Jobby Hogger wrote:
Just a nitpick, but it measures cadence based on the shock of when the foot hits the ground, not the arm swing.
Garmin 620 has an accelerometer in the watch and uses arm swing unless you are using a footpod with it.
Jobby Hogger wrote:
Just a nitpick, but it measures cadence based on the shock of when the foot hits the ground, not the arm swing.
Garmin 620 has an accelerometer in the watch and uses arm swing unless you are using a footpod with it.
Robes180 wrote:
The cadence should not increase with speed. Only the stride length.
Correct if you're talking about 5000-marathon.
Absolutely incorrect for middle distance, where cadence AND stride length increase with speed (for 800 vs 1500 vs 3000).
I've noticed this too with myself.
- For a normal, easy run, I'm normally around 165-170.
- Tempo 175-185
- Speedwork 190-200
What does it mean? I don't know, but thought I'd throw this out there as another data point. I am primarily a heel striker, especially at lower speeds. I run only about 25-40 miles a week and have had any recent injury issues. Age 35, 5' 10", 150 lbs.
The minute I saw this thread I knew it would garner a lot of responses suggesting you leave your runners alone and not mess with their form or cadence. I disagree strongly. I have a lot of experience as both a competitve runner and a coach and I don't even need to see video of your fastest male runner to know that he is overstriding massively at that cadence. In my experience, it is impossible to run fast with a cadence in the 160s without reaching out far with the lead leg.
I promise you that you are going to extend his career and save him a lot of injuries if you act proactively and get him to land closer to his COG and push from the hips, lengthing his stride more behind him, with less ground contact time. Though he may not have injuries now, there is no way he can sustain such a low cadence at fast paces over a long period.
Now, I don't think that 180 is a magic number, but using it as a goal your runner can aspire to will help increase his turnover. I have had a lot of success getting my runners to around that number. I agree with the poster who suggested running with a metronome works well.
Also, stride length + cadence = speed. If you're keeping pace with a guy and you have the same stride length and cadence but then he starts turning his legs over faster, maintaining the same stride length, you're going to lose.
Lastly, as a competitive runner I had four stress fractures before my gait was analyzed and I was found to have a cadence in the 160s. I worked with a metronome to get it into the low 180s (where it remains today) and never had another serious injury.
Thank you for the response. Always happy to hear from experienced coaches.
His workout of 800's yesterday was interesting. He had a stride rate of 170-175 which was a little better.
I find the whole thing interesting. I might think about purchasing that metronome for the kids with a stride rate in the 160's. Do you think that would be helpful?
Coach with a question wrote:
I might think about purchasing that metronome for the kids with a stride rate in the 160's. Do you think that would be helpful?
I'm sure it couldn't hurt... you could always have them get a metronome on their smartphone. It's free and works the same. That's what I did.
@Robes180 Since I tend to agree with you, and since we've been doing research on the value of running in synch with your heart, I wondered if you might be willing to provide thoughts or feedback on our work? counterpace.com
I am wondering the same, since I have been told all kinds of feedback based on my own cadence, which usually averages over 190 spm in races (5K up to marathon distances). I was told that it's too high and that it should be in the 170s since that supposedly correlates to better FTP. I have also been told this corresponds with "shuffling." And I have also been told that it's really high and that it's a good thing since it negates injury (less ground contact time) and in the long run there is also less energy expenditure.
https://www.runnersworld.com/advanced/a20822244/the-great-cadence-debate/running for runners wrote:
Robes180 wrote:
The cadence should not increase with speed. Only the stride length. And by stride length I mean the distance traveled, not how far you stick your heel out. They should be landing on their forefoot mid foot with good form but using the elasticity in their Achilles to propel themselves forward farther. Running is really jumping. The cadence should not increase. Only the length of the "jump" which translates to speed. Your runner could increase his cadence to 180 just in general, but 165 is by no means a bad cadence.
- robes180
Kenenisa Bekele keeps the same stride length on the track regardless of speed. You know who he is don't you?
I say things as fact in condacending manor.