Random Running Questions

rovers_runner

jamule wrote: »

did you post that on the wrong forum? is there no entertainment or celeb bum siffing thread for that?

His occupation is a personal trainer, supposedly.
Lot of the people here in this running forum are based in Dublin, don't see the point of your question?

Butterbeans

rovers_runner wrote: »

Has anyone here ever worked with Karl Henry from OT?

I'd be interested in their opinion of his methods as he seems to be still stealing a living on the panel on the OT program on RTE.

Does he actually seek client's for personal training or live off the rte handouts?

Your post comes across as a thinly veiled let's all pile in on Karl Henry.
I've no idea of his background, but a quick Google will tell you he's involved in running a gym / tailored fitness programs. Wouldn't imagine he'd have much involvement with coaching athletics specifically, not really a topic for this thread or forum.

Butterbeans

Question on cadence.
I was reading up on cadence and came across a few references of an ideal cadence of 170 to 180. I know that will vary from person to person but looking at mine - approx 150 for easy and 160 for harder efforts - it seems on the low side and I'm obviously overstriding and not being as efficient as I could be.
I've been trying (only since last week) to shorten my stride and have my foot hitting the ground under the hip. I've been doing it only on my easy runs for now.
Is there anything else I can be specifically doing to help with this. I don't want to get too bogged down in it either but seems there's definitely room for improvement.

Tombo2001

Omega28 wrote: »

Random question...


I've been running on and off now with no real consistency, however I've never really been able to get under 29 mins for a 5km.

Any advice on breaking plateaus and getting quicker?

Try intervals.

Run a kilometre at 25 minute pace, run a kilometre slow, run another at 25 minute pace, run two more slow.

Doesnt have to be exact, but this type of thing.

Do this every second run, do a regular run every other.

ariana`

Butterbeans wrote: »

Question on cadence.
I was reading up on cadence and came across a few references of an ideal cadence of 170 to 180. I know that will vary from person to person but looking at mine - approx 150 for easy and 160 for harder efforts - it seems on the low side and I'm obviously overstriding and not being as efficient as I could be.
I've been trying (only since last week) to shorten my stride and have my foot hitting the ground under the hip. I've been doing it only on my easy runs for now.
Is there anything else I can be specifically doing to help with this. I don't want to get too bogged down in it either but seems there's definitely room for improvement.

I'd look at some drills you can do as part of your warm up before you run. If you google running drills to improve running cadence you are sure to find some. Things like butt kicks, high knees etc.

Kander

Butterbeans wrote: »

Question on cadence.
I was reading up on cadence and came across a few references of an ideal cadence of 170 to 180. I know that will vary from person to person but looking at mine - approx 150 for easy and 160 for harder efforts - it seems on the low side and I'm obviously overstriding and not being as efficient as I could be.
I've been trying (only since last week) to shorten my stride and have my foot hitting the ground under the hip. I've been doing it only on my easy runs for now.
Is there anything else I can be specifically doing to help with this. I don't want to get too bogged down in it either but seems there's definitely room for improvement.

Awhile back, I had a string of injuries that managed to place solely at my poor stride. Once of the techniques that worked best for me was to count my strides as I was going along and be conscious of what I was doing.

I started off at my easy paces and worked up to the faster efforts. I just had a timer on my watch and I counted every time my right foot hit the ground in that 60 seconds. I probably did 2 sessions a week for 3 months paying attention to it.

It was tedious at times and mind numbing but sure what would I have been doing anyway out running. It's been 6 years since I did it and still so glad I put in the time.

Sitting comfortably at 175-180 SPM these days but when practicing I tried up to 200 just to over exaggerate the change in technique.

Reg'stoy

Butterbeans wrote: »

Question on cadence.
I was reading up on cadence and came across a few references of an ideal cadence of 170 to 180. I know that will vary from person to person but looking at mine - approx 150 for easy and 160 for harder efforts - it seems on the low side and I'm obviously overstriding and not being as efficient as I could be.
I've been trying (only since last week) to shorten my stride and have my foot hitting the ground under the hip. I've been doing it only on my easy runs for now.
Is there anything else I can be specifically doing to help with this. I don't want to get too bogged down in it either but seems there's definitely room for improvement.

I've done a bit of reading up on this and 170 seems to be for the 'average' person and so lower and higher cadences 'may be available' on other people.

Running form seems to be more important, so I'd concentrate on that. What I have found is my form improves at higher speeds, something to do with the body being more economic in it's movements at an increased workload. The flip side of this coin is, that when tired my form goes to hell and I even noticed my foot dragging across the ground after doing some tough intervals this morning.

What I've tried to do is occasionally shorten my stride and pick up my foot speed but I'll be honest, I tend to just drift along on most of my runs and not really think about form/cadence. I don't want to be Padraig Harrington and change things so much nothing works any more.

