Seems pretty interesting. will have to give it a try on my next run.
http://triathlon.competitor.com/training/running-stride-length-in-triathlon.html
Huh?
stride <> cadence
breaking <> braking
Stride what? Length? That is certainly not cadence. Stride rate, however, is cadence.
Of course, he never claimed that stride length = cadence. But the two certainly are related.
Oh, I know they are related, via speed. I was being flip with my response.
But the author made it sound like a long stride is bad. If you are running 10min/mile then taking long strides is probably not very efficient. However, you certainly know that one can’t run fast without increasing the length, cadence remaining constant.
Readers may determine that their stride length is, in fact, too long so they increase the cadence and take shorter steps. They then think that becomes their defacto stride length. So, when they want to run faster they don’t want to increase their stride length, it was too long before. Then what, run at 200 spm, 220? The author didn’t mention that a re-evaluation is needed for different run speeds. I just think he could have explained it better.
Over-striding, reaching, whatever you want to call it is bad. Higher cadence is good. The stride length that lets you run the speed you want… it is what it is.
i realized the quick posting of the title made it confusing so i swapped it out.
Before you give it a try, ask the author if there is any science to back up his claim about counting over the 10s period. If there is a little citation would be nice so people know he isn’t blowing something.
The research shows that 95+% of all people self select the proper stride length for them at whatever velocity they are running. Sometimes a little basic research isn’t a bad thing.