Low HR Training

1

how important is cadence with slow running (Read 36 times)

Usurper17


    After a brief hiatus in November and December, I'm getting back into the swing of things.  Before my break, things were progressing nicely, dropped my mile pace by 2 minutes and lost 8 pounds.  Sounds great except I'm exceptionally slow so I'm a little confused on technique for running at 13 min/miles.  Yes, that's an improvement.

     

    I've been practicing some running drills so I can improve my running technique. My goal for 2016 was to avoid injury (check) and run 15 miles (check).  For 2017, I'd like to improve mt time and also develop the skill of running.  Running in MAF is helping my health and also my endurance.  Hopefully, developing some running skills will improve my pace.

     

    First, I noticed that my cadence is about the high 160s, maybe 170 which seems low compared to the recommended 180.  Of course, my 13 min/mile pace is slow so does cadence really matter?

     

    When I get on really technical trails, my cadence goes up to 180 and I feel light and quick, but running on road I tend to have a slower cadence.  When I push the cadence to 180 or so, I tend to push out of MAF and need to slow to a walk but I feel my glutes are really firing (yes, I just said that).

     

    so which is better?  running consistently at an even pace with low cadence in the 160s?  Or run at 180 cadence and walk frequently?  I'm kind of leaning towards the later in hopes that I'll develop some technique.

    BeeRunB


      Hi Usurper,

       

      That recommended 180 strides per minute was a concoction of running coach and author, Jack Daniels. After studying elite athletes, he noticed they ran with a cadence of around 180. Remember that these are runners with tremendous strides. Since i have tendency to experiment, of course I would try this. The problem is that I don't have a lengthy stride, maybe because I'm not a spring chicken, have stubby legs (not stubbly), or maybe the inherent body talent and strength isn't there. I could go 180 strides per minute at certain speeds. Let's say my 5k pace is 7:00, I could maintain 180 around 9:00-10:00 pace. But If I went faster, I couldn't widen my stride enough to maintain the 180, my cadence naturally rises to 190-200.

       

      Running 13:00 pace or slower, it'll be around 160, give or take a few strides. I can shorten my stride much easier than lengthen it, so I can do 180 at slow speeds, but my stride becomes ridiculously short.

       

      The moral of the story is that I'm an amateur with more talent for picking up on underlying themes and symbolism in TV shows while I try to guess the ingredients in the food I'm eating, than for running. 180 is completely unnatural for my body at high and low speeds, and only hit that number at a certain medium speed. I believe it's best for me to run naturally and not force the cadence. I'm really not sure if Daniel's 180 is great for all elites as a forced cadence either. I'm skeptical that it's some magic number that everyone must strive to achieve in order to be their best.

       

      My recommendation is to run naturally. The only technique I've ever worked on is running hills in a particular way, the rest I've just ran.