You can find specific play lists of music that given their beat will help your cadence and some Garmin watches will allow you to use a metronome indeed some apps do this too, so you can complete a stride on every beep. Naturally the surface you are running on will effect your cadence, as indeed will the elements. I did my intervals on grass this morning and running up a slight incline against the wind most definitely effected mine .

jamule

Butterbeans wrote: »

Question on cadence.
I was reading up on cadence and came across a few references of an ideal cadence of 170 to 180. I know that will vary from person to person but looking at mine - approx 150 for easy and 160 for harder efforts - it seems on the low side and I'm obviously overstriding and not being as efficient as I could be.
I've been trying (only since last week) to shorten my stride and have my foot hitting the ground under the hip. I've been doing it only on my easy runs for now.
Is there anything else I can be specifically doing to help with this. I don't want to get too bogged down in it either but seems there's definitely room for improvement.

Drills, Hills and intervills!

BeginnerRunner

rovers_runner wrote: »

Has anyone here ever worked with Karl Henry from OT?

I'd be interested in their opinion of his methods as he seems to be still stealing a living on the panel on the OT program on RTE.

Does he actually seek client's for personal training or live off the rte handouts?

He's getting a lot of negative backlash this week. Most of it unjustified IMO.

WRT RTE handouts - is that what you call a salary? OT is one of the most popular shows in Ireland.

But all that's beside the point, his oul lad is the original reason the family is so well known and I'd say their media nous has done a lot for their gym.

FinnC

BeginnerRunner wrote: »

He's getting a lot of negative backlash this week. Most of it unjustified IMO.

WRT RTE handouts - is that what you call a salary? OT is one of the most popular shows in Ireland.

But all that's beside the point, his oul lad is the original reason the family is so well known and I'd say their media nous has done a lot for their gym.

Who is his aul lad?
I don’t watch OT much anymore, what’s he getting a backlash for?

Swashbuckler

rovers_runner wrote: »

Has anyone here ever worked with Karl Henry from OT?

I'd be interested in their opinion of his methods as he seems to be still stealing a living on the panel on the OT program on RTE.

Does he actually seek client's for personal training or live off the rte handouts?

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=252

Butterbeans

ariana` wrote: »

I'd look at some drills you can do as part of your warm up before you run. If you google running drills to improve running cadence you are sure to find some. Things like butt kicks, high knees etc.

Thanks. I used to do those warm up exercises religiously when I started running first, and they've just fallen by the wayside. I worked them into my warm up before my session this evening.

Butterbeans

Kander wrote: »

Awhile back, I had a string of injuries that managed to place solely at my poor stride. Once of the techniques that worked best for me was to count my strides as I was going along and be conscious of what I was doing.

I started off at my easy paces and worked up to the faster efforts. I just had a timer on my watch and I counted every time my right foot hit the ground in that 60 seconds. I probably did 2 sessions a week for 3 months paying attention to it.

It was tedious at times and mind numbing but sure what would I have been doing anyway out running. It's been 6 years since I did it and still so glad I put in the time.

Sitting comfortably at 175-180 SPM these days but when practicing I tried up to 200 just to over exaggerate the change in technique.

Interesting approach. It's something I could potter around with for a few miles of my long run and another easy run during the week. Thanks

adrian522

Butterbeans wrote: »

Interesting approach. It's something I could potter around with for a few miles of my long run and another easy run during the week. Thanks

Don't get too hung up on your cadence, different people naturally run at different cadences.

There is no magic number. It's good to avoid overstriding and it may be useful to increase your cadence through drills and strides and things like that but don't worry too much about hitting 170 or 180 or whatever.

This is interesting and shows elite ultra runners running at vastly different cadences

https://www.outsideonline.com/2377976/stop-overthinking-your-running-cadence

Butterbeans

adrian522 wrote: »

Don't get too hung up on your cadence, different people naturally run at different cadences.

There is no magic number. It's good to avoid overstriding and it may be useful to increase your cadence through drills and strides and things like that but don't worry too much about hitting 170 or 180 or whatever.

This is interesting and shows elite ultra runners running at vastly different cadences

https://www.outsideonline.com/2377976/stop-overthinking-your-running-cadence

Good article, makes a lot of sense.
Like a poster said above "Hills, drills and intervills "and just keep an eye on overstriding, I know I do this at times.

partyguinness

Butterbeans wrote: »

Question on cadence.
I was reading up on cadence and came across a few references of an ideal cadence of 170 to 180. I know that will vary from person to person but looking at mine - approx 150 for easy and 160 for harder efforts - it seems on the low side and I'm obviously overstriding and not being as efficient as I could be.
I've been trying (only since last week) to shorten my stride and have my foot hitting the ground under the hip. I've been doing it only on my easy runs for now.
Is there anything else I can be specifically doing to help with this. I don't want to get too bogged down in it either but seems there's definitely room for improvement.

