Can you still overstride at 180 cadence?

180 IS THE PERFECT CADENCE. EVERY RUNNER MUST RUN 180 CADENCE OR ELSE THEY WILL NOT RUN THEIR BEST. I AM NOT A BOT.

The scuffing is your foot going forward as it touches down. That's inefficient, but not necessarily something to cause injury. I would guess that your injuries are most likely due to the wrong shoe. You need to describe your injuries in detail if you want to get constructive feedback.

NotAnotherFormQuestion wrote:

Due to my slow adaption to running... Faster paces (5min miles)

I know your a former cyclist and all, but I think I know the problem. You are trying to take in too much at once. It takes most people at least a year to get used to the stresses of running in general. This is usually not noticed because very few people try to train hard from the get-go. This has nothing to do with cadence and everything to do with overuse injuries. Also, if your only running 20mpw, 5 min miles in training is wayyyyyy too fast, unless your doing short sprints. Sub-elites run 5 in practice. Not beginners.

Thanks Fisky.

Is my "foot going forward as it touches down" considered overstriding? How would I best fix this? Sorry if thats a dumb question. Do I just need to kind of actively "paw back" during my stride? I try to run as relaxed and naturally as possible, but maybe I'm running too relaxed, and being lazy with my stride, causing the scuffing.

Sorry to be vague about injuries, most don't care so I tried to keep it short. Basically, I'm having pretty bad medial arch pain (inside of foot, close to big toe. Possible flexor hallus tendonitis?), and post tib pain on my left side. I think you're right about the shoe, I was trying to build up in racing flats, after reading up on the early 2000's threads on here. But I think that was a mistake, or geared to more adept runners then myself. I recently tried a mild stability shoe (saucony guide 10), and I'm definitely less sore after runs. Although, I do get some calf soreness in these that I don't in my low drop flats, but I'll take that over stabbing arch pain. I think now I'll just run in these more supportive shoes most days, and eventually add some speedwork in flats, with maybe some 5-10 minute cool downs barefoot on dirt to build some foot strength.

And to the other guy regarding pace. No way I'm banging out 5min miles consistently. I just did one as a test and had a really high cadence, so I included that to be descriptive. I raced bikes professionally so my aerobic capacity is world class, but my muscles/tendons are that of a 12 year old girl. So since I started 90% of my mileage has been at about 8' pace, and the rest 9' or above for recovery. Taking it pretty slow as I've been constantly battling injury. Waiting a half a year or so until I add speed.

You can overstride at any cadence if your center of gravity and footstrike are off.

If you have a sufficiently high leg speed velocity you certainly can overstride at 180.

Transitioning from biking to running takes a long time and a lotta mileage. When you get sore, go back to cycling for a few days and then ease your way back into running. Eventually you will get there.

There are a lot of ways for your form to be bad other than overstriding. Cadence has nothing to do with it. Of course you could be overstriding.

I think the main issue as others have noted is that your running muscles/tendons/etc aren't very strong yet and simply can't handle the intensity. Running is very different from cycling in that sense.

FWIW, I usually get fewer injuries when my mileage is higher. I don't know if that's because more miles = more strength, or because fewer injuries = more miles, or some combination of both.

"If you have a sufficiently high leg speed velocity you certainly can overstride at 180."

Is it possible to have "sufficiently high leg speed" just by kind of forgetting about form and running? Or do you mean that you'd have to force an unnatural leg speed?

Maybe I should have worded my question differently. I understand that if you really were forcing a choppy fast stride, you could overstride at any cadence. It sounds like lots of people take the high cadence and roll with it, forcing it no matter what. I think it seems to be more of a consequence of good form, not something you can force. I never measured it until I got a garmin recently, and it happened to hover around 180 without thinking about it. Seems like unless you're running like one of those pose doofuses a natural cadence of 180 or higher would mean your footstrike is all gravy. But my injuries make me second guess it. I guess maybe it just takes longer to adapt to running than I thought and maybe just over thinking form.

Like I said, I seriously don't think many runners worry much about cadence. But there are many ways to injure yourself.

Correct. Just get out there and run.

NotAnotherFormQuestion wrote:

maybe just over thinking form.

You're height and weight are optimal?

Do you look at your shadow when you run? Is there a store

window you can safely run past and watch your form?

I wouldn't worry about the 180 thing until you RE-LEARN

how to run again. You gotta do it or you'll doom yourself

to injuries.

This is a great video, download and do it and memorize the technique.

Proper Running Technique: Running Form Tips and Drills

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRkeBVMQSgg

Good luck

Cyclists are notorious for picking up overuse injuries when starting running, especially tendon/ligament.

Cyclists have a well developed aerobic system and good muscle endurance, so easily overdo things without really feeling that they are putting in a lot of 'effort'.

It takes a long time for those to strengthen up.

Cadence bot wrote:

180 IS THE PERFECT CADENCE. EVERY RUNNER MUST RUN 180 CADENCE OR ELSE THEY WILL NOT RUN THEIR BEST. I AM NOT A BOT.

This nitwit is obviously being sarcy and he's right. There is absolutely no benefit to knowing your cadence. Cadence is dependent on leg length and height among other things, so to cite 180 as the perfect cadence, as you have probably seen around the web, is a load of sh*t.

I'm 6'2 and at 6:00 pace my cadence is 170. When sprinting it goes well up into the 200s.

Run several days a mile or two (or more) barefoot on clean synthetic turf. Your best natural stride will emerge from this.

Give Til It Hurts wrote:

Run several days a mile or two (or more) barefoot on clean synthetic turf. Your best natural stride will emerge from this.

His stride will depend on the surface and the shoes. His best natural stride will probably emerge after he runs for a while longer, getting used to the requirements of running as opposed to cycling.

I think you hit it with the "..my aerobic capacity is world class..." Generally the engine (cardio-vascular system) gets fit faster than the chassis (muscular/skeleton/tendons). I'm an older runner now, but had around 75 Vo2 max at one stage, and I still find that if I'm not very careful it's easy for me to run at paces that feel comfortable from a cardio standpoint, only to find the next day that I've overdone it as far as the legs are concerned. You have a double whammy, as you've already built the cardio up to an extreme degree, while the muscular/skeletal system is at beginner stage.

Working on good form (McMillan has a good guide) will help, but unfortunately, it's probably to a considerable degree, a question of going very cautiously until the muscular/skeletal system catches up.

Thanks for the help everyone. Looks like more than anything, I'm another victim of the minimalist movement. Gave my bulkier trainers (Saucony Guide 10's) another chance and running felt effortless. Knocked out 8 miles at 7' pace yesterday and didn't feel a bit of my usual soreness after. I feel like an idiot! Ditching the flats for awhile. Still gonna do some cool downs barefoot just to build some foot strength, and add in flats on speedwork days after a few more months of base building.

I think initially the flats felt much better because it made me have to run lightly without slamming down on my heels like most beginners tend to do, encouraged by the big bulky shoes. But I should have just sprinkled them in to encourage good form, not train in them 100%. Got too interested in those early 2000's threads about training in flats, but I guess they are old for a reason.

Thanks for all the responses.

I'm a minimalist who has run in flats for almost 10 years including countless 100 mile weeks on pavement. However, I teansistioned into flats over the course of about six months. I can't think of a worse thing to try and do than come into running and right away just start running in flats. Flats aren't for everyone. They work for me but may not for other people. I get severe arch pain/PF if I run in anything other than flats. Everyone is different. See how the trainers work for you and if you're not getting injured in them then by all means just stick with wat works. Enjoy running, it changed my life