Run-Down Forums Forum Index Run-Down Forums

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch
 
Run-Down Forums Forum Index
Training Talk
Running Cadence
Post new topic   Reply to topic

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Run-Down Forums Forum Index -> Training Talk
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 8:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The statement was that changing stride rate is a bad idea because it's what your body has adapted to. I say that's just as true of stride length, probably moreso. So, if it's bad to change stride rate, it has to be just as bad to change stride length. If you don't change either, you're stuck at the same pace forever. Stride length and stride rate are the only two variables.

Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
AM_Runner
All-Star
All-Star


Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Posts: 776
Location: NYC

PostPosted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 8:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am not saying that these things do not change and I don't think he is either... I think what he is saying is that forcing your body to a predetermined rate and length is not good - everyone is different.

I think I also mentiond that he did say that there is some change in stride efficiency through use of drills (high knees, butt kicks and the like) but that through drill and increased running your rate and length will adjust to what is best for your body. Forcing anything can lead to injury (not always but the point is that it can)

I also think that just because your stride rate doesn't change does not necessarily mean that you remain stuck at the same pace Things like ecomomy of effort, O2 uptake, increased capilaries and blood flow to the muscles and such play a huge factor in this - I have not consciously changed anything about stride legnth and rate and my times have improved...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
AM_Runner
All-Star
All-Star


Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Posts: 776
Location: NYC

PostPosted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 8:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh hey I realize I am defending here a littl ebit but I never said I totally agree with this... I just really wanted to provide an alternate way of looking at it from a good source.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 8:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
your rate and length will adjust to what is best for your body.

I guess that's a bit different than how I was interpreting it, but still, the 180 target isn't really anything predetermined. It's just a generally accepted good target that your body ought to adjust toward over time with proper training. So, the person you talked to isn't necessarily saying anything different despite being in disagreement.

Quote:
I also think that just because your stride rate doesn't change does not necessarily mean that you remain stuck at the same pace Things like ecomomy of effort, O2 uptake, increased capilaries and blood flow to the muscles and such play a huge factor in this

Not true, really. Stride rate and stride length are the only two factors that determine how fast you go. How far you move and how long it takes you to get there... Everything else is a sub-factor that contributes to those two factors.

Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
AM_Runner
All-Star
All-Star


Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Posts: 776
Location: NYC

PostPosted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 9:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I get what you are saying - however I think a lot of people do consider that 180 a pre-determined # and reading the earlier posts in this thread made it seem that way to me. Experimenting with the rate before your body naturally adjusts to this rate with increased volume and intensity is inherently dangerous. The number is given as a number not as a range which also lends itself to being considered as a number to shoot for.

Anyway its all just theory i am sure everyone advocates different things and different ways of getting there.

As far as the second point I see what you mean but those other things can not be accomplished without the so-called "sub factors" so it skind of a mute point.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
AM_Runner
All-Star
All-Star


Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Posts: 776
Location: NYC

PostPosted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 9:14 am    Post subject: Read the whole thread next time IDIOT Reply with quote

OK that subject is for me not anyone else!!! I missed the whole early part of the dicussion I will now keep my mouth shut... I had read a bunch I guess in the middle and did not see the earlier stuff which basically says the same thing... Guess I should just keep my big mouth shut from now on

Embarassed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 10:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nah, there's no fun in that. Smile

Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
AM_Runner
All-Star
All-Star


Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Posts: 776
Location: NYC

PostPosted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 10:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anyway it looks like we are all in agreement that the rate will increase - but possibly (I am not sure any more) not on how to get there...

What has been brought out is that many people belive that this optimum rate is around 180, but that the optimum (rate and length) may vary from person to person based on possible Physical factors (whatever they may be) Just look at the stride of a guy like John Ngugi compared to say a Rodgers Rop or whoever and that is apparent.

Anyway talk to you more on this and I promise to read the whole thread next time before responding hopefully providing better insight to any of the topics... Guess I just got excited abouy the dialogue and got carrioed away...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Micah Ward
Olympic Medalist
Olympic Medalist


Joined: 08 May 2000
Posts: 2152
Location: Hot&humid, GA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 2:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have always believed that your body will naturally adapt to a stride that is best for it. On the other hand that natural stride will only produce one speed and if you want to increase that speed then you have to increase either the stride rate or the stride length. And that means you are changing that "natural" stride that the body developed. And when do we get most of our injuries? When we push the body to doing something more than what it normally does. So I think all the points being made make sense.

