Hi All,
For the first time ever in my running, i’ve decided to follow a running program. There are many posts on ST about the ideal running cadence and from what I gather it seems that the number is around 180spm.
My question is, does this cadence need to be kept just when doing “race pace” runs, or is it something that I should be striving to do all the time i.e. even during "easy/long runs?
Cheers for the help.
Pretty much all the time. it will go down slightly when running slow but not much.
Pretty much all the time. it will go down slightly when running slow but not much.
The only thing that will really change is your stride length…if that make sense. As you toe off running faster you will lengthen the length between foot strikes and increase the effort as compared to running easy where the length will shorten and the effort will be reduced. Your cadence will only vary slightly at any speed.
Dave
BPC Triathlon
Hi All,
For the first time ever in my running, i’ve decided to follow a running program. There are many posts on ST about the ideal running cadence and from what I gather it seems that the number is around 180spm.
My question is, does this cadence need to be kept just when doing “race pace” runs, or is it something that I should be striving to do all the time i.e. even during "easy/long runs?
Cheers for the help.
The vast majority of runners will select the stride length and cadence that best suits them.
John
Thanks for the replies!
Do I take it then that my cadence (which currently sits at 160-170spm) is what I’m stuck with?
I do training runs at higher cadences (trying to teach myself to run at higher cadences), but always find myself falling back to my set speed.
Is running cadence then, very different to cycling cadence, in that cycling cadence is (I think) relatively easy to train to spin faster and still be effective, whereas, I find run cadence training significantly more challenging to excel at?
Does anyone have any good training drills that can help with cadence?
Cheers
Most people run with higher cadences as they progress from beginner to elite. I’m not aware of any studies that definatively conclude that “actively” trying to accelerate the process helps.
Do I take it then that my cadence (which currently sits at 160-170spm) is what I’m stuck with?
I do training runs at higher cadences (trying to teach myself to run at higher cadences), but always find myself falling back to my set speed.
Is running cadence then, very different to cycling cadence, in that cycling cadence is (I think) relatively easy to train to spin faster and still be effective, whereas, I find run cadence training significantly more challenging to excel at?
Does anyone have any good training drills that can help with cadence?
Its not fixed, I increased mine from ~80-85 (i.e. same as yours, but counting rpm rather than spm) to 90-93. It just took discipline and several months consistency. I still sometimes find myself dropping cadence to ~87 on recovery runs if I don’t pay attention.
I used a watch with multiple intervals, set one at 2 minutes the other 20s. Count 30+ steps/20s and check it each 2min. After a while (~couple months) moved this to 4min, then 10min. Now its habit and I know when I’m right at 90 by feel. I do see less injury/stress on the legs and I think less effort.
Or say, actually read some research on it:
http://sweatscience.com/the-problem-with-180-strides-per-minute-some-personal-data/
.
Go look at the post above mine on sweatscience. All this crap regarding the “magical number” of 180 is vodoo science. Yes according to daniels run cadence from sprinters to marathon is 180 and above (in elites)…Think about this for a second. If you are an elite runner marathon distance and you are running 180cadence/min and you are running 5 min miles that comes out to a stride length of almost 6 feet. If you have a smallish runner thats a pretty big leap…so they run with a faster cadence…greater than 180. If Usane Bolt only does 180 cadence for 100yd sprint his stride length is over 10feet…but its not its like 240
If you run the same cadence in your IM at say 9min pace (3:54 marathon split) your stride length is 3 feet. Most people can walk with a stride length of 3 feet. At 10min pace its 2’ something…its starts to get rediculous. Anyone that tries to run a 5min pace for any length is going to have astride rate over 180 its simple mathmatics.
Youtube videos of elites going out for a jog and you will see them with cadence 160-170
It all depends on how fast your run
www.sweatscience.com
The vast majority of runners will select the stride length and cadence that best suits them.
+1. altering stride rate or length decreases economy. however, a overly long stride is worse than a shorter stride, but neither are ideal.
