Has anybody out there increased their stride rate and thus improved their racing times?

I've read most of the posts on this thread, and I don't think anyone has mentioned the use of a pocket metronome to improve stride rate. It can be set to one's current

cadence (for example, 85 for someone taking 170 strides per minute), then gradually increased by a couple of beats per minute over a period of weeks to months until your rate is where you want it. (BTW, it's best to do this away from other people, unless you're not concerned about being regarded as a total geek.)

Actually, I have no proof of real confirmation its him, I think I've read about people saying this though, I'm not really sure though.

i'm a huge heel striker. is this because my stride is too long? if i decrease my stride length will i automatically get off my heels? it seems that uses different muscles because i've tried striking on my forefoot and after a short distance im tired and fall right back on my heels where its comfortable. i have noticed though that a few girls on my team don't even touch their heel to the ground when they run.. they say they've always done that but is there a way for me to train myself to run like this?

Dr. Daniels has forgotten 1000 times more information than I have ever known, but in case he doesn't get back: My experience with athletes is YES. Until it becomes natural you will have to force yourself to stay on the midfoot and keep the cadence rapid. It will almost feel like a scooting motion (pulling the leg through & touching down quick)until you become relaxed. Yes, it can be learned. Lead with your hips, keep your feet under your torso, touch the ground light and quick.

JY:

I'm sure you're onto something. While it surely behooves every runner to experiment with increasing stride rate (and thus, at a particular pace, shortening stride length), and while elite runners and their high (180/minute or greater) should surely be our guides here, I think it's a mistake to totalize from what the elites do--unless you're an elite runner, in which case if EVERYBODY is doing something, it's probably a good idea to trust the general wisdom, at least initially.

When people speak about the stride rate of elite runners, for example, they're almost always talking about those stride rates as measured from Olympic or WC footage or the like: race pace in top competition, at 4:30 a mile or below. But elite runners do lots of running apart from racing--including recovery runs at 7:00 pace--and I'll bet my wisdom teeth that such runners don't stride quite so quickly when they're running recovery pace. Nor should we. Nor should we assume that we MUST run 180 or above in non-competition (or equivalent-paced: i.e., race-pace interval) situations. That's silly--a misuse of statistical evidence.

It makes more sense, I'd suggest, to take the 180 figure as a kind of guide; to measure one's own stride rate in various situations--on an easy run, on a tempo run, at race pace; to experiment with slightly shortening the stride and slightly increasing stride rate. Make experiments.

I did this two years ago. I am rather low-slung for a runner--like a guy named Brad Rowe, actually, who ran for Princeton when I was there. Long waist, shorter legs (proportionally). I tend to overstride slightly, especially when I'm tired, although I'm not what you'd call a bounder. When I first became conscious of my stride rate, and heard of the 180 figure, I checked my rate and found that I was striding at approximately 164-166. I increased that to 170 (85/min per foot, which is how I count it), and that felt exactly right.

These days I monitor it briefly during 3-4 runs per week. I'm able to nail 170 unerringly. I still tend to slow cadence a little, though, if I lose focus, so I make a point of monitoring it inwardly and making small "trim" adjustments.

I'm not convinced that, with my proportionally short legs, it would make sense for me to shorten my stride and increase my rate still further. 180 feels wrong to me--although I suspect that I drift in that direction at race pace. But at all other slower paces, 180 feels a shade too fast. I won't rule it out, and I'll continue to experiment, but I won't lose sleep over "not being able to measure up" to an arbitrary elite standard. The reason I'm not an elite runner has little to do, frankly, with my stride rate and much to do with lack of cardiovascular talent.

After posting this, I've finally managed to read the most recent posts (instead of merely the first page of posts) and think that what I've said doesn't place me at odds with Dr. Daniels, whose RUNNNG FORMULA I've greatly enjoyed. I certainly hope it doesn't! In fact, Dr. Daniels's last several posts convince me that I should perhaps dedicate a couple of weeks this summer to seeing what a stride rate of 175 feels like. It seems, from info shared here by various runners, that EVERYBODY has a "comfort" rate and a "too fast" rate; I was intrigued to see 170 described by some as "too fast"--i.e., unnatural relative to a current stride rate--since it's entirely natural to me. It would certainly appear, from anecdotal evidence presented here, that if I continue to press outside my comfort zone, press for a slightly faster cadence, I may initially experience awkwardness but then may breath through into faster times and a "new normal." Point taken. Thanks, all.

Interesting and related blurb from an article in Trail Runner magazine.

"Top runners have a cadence of 90 strides(180 Steps) per minute and a long stride length. (A five-minute mile is 1056 feet per minute. At 180 steps per minute, each step is 5.8 Feet! NO wonder they are fast). It is very difficult (read:impossible) to lengthen a person's stride. You run the way you run. However, you can increase your cadence."

