Thoughts on Cadence
I know there has been a lot of discussion on these boards the past few weeks about running cadence, or stride counts. At the same time, over the past 2-3 months I have been paying close attention to my own cadence and have been working on improving it. So obviously I have had my running watch working double-duty during this time.
One interesting thing I have noticed is that the faster I go, the higher my cadence is. For example, at a 9:00 pace, I am usually around 168 strides per minute. At an 8:00 pace, the number is 172: at 7:00, it goes up to 178; and at a 6:00/5K race pace, my strides are 182 per minute. So you can see the pattern.
Much of what I have been reading lately has said two things: 1) your cadence should be the same at every pace, and 2) your optimal number should be somewhere between 170 and 180 steps per minute.
So do I have a problem here, and if so, what is it? The main purpose of my running is to race faster, and my “race cadence” is excellent. Am I risking an injury at the slower speeds because my turnover rate is not quick enough? Or are all of the running coaches who preach this stuff overlooking the obvious: that the faster you go, the greater your cadence will be.
Workout:
- Type: Run
- Date: 12/21/2007
- Time: 05:00:00
- Total Time: 1:11:28.00
- Distance: 8 miles
- Average Pace: 8:55.71/mile
This entry was posted
Posted by Chris on Friday, December 21st, 2007 at 5:00 am and is filed under Run.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Digg! this story.
3 Comments: :
Thoughts on Cadence
December 21st, 2007 5:55 pm
adarian says:
You can also go faster or slower by maintaining the cadence and increasing or reducing the stride length.
Do you have the 182/min for the whole race? or just a spot measure?
The whole issue still comes down to how far you travel in the minute.
You could take 182 step and travel 200 meters and you could also take 182 step and travel 220 metere, see what I mean. The same cadence but one is faster than the other.
What you have to find is the best cadence for you, one that you can hold for a large portion of the race, not just for a section of the race.
December 25th, 2007 1:10 pm
goalrunner says:
I think, but cannot confirm, that my cadence is consistent throughout the race. Thanks for the info!
December 25th, 2007 6:38 pm
adarian says:
If you do some quick math you will find out that your stride length may be to short. Or you not covering much ground per stride.
Which brings us back to if one runner takes 180 steps and covers 300 meters and another takes 180 steps and covers 250 meters in a minute, see the problem. Same cadence but one is going to be faster by far. After two minutes of running the second runner would be almost 100m behind. Now if runner b says that I will increase the cadence to 190 and maintain the length, that would make a big difference.
Which is the question of how do you increase the cadence without sacrificing the length?
How do you find the right balance between the two. One can affect the other without an inverse relationship.