Is running cadence then, very different to cycling cadence, in that cycling cadence is (I think) relatively easy to train to spin faster and still be effective, whereas, I find run cadence training significantly more challenging to excel at?
Does anyone have any good training drills that can help with cadence?
It is common for people to find it more difficult to increase run cadence than that of cycling, think about how much movement control you have with regard to cycling versus running.
With regard to drills, there are a number out there that can help, in my work with athletes, I find that the best drill is really to practice taking short and quick strides, essentially to make yourself run with a quicker cadence at times in your normal runs. You will feel like you’re reverting to your old patterns, as you likely are, but the question is whether over a longer duration you will start to make changes. You can’t expect yourself to try a quick cadence out a few times and then for your body to embrace it and have it become natural. That process takes time.
Most people run with higher cadences as they progress from beginner to elite. I’m not aware of any studies that definatively conclude that “actively” trying to accelerate the process helps.
+1
The concept that you “should” run at 180spm was based on looking at elites, but there is no evidence that forcing yourself to run at 180spm will make you faster. The progression is natural.
I know nothing about whether you SHOULD pursue a faster cadence, but I toyed with it a couple of times just for the reasons you did. One easy way to make yourself do it for a few runs is (if you run with an iPhone) to download one of many metronome apps and play it while you run.
Sample of 1.
I used to run 160-170bpm. My HM time last year was 1:41:41 (7:45ish).
I created a playlist of 180bpm songs and have been running to it for the last year.
My HM time yesterday was 1:35. (7:15)
Now- it wasn’t the cadence that made me faster. It was upping the cadence, which reduced the stress on my running part, which allowed me to increase my weekly mileage and consistency without injury, which improved my pace 30s/mi.
180bpm felt very awkward at first. Now 170 feels awkward. Yes- you need to train at your desired race cadence. No, runners don’t naturally select the most efficient cadence. They may select the most efficient cadence for where they are right now, but not where they will someday be.
" No, runners don’t naturally select the most efficient cadence. They may select the most efficient cadence for where they are right now, but not where they will someday be. "
HUH?
“where they will someday be”…So that time will eventually be right now and hence they will select the most efficient cadence
Yeah. Sorry I was a bit unclear. Upping my cadence helped me a lot. Wasn’t natural at first
Another n=1 example, but after reading an article about 180 spm being ideal, I made an effort to up my cadence, from what was probably about 160-170 spm naturally. Keep in mind that I’m pretty much a beginner runner who has never put in consistent mileage (guess what my goal is for this off-season!). So, I found a 90 bpm metronome mp3 and ran with it and basically the same training volume as I had the previous couple of years. I figured 10% higher cadence should translate to 10% faster pace. I’m kinda dumb that way.
What I found is that the higher cadence translated to a much lighter foot strike, which seems to have helped some injury issues I’ve dealt with. The flipside is that it seems to also translate to a higher heart rate, which subsequently seemed to hurt my overall performance - I have a hard time holding 180 spm for a full race. I’m finding that in all my races this year, I start out strong on the run, feel a little too good, and then my cadence and pace drop pretty significantly towards the end. The net result has been no measurable improvement in my run times. My cadence might be 10% faster, but I sure am not! I find myself running with a lot more tension in my body, and feel kind of funny because the higher cadence seems like tiny little steps. It’s just not very natural for me. I haven’t filmed myself yet, but I imagine I look kind of stiff, unnatural, and odd.
So, lesson learned, I think there’s probably something to be said about letting the increased cadence happen naturally, or at least more gradually.
Cadence depends on the events you are running. I train with some ITU WCS racers, the optimal cadence for them over 5/10k’s is 105, whilst an optimal HIM/IM cadence is around 90/95. I know (especially for the 10k) it feels quite high, yet it encourages a more forefoot landing and best conserves energy. The top runners in the sport (with the exception of Andreas Ralert) fit within these cadence ranges. When you are running slower, it is not your cadenece which should slow, rather the force you apply to each step that decreases