OldXCguy: This might be helpful to me in retraining myself, since it would allow me to quit counting and zone out a bit, just letting my feet fall to the beats of the metronome. Do you have a cheap one to recommend? I went online, but there's a dizzying variety of them.

Just found this:

http://www.samedaymusic.com/product--KORMM1

no

just the facts wrote:

dnixon, Great to hear. Continue with this experiment. It begins to come more naturally after only several days. Also make sure your posture is upright and try to feel as though you are leading with your hips. Like a string is tied around your waist and you are using hamstrings to pull your legs through rather than a forward upper body lean and quads pushing. It all kind of goes together. Good luck and enjoy the difference.

Well, today (my day off and my 50th birthday) i went for a scheduled 8.3 mile run. It's a route i've run so many times before, and i know all the mile points. I've only been running for a month now, doing 15-20 miles p/week, after a 1.5 year layoff (during which i worked a floorsanding job that left me wasted). All that to say i'm not in good shape. Anyway, i ran this 2 weeks ago at a moderate to hard pace and ran 66:20.

On this morning's run i again worked on cadence, trying to hit 170 footstrikes p/min. and imagine that string you talked about. Once again, my stride length felt ridiculously short and very uncomfortable. I didn't feel fast. So i was absolutely flabbergasted to go through 4 miles in 30:00 and finish the run in 1:01:46 (7:26 p/mile avg on a very hilly course)!! At a couple points along the way i went by long storefront windows and did a form check. It was as if i was looking at someone else!

Here are are some other observations:

(1) The last 2 miles it was much, much harder to keep the same cadence, and it wasn't because i was tired in the usual sense. It seemed to be at the neuromuscular level, kind of like when you try to drum something on a table top as fast as you can, but after 30 seconds you start to lose rhythm. It took super-intense concentration to hold the tempo.

(2) My hamstrings began to ache the last 2-3 miles. This has NEVER happened to me before for non-track work. In the past it's always been my quads.

(3) I gave no more effort than on the same run 2 weeks ago (with similar weather conditions), yet finished almost 5 minutes faster and with a heart rate 5-10 beats p/minute less than normal.

(4) I was never aerobically distressed and my breathing was never labored.

(5) I recovered more quickly than normal, evidenced by the way i felt and how quickly my heart rate dropped.

(6) This stuff works.

I have been working on increasing my cadence for about 4-5 months now. I honestly feel that it has helped me a great deal. It takes a while to get used to- the first few runs with it, while seemingly "easier" early in the run- the tail ends would leave my legs dragging. However, over time I noticed my ability to recover faster from a surge during a workout, more power on hills, and the ability to hold a faster pace on long runs. Mainly i worked on this during long runs- sort of pacing off of others I was running with. I would try to keep turnover pace with some of the other shorter runners, i would be going at a slower actual pace- but getting in the same type of workout (in terms of steps and effort) i needed.

Now- a few months later, my standard cadence is much higher, and my stride length is a little shorter than before. What I like the most about this is that in race situations when someone makes a move- it is much easier to cover when you are already running the cadence they are- simply by lengthing the stride slightly (back to what I had originally), it is easy to match speed and roll with them. I truly think that this is one of the most valuable tools I have developed in recent years.

Thanks for the info.

Were you — like me — an overstrider, or were you just trying to correct a too-slow turnover? And do you remember your hamstrings aching? Last, has this resulted in faster race times for you?

To answer your question, the metronome I use is by Seiko.

It's about the size of a business card and it's thin, so it

fits easily in the palm of your hand. I've had it for awhile, but I believe it was around $25. You are correct, that you can just zone out and focus on matching your footstrike to the beat. After you have used one for some

time, you can set the beat to 1/3 of your strides per minute and use a waltz tempo. That sounds like I'm being funny, but what I mean is that you can set it to 60 and count every third step if your goal is 180 strides per minute. By doing that, you prevent yourself from emphasizing one foot.

______________

Smart.

I need a longer stride length! My turnover has always been 180-185, but I can't break 4:30 to save my life. I've done 10k in the 31's, but my stride is so small. And I even do all-out 400 repeats to try to help.

Is having a naturally long stride just another facet of talent and potential, like having innate 400 speed?

I found that working on increased cadence is most easily done on moderate and steep hills and I find it fun and especially when I got to the top of a short steep hill I run up at the end of a beach run I do I was no longer winded at the top and I moved faster. I am excited about this whole cadence, stride discovery and even if someone posted that it doesn't do a damn thing, psychologically it's done a lot for me personally. Good running!

What about plyometrics? (E.g., bounding) I've heard that this helps.