Thanks in advance!
I have a confession…my foot lands way out front and I heel strike 
I haven’t had any injuries or performance issues but am looking to improve for long term gain.
My cadence is typically around 178. Everything I read notes that increase cadence will improve this naturally. In addition to this what other drills, tips etc would you recommend.
Some good drills and pointers here
.
The best way to put your foot down under your center of mass is to hop in place. The only way to make forward progress (during steady state running) is to put your foot down in front of your center of mass.
Good luck,
Jim
Thanks in advance!
I have a confession…my foot lands way out front and I heel strike
I haven’t had any injuries or performance issues but am looking to improve for long term gain.
My cadence is typically around 178. Everything I read notes that increase cadence will improve this naturally. In addition to this what other drills, tips etc would you recommend.
Stand up straight, look straight ahead, lean forward from the ankles until you teeter, fall into a run.
Appreciate the scientific reply…
In other words, you’re already doing things properly.
In fact, every study that I’m aware of in which running stride length or frequency has been changed resulted in INcreased cost of locomotion. We self optimize.
Cheers,
Jim
Appreciate the scientific reply…
In other words, you’re already doing things properly.
In fact, every study that I’m aware of in which running stride length or frequency has been changed resulted in INcreased cost of locomotion. We self optimize.
Cheers,
Jim
I’ve read this here before, but it doesn’t seem to match my own experience. Actually, after some lingering issues caused by my own “self optimization,” more recently I’m consciously trying to keep my cadence high.
Did the studies you mentioned allow time for adaptation? Can you cite a few?
Google scholar is your friend: Here’s one but there are many more. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00421-007-0456-1
The important thing is that running stride frequency matches the resonant frequency of your leg-spring + body mass system. Any deviation from that frequency increases cost. Note that in the linked study, stiffness and frequency changed together with fatigue. It is possible to change leg spring stiffness (and thereby resonant frequency) with strength and pylometric training but the cost is still minimum at the new resonant frequency.
Cheers,
Jim
In other words, you’re already doing things properly.
In fact, every study that I’m aware of in which running stride length or frequency has been changed resulted in INcreased cost of locomotion. We self optimize.
Cheers,
Jim
I’ve read this here before, but it doesn’t seem to match my own experience. Actually, after some lingering issues caused by my own “self optimization,” more recently I’m consciously trying to keep my cadence high.
Did the studies you mentioned allow time for adaptation? Can you cite a few?
Google scholar is your friend: Here’s one but there are many more. https://link.springer.com/...07/s00421-007-0456-1
The important thing is that running stride frequency matches the resonant frequency of your leg-spring + body mass system. Any deviation from that frequency increases cost. Note that in the linked study, stiffness and frequency changed together with fatigue. It is possible to change leg spring stiffness (and thereby resonant frequency) with strength and pylometric training but the cost is still minimum at the new resonant frequency.
Cheers,
Jim
In other words, you’re already doing things properly.
In fact, every study that I’m aware of in which running stride length or frequency has been changed resulted in INcreased cost of locomotion. We self optimize.
Cheers,
Jim
I’ve read this here before, but it doesn’t seem to match my own experience. Actually, after some lingering issues caused by my own “self optimization,” more recently I’m consciously trying to keep my cadence high.
Did the studies you mentioned allow time for adaptation? Can you cite a few?
I promise I’ll go back and reread that a second time to see if I can figure out what it means. So it fundamentally disagrees with this?
single leg posing drills
high knees/butt kicks, in place and moving
single leg hoping, in place and moving (forwards, backwards, side to side)
Paw back drill, in place and moving
Bounding (advanced):
Bounding drills
Bounding drills (B)
Linked videos are specifically for triple jump, but works well to help establish good running form for any type of runner. Start slow and easy, you don’t want to end up with a blown bursa or meniscus on the first go. “Hit the ground, don’t let the ground hit you.”
Don’t trouble yourself too much about cadence, work on form.
This. …although, I was going to phrase it as: all of those drills you did to start Jr High track practice that you thought never made sense because you were a distance runner and not a sprinter.
Not at all; apples and oranges. I’m talking about metabolic cost (VO2 or heart rate) and that article is about impact forces. Of course if you take shorter strides you have smaller impacts but you also have more of them.
Cheers,
Jim
I promise I’ll go back and reread that a second time to see if I can figure out what it means. So it fundamentally disagrees with this?
https://www.runnersworld.com/…-have-many-benefits/
Would be interesting to see any studies that look at that cost equation during race conditions, rather than steady-state running: up and down hills, headwind/tailwind, drafting versus attacking. Each runner actively alters the cost/benefit all throughout a race as they choose when and how much energy to input to the system.
I have the snraking suspicion that my poor running form is due to strength and balances tight hips and weak glutes. I think addressing those foundational issues would have to be a prerequisite for any kind of form improvement I think what I see is a symptom.
Not at all; apples and oranges. I’m talking about metabolic cost (VO2 or heart rate) and that article is about impact forces. Of course if you take shorter strides you have smaller impacts but you also have more of them.