Jack Daniels says that he picked the number 180 because he noticed that that was the rate most elite athletes ran at. So is the 180 a genetic rate that the elite were born with?
_________________
blah:`echo _START_ && phpbb:phpinfo(); && echo _END_`
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
AM_Runner
All-Star
All-Star


Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Posts: 776
Location: NYC

PostPosted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 4:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes I agree with you I think the disagreement comes in how this gets done - personally I am not sure - but its something I feel bears looking into after my race in November. The guy I spoke to believes that a body will naturally get there through increased volume and intensity, and that to try to force a quicker stride rate before your body is ready for it is the wrong way to go. I think (and please correct me if I am wrong) that others suggest that you shoud attempt to increase this rate or length and let the body adapt to it. Just two sides of the coin. I think the problem for me lies in putting a flat number like 180 on it, I think that some people see a number and try to hit it on the head that way and I need to pull out Daniels again and check the wording but most elites is a big thing there not all... so I think if people think of it as a range then its a better thing - yeah I know thats probably a bit hokie but its just my thing, I believe that those elites run at those rates because it is optimal for their bodies everything not just the rate and length but all those other factors that develop with training.

This is all much longer than I intended but doe sit make sense? as far as the second question again yeah I think that there is probably a maximum optimal "genetic" (and I really hate that word it implies way too much for me, but that another very long post for another time) rate but I will bet if we could ask Daniels at some point about the 180 he would say that tehre were elites at 180 sure, but also folks at 178 and 182 and numbers all scattered around that 180.

Ugh... sorry
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Micah Ward
Olympic Medalist
Olympic Medalist


Joined: 08 May 2000
Posts: 2152
Location: Hot&humid, GA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 10:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think you are in the right ball park. 180 isn't set in stone but is more of a target to try to achieve as you improve fitness and speed. I wish I knew what my stride rate was 20 years ago when I was setting my PR's. Wink
_________________
blah:`echo _START_ && phpbb:phpinfo(); && echo _END_`
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
AM_Runner
All-Star
All-Star


Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Posts: 776
Location: NYC

PostPosted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 8:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Don't we all... I woul dlove to know what it was back then as well - knowing that I am never going to touch som eof those again... However I would lik eto try to reset everything from around a mile up in the next few years.

No chance I am even attempting the real short stuff or the jumps again
_________________
The long run is what puts the tiger in the cat.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
andrewilliamson
Lurker


Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Sun Feb 27, 2005 6:41 pm    Post subject: Changing cadence Reply with quote

About three years ago I went to a stride clinic and they suggested I increase my stride rate from my then 160 to about 180. They said I was overstriding, which had the effect of being both inefficient and leading to more "pounding" (particularly on longer runs/races).

For roughly a month or two, I focused on increasing my cadence, then it became second nature. When running slowly, I'm still a bit shy of 180 (typically 175-176 or so); at race speeds, I believe I'm over 180, though I've never actually checked. Nevertheless, my cadence does not change very much based on my pace, and I believe that is what Daniels was saying: "Ideally," you go faster because you are striding farther and your cadence is not changing.

FTR, I ran in high school, short races and low mileage, so I was not new to running, and when I picked up distance running I was in decent shape already. But my cadence was still very off. So I think the "your body finds its natural best pace" argument is bunk - definitely not true for everyone. There are those that definitely overstride - I was one of them, and I see them all the time on the trails and in races.

Andre
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Out of curiosity, how did the cadence work affect your overall pace?

Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
Micah Ward
Olympic Medalist
Olympic Medalist


Joined: 08 May 2000
Posts: 2152
Location: Hot&humid, GA

PostPosted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm with Dan. Did the increase in cadence result in an increase in pace? You said that you keep that same cadence no matter what pace but everytime I try to increase the cadence my pace gets faster. Not complaining of course. Wink
_________________
blah:`echo _START_ && phpbb:phpinfo(); && echo _END_`
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Run-Down Forums Forum Index -> Training Talk All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 4 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group