnoit'sbad wrote:

Yes is IT too much. Look at the 13:30/2:10 guys on Strava their cadence is ONLY that high doing 200s. They will run 150 on easy runs 8 minute miles and only start getting to 180 once they get down under 3:10/km. I've seen them doing 3:45 pace with 160. The cadence thing is bullshit, if it's too high you're just cutting ground contact short on purpose which means you're not letting your muscles fully contract and relax. You can get bad shin splints doing this as you build up so much tension in the shin muscles from not letting them load and spring naturally. Just run, don't force anything.

Nope. You are relating cadence to speed, but if you are comparing runners of difference ability, it's much more closely related to effort, as in mile cadence will be similar to mile cadence. There is a lot of individual variation though, and the super talented will be able to have a slower cadence at lower speeds because they have more spring and therefore float in their legs. I've run pretty fast, and I can't run a slower cadence than the high 170s even if I'm trying to run as slow a cadence as possible.

Some years back for a thread on cadence, I counted strides on a bunch of race videos, calculated cadence using the clock on the screen. The half dozen or so elites that I looked at were doing 200 (210 for the steeple WR, last lap) at middle distance to distance race pace. Those race paces are obviously slower than doing 200s.

DevinChaulk wrote:

38, M, 6 feet tall, 160 lbs.

My cadence for HM Tempo (6:26-6:35 pace) is around 197. Easy runs (around 8:00 pace) is around 188. I can't say whether or not that's a good thing. I tend to have a naturally high cadence. I'm not trying to shorten my stride or anything. I'm just running and not thinking too hard about it.

30, M, 6 feet tall, 150 lbs

My cadence at 6:30 is 168-170. Couldn't imagine churning out 197 (which I hit around 4:20-30). I may try it later just to see what it feels like.

hahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaa!

that's a load of BS!!! lifting can improve your running greatly without any "movement and mobility" exercises.

To the OP: yeah, it doesn't matter that much. It may limit your high end speed, because it would be hard i'd think to run at mile-800 pace at 200-220 cadence. You'd need to learn to open up your stride a bit more, strengthening your legs can do that, maybe some lunges if you want just to open that up. if you arnt running super fast, I don't see a big issue with it. The poster"ohnoit'sbad" is right in saying that many elites run with 160 or slower cadence on normal runs. It's not important though, as he said, "don't force anything."

You should be able to do a basic test: get some friends to do a workout with you. run with them normally, then slow your cadence and try to keep up. If this makes you more tired than usual, than clearly your original cadence was better