Martin Hehir's cadence

Asdfasd wrote:

Does his slow cadence show it doesnt matter?

Or does it show something about super shoes?

More context please. What was his cadence during the marathon? How tall is he? Any other important variables?

I don’t think it’s the cadence that’s important here, just the size of the bulge to carry you through the finish line.

Loping stride like Hall, Rupp, and Rodgers.

Asdfasd wrote:

Does his slow cadence show it doesnt matter?

Or does it show something about super shoes?

When you’re bouncing that much from your mechanical shoes..it doesn’t matter what your step rate ...

what’s his cadence?

I think it is very simple. Your running speed is a product of your cadence and stride length. Thus increasing either one without decreasing the other yields an improvement in speed. If you run enough miles over the course of the years at the right speed, your body will learn the optimum balance of the two accounting for your individual qualities. It would be very hard to perform the measurements and design the model that would give the right number for your body, but if you could make one, I bet it would show that you run the fastest at your intuitive stride rate.

A pattern has been observed that elite runners tend to gravitate towards 180 steps per minute. If you are running 70 seconds per lap, at 180 steps per minute you stride length is about 6 feet and 2 inches already. For a 5'7-5'8 runner, this is quite a stride already. If he were to turn over at any less that 180, he would have to increase his stride length beyond that and would be loping/bounding rather than running. A casual runner going 2:00 per lap or slower can afford to turn over at a much lower rate. But all in all, I think it is a mistake to say that elites are elites because they turn over at 180. Rather, they have to turn over at 180 or higher to run the speeds they do, and they can because of their power and endurance.

I think it has been proven that you don’t have to “lope” or be “inefficient” to have a long stride. Look at Rudisha, or many other 800m runners. They have a long stride and look very efficient but that is because it is a much faster pace than a marathon and they still have a high cadence

Reviewing some rough video, Droddy looks to be pretty close to 200spm and Marty is more like 168spm(!)... I checked about 45 minutes into the race and in the last 2 miles. Consistent stride rates for both of them.

I have no conclusions based on that. We've seen a wide discrepancy of stride rates among the elites forever.

However, I believe that these super shoes might be more helpful in preserving the legs of the long striders/lopers out there who might take more of a beating from the marathon distance.

If they train together and one takes 20% more steps, I am assuming that guy's shoes wear out first which means the shoes take more beating on the shorter strides.

Look at strava in a computer and you can see the cadence, you don’t have to look at video and count

WI champ wrote:

If they train together and one takes 20% more steps, I am assuming that guy's shoes wear out first which means the shoes take more beating on the shorter strides.

Interesting idea. I'm not sure I prescribe to that logic. 20% more steps likely means 20% less force/impact on each step. Plus, I'm more concerned with the wear on the athlete during the race rather than how long the shoe will last.

The potential impact that's interesting to me is guys with longer strides. Less steps at the same speed means more impact. These lopers and leapers are more in need of extra padding/stack height/rebound effect in longer races than a runner who glides at 200spm.

So I think a guy like Marty has benefited more from the super duper shoes than guys like Droddy. My non-scientific opinion.

Actually, higher stride rate puts less stress on the body and therefore also the shoe (I think).

When you have a high cadence you are in the air longer and hit the ground harder.

I assume the opposite. More steps is more total stress. An extra 1000 steps during a marathon means that you have to use the muscles and tendons 1000 more times. Open and close your fist 1000 times to see if it tires you.

WI champ wrote:

I assume the opposite. More steps is more total stress. An extra 1000 steps during a marathon means that you have to use the muscles and tendons 1000 more times. Open and close your fist 1000 times to see if it tires you.

That logic is bananas, to put it politely. You're entirely removing 2 important parts of the equation. The increased landing force of a longer stride and the increased power needed by the muscles (or assisted by the shoe) to create a longer stride.

A more relevant example than your hand experiment would be you and I both jumping up and down for 2 hours. You have to jump 20% more quickly than i do. I get to jump slower, but I have to jump 20% higher. In that case.

Now, in that scenario, who do you think would benefit more from the super shoes?

RunningNoob420 wrote:

Actually, higher stride rate puts less stress on the body and therefore also the shoe (I think).

When you have a high cadence you are in the air longer and hit the ground harder.

This should say "lower stride rate".

This race was the first time I have ever seen him run. I was thinking while watching him win that he has significantly more vertical motion than most other elite marathoners.

Asdfasd wrote:

Does his slow cadence show it doesnt matter?

Or does it show something about super shoes?

My experience is that with the 4% shoe, my stride-rate decreases slightly and stride-length increases.

look at Strava wrote:

Look at strava in a computer and you can see the cadence, you don’t have to look at video and count

no- if you want to know cadence, use video- don't rely on a watch, they aren't always accurate, and you might not have the race/performance for which you want the cadence data.

I think Hehir's cadence in his sub 4 indoor mile on 1/30/15 (or 1/31/15?) was low 180's (but I'm too lazy to verify my initial calculation, which involves carefully watching video segments), which is pretty low for running 15mph.

I don't know his height- but taller runners definitely tend to have slower cadences.

I don't think the cadence is "caused by" the shoes.

look at Strava wrote:

Look at strava in a computer and you can see the cadence, you don’t have to look at video and count

It looks like the race isn't showing up on his Strava, but his most recent workout has a 4.5 mile section near 5:00/mile where his cadence bounces around 165-170