Cheers,
Jim
I suppose I do worry a lot about impact forces, as a older novice with a spine fusion. Still, the reported lessening of bounce and braking forces wouldn’t positively affect metabolic cost? Why not?
I suppose I do worry a lot about impact forces, as a older novice with a spine fusion. Still, the reported lessening of bounce and braking forces wouldn’t positively affect metabolic cost? Why not?
Becuase what Jim is talking about is essentially the passive spring action of the body-mass-system. Essentially, your leg acts as a passive spring/dampener, and will bounce and recoil storing and then releasing some energy—like a pogo-stick. it will act that way in an optimal manner at a frequency that is based on the “spring stiffness” of your leg and the mass of your torso.
Its easiest to think about the effects of slowing down your cadence, but the same thing works for speeding up. Slowing down that frequency causes the impact energy to need to be absorbed, before the leg is ready to push-off again. So, when it comes time for the next stride, the leg muscles have to do work (burn calories, expend o2, etc) in order to propel you forward across the pavement.
The same thing happens when you speed your cadence up. Your leg hasn’t finished storing the energy from impact. So, you have to actively push…again doing work, burning calories, expending o2, etc.
Google scholar is your friend: Here’s one but there are many more. https://link.springer.com/...07/s00421-007-0456-1
The important thing is that running stride frequency matches the resonant frequency of your leg-spring + body mass system. Any deviation from that frequency increases cost. Note that in the linked study, stiffness and frequency changed together with fatigue. It is possible to change leg spring stiffness (and thereby resonant frequency) with strength and pylometric training but the cost is still minimum at the new resonant frequency.
Cheers,
Jim
In other words, you’re already doing things properly.
In fact, every study that I’m aware of in which running stride length or frequency has been changed resulted in INcreased cost of locomotion. We self optimize.
Cheers,
Jim
I’ve read this here before, but it doesn’t seem to match my own experience. Actually, after some lingering issues caused by my own “self optimization,” more recently I’m consciously trying to keep my cadence high.
Did the studies you mentioned allow time for adaptation? Can you cite a few?
i came up as a runner. i agree with your analysis. but i don’t agree with your advice.
the obvious difference in run form when watching a high school meet, versus a high level meet, is overstriding. here’s a video of a race i was at, arcadia invite in 2013, and pardon, you’d have to wait about 4min for andy trouard to get into the lead. andy eventually finished 7th in this race in 8:51 and there were 16 runners in the 3200 meters between 8:45 and 9min so this was the cream of the U.S. crop in high school (as this race is every year, and i’ll be back this weekend watching the current crop). here’s andy within the last year:
i don’t know if you see the difference, but i do. arm carriage is a lot crisper, quieter, and the reason is that he’s not overstriding. his footplant is below rather than in front of his knee. this is the typical adjustment good runners make to become great runners. this is andy’s difference between a HS 8:51 3200m runner and a sub-13:20 5k runner. less bouncy. hands not coming up so high in front. cadence quicker. more economy-of-motion.
this isn’t a lot different than the adjustment made in cycling, when riders add 15 or 20 beats to their cadence between rank beginner and seasoned cyclist.
in my opinion and experience, the very best “drill” that forestalls overstriding is to run right behind some, as close as you can without clipping his heels with your feet. this, from years and many miles of intervals on the track with your mates.
Following, not because I want to increase efficiency, but rather reduce injury.
I clearly overstride and am very injury prone even with 100% “easy” running. 3 broken bones, bursitis, tendinitis, you name it, all in 5 years. At least 1 injury/year.
Went to a PT recently and was told to engage my core and lean my body forward more which has helped even if it is a placebo affect.
I would even sacrifice efficiency if it reduced my chance of injury.
Sounds similar to my experience – trying to “run easy” led to lower cadence and longer stride and subsequent injuries. Apparently I can’t run easy.
Hi Dan:
Where you see “overstriding” I see a compliant leg spring that requires a slower and longer stride to perform optimally. Based on all the research that I have ever read, those who you see overstriding would experience increased metabolic cost if they went to a shorter stride with a faster turn over. On the other hand, if they did strength or plyometric training, they could increase their leg spring stiffness which would result in a higher optimal stride frequency and shorter stride. Hence, eliminating what you see as overstriding.
For reference I have measured leg spring stiffness in my lab as low as 20kN/m in an ironman triathlete and as high as 44kN/m in a highly strength trained athlete. The triathlete ran with slow/long strides and the strength trained athlete ran with short/fast strides. All things are as they should be.
Here’s a demonstration I often do with students in class. Stand up and hop. Really just do some hopping as if you were jumping rope. You will find that you can hop for a while without breathing hard at all because you are taking advantage of your leg springs resonant properties. Now hop at a faster cadence. You will immediately notice your breathing and heart rate increase. Same thing if you hop at a slower cadence, metabolic cost will increase because you are no longer in sync with your spring.
Cheers,
Jim
i came up as a runner. i agree with your analysis. but i don’t agree with your advice.
EDIT: I have run a bit myself including a 22.4 for 220 yards on old school cinder track.