Bounding? or Turnover? (Read 1101 times)

For those of you that are pretty fast, or know more than I, I have an odd question. I'm a bigger guy at 5'11" and 195 lbs. I'm working on getting down to around 19 min 5K paces. Pretty low mileage right now at just around 20 or so. I'm a few months coming off an injury and I've just kind of been gun shy about raising mileage again but I'm working on it. Anyway... Pace: Recovery 8:00-8:30. Easy runs are in the 7:25-7:45 range. Dipping down into the 6's here and there without thinking about it. (read:not meaning to and catching myself) Right now I'm just going back and forth between easy runs and a weird harder day where I'll do everything in the 6:30-ish range doing 2 miles, 800, 800, and then 400's all the way back with as much rest as I need to keep the pace for the next distance. I know it's an odd workout for low mileage but it feels good. My endurance stinks right now but I'm working on that. So the question is this... how much does bounding have to do with faster paces? I can run a 1:05 400, but my legs feel like they are really moving. I've noticed that doing the above 6 minute-ish workout that it's harder for my lungs than my legs and I've got a higher turnover rate than normal. My easy paces in the 7's seem like a fast jog for the most part. I read something somewhere a few weeks back and toyed with it out on a saturday run and started taking longer strides kind of bounding and I dropped down in the 5 minute range pretty easily for a couple 400s, although it was new to my legs and I really felt it, but it was easy on my lungs. I remember seeing guys I was racing against in the 19:00-20:00 range and it really looked like they were jogging compared to my turnover. So, is this something I should really be working on? or will it work itself out? (I know mileage needs to come up, but just in general.)

Pace: Recovery 8:00-8:30. Easy runs are in the 7:25-7:45 range. Dipping down into the 6's here and there without thinking about it. (read:not meaning to and catching myself) Right now I'm just going back and forth between easy runs and a weird harder day where I'll do everything in the 6:30-ish range doing 2 miles, 800, 800, and then 400's all the way back with as much rest as I need to keep the pace for the next distance. I know it's an odd workout for low mileage but it feels good. My endurance stinks right now but I'm working on that. So, is this something I should really be working on? or will it work itself out? (I know mileage needs to come up, but just in general.)

1. An interesting fact: your recovery and easy paces are about the same as mine, and I think I'm in 17:00 5k shape. 2. You are right, your mileage should come up before you worry about these things. From the sound of it, you've got PLENTY of basic speed to run a 19 minute 5k. Your problems are the ones you already identified: your weight and your lack of endurance. There's one good cure for both of these: running more. 3. I might be wrong about this, but maybe one reason you're not running enough is that you are running too fast. It takes a lot out of you to be running so close to 5k pace, and that may be sapping your motivation to get out the door. Just my two cents. Perhaps they aren't relevant to the thread title, and sounds like you already know it; you just gotta do it.

If you're working on getting down to a 19-minute 5k, where are you at right now? And what do you mean by bounding?

Bounding? The only bounding should be up hills, as part of a specific workout. Longer stride length and higher turnover rate will both increase speed. By running more, you will work both to the point where your body finds its natural rhythm.

Yeah, I kind of described this the wrong way. I guess you can replace 'bounding' with 'longer stride'. More pushoff and more air time? See, it doesn't really feel like my stride length is extending all that much. i.e. as my pace gets faster, my turnover matches but maybe my stride length isn't lengthening as much as it should? It could be my perception but I could swear my turnover is faster than other people at the same pace. It's not a big deal and I probably won't change anything, I just found it really interesting that it was easier (on my breathing) to bring down my pace with longer strides than with faster turnover and started thinking that maybe I'm not striding long enough when I increase speed. *shrug* Just thought I'd ask. I guess the natural rhythm answer works.

You keep getting injured because you're running too fast. Get a heart rate monitor and learn what "easy" really feels like. Also, there's little to gain and much to risk by doing speedwork on such low overall mileage.

You keep getting injured because you're running too fast.

Actually I've been told that my left leg swings out and around and I might have a leg length discrepancy. I've also found during the last month that one of my hips is a lot tighter than the other. If anything was the cause, other than leg length/tight hip, I would guess disproportionate long runs to my training volume, and or possibly the lack of a cutback week going from 30 to 40 miles per week. Leading up to the injuries I was doing no speedwork or tempos. All training was slower than 8 minutes per mile, with the exception of dipping down to 7:30 and 7:45 a couple times within the last month before my injury, all of which at the time was my easy pace. (i.e. my last long run of 11 miles that did it I ran at 8 minute pace working down to 7:35ish for the last 3 miles)

Thanks for the advice.

You're welcome. As you continue to think about your training plan, keep in mind that speed is not your problem. The question that your training plan should answer: what can I do that will give me the strength to use my natural speed over longer and longer distances? (Hint: the answer is pretty simple and requires no knowledge of muscle physiology, lactic thresholds, or VO2max.)

I have the same question. Seriously, you guys are missing the point. Grrr! Try a longer stride (you feel as if you are bounding) or simply a short, faster stride. Which leads to more speed? Most of what I've read says that a cadence of 180 strides/minute is best. Elite runners are even higher. Like the OP, I tried both bounding and high cadence to see what was faster....bounding appeared to win. Conventional wisdom says rapid turnover wins. I think I'll try the experiment again sometime under more controlled conditions. I also bound uphill, like an idiot. I know, I know, you're supposed to shorten your stride...but there are all those people to pass. /hijack, because I just don't want to post this on its own Very Special Thread/ I gambled very aggressively on the Hartford marathon, setting an aggressive BQ pace. And I crashed, spectacularly so. It was a painful experiment but I'm glad I went for it anyway. My next marathon in the Spring will be just for fun, I promise. No watch, no goals. /hijack off/