I wouldnt get too hung up on cadence but I have to admit your 160 for harder reps does seem very much on the low side and a tad surprising. I tend to notice on Strava the shorter the runner the higher the cadence.

I just checked my own. Last night I ran a steady 90mins averaging 174. 300meter repeats on Wednesday I was 178/182.

How tall are you?

Butterbeans

partyguinness wrote: »

I wouldnt get too hung up on cadence but I have to admit your 160 for harder reps does seem very much on the low side and a tad surprising. I tend to notice on Strava the shorter the runner the higher the cadence.

I just checked my own. Last night I ran a steady 90mins averaging 174. 300meter repeats on Wednesday I was 178/182.

How tall are you?

I'm 6'1".
As an example, for my 5k PB (19:55) the max cadence I would have hit was 162, averaging at 160.
For a similar 90min steady as you mention above, I'd average 156.

Slideways

Only had this discussion with a pal of mine last night. He’s about the same height as you and averages 155 on a slow run.
Says he lands midfoot and it’s not in front of his centre of mass so I told him not to worry too much about cadence as IMO this is far more important. One size does not fit all when it comes to cadence

I’m 5’8” and my cadence on easy run is 176 consistently. On harder runs it only goes up to 182

lulublue22

Similar to above my cadence is quite low ~ 160 / 165 for easy runs but could top 180 / 190 for faster pace stuff. My watch records stride length is there a way to see if you are over striding ?

Butterbeans

lulublue22 wrote: »

Similar to above my cadence is quite low ~ 160 / 165 for easy runs but could top 180 / 190 for faster pace stuff. My watch records stride length is there a way to see if you are over striding ?

I'd say by someone observing you run (who knows what they're talking about) or take a video of yourself running, your watch can't or couldn't indicate overstriding I'd imagine

lulublue22

Butterbeans wrote: »

I'd say by someone observing you run (who knows what they're talking about) or take a video of yourself running, your watch can't or couldn't indicate overstriding I'd imagine

It gives you your stride length - mine is fairly consistent. I’ve tried to figure out if you can use this in a formula to gauge if you are over striding or not.

Butterbeans

lulublue22 wrote: »

It gives you your stride length - mine is fairly consistent. I’ve tried to figure out if you can use this in a formula to gauge if you are over striding or not.

I guess it would have to take height and weight into it too, and possibly other factors, but I'm still not sure if a formula would work. It's more to do with where your body mass is in relation to your foot when it hits the ground.

lulublue22

Butterbeans wrote: »

I guess it would have to take height and weight into it too, and possibly other factors, but I'm still not sure if a formula would work. It's more to do with where your body mass is in relation to your foot when it hits the ground.

Tks for that - Ive googled quite a bit and have not come across any formula / method to calculate if you are over striding. I do have video of myself running so might watch that after I google examples of over striding.

Ceepo

lulublue22 wrote: »

Tks for that - Ive googled quite a bit and have not come across any formula / method to calculate if you are over striding. I do have video of myself running so might watch that after I google examples of over striding.

Over striding is both simple and complex at the same time.
Take two people of the same hight and leg length, measure the to closest points of the stride, so toe off and heal placement. And this will give you their stride length. However how both achieved that length may differ.

Athele A" might land with their foot under their centre of mass and have good hip extension.
Athlete B" might land with their foot way ahead of the centre of mass and have restricted hip extension.
Athlete B" would be classified as over striding as their heal is landing way out in front of them, and in effect acting as a brake.
Cadence while it is important needs to be seen in the context of what hight and pace the athletes are running at, and the individual bio rhythms.
Unless athletes are getting recurring injuries then I don't see a need to change thing's.
If its not broken, don't try fix it.

lulublue22

Ceepo wrote: »

Over striding is both simple and complex at the same time.
Take two people of the same hight and leg length, measure the to closest points of the stride, so toe off and heal placement. And this will give you their stride length. However how both achieved that length may differ.

Athele A" might land with their foot under their centre of mass and have good hip extension.
Athlete B" might land with their foot way ahead of the centre of mass and have restricted hip extension.
Athlete B" would be classified as over striding as their heal is landing way out in front of them, and in effect acting as a brake.
Cadence while it is important needs to be seen in the context of what hight and pace the athletes are running at, and the individual bio rhythms.
Unless athletes are getting recurring injuries then I don't see a need to change thing's.
If its not broken, don't try fix it.

Tks for the informative post. I agree with the don’t fix it if it ain’t broke. I don’t tend to get injured often ( though just getting back to it after doing something to my back in Jan) so figure I can’t be doing too much wrong. Just wondering re cadence and stride since I tend to drop a lot on the easy runs compared to faster sessions. I find the faster running more natural but I’m just not able to keep it up over time.

Ceepo

lulublue22 wrote: »

Tks for the informative post. I agree with the don’t fix it if it ain’t broke. I don’t tend to get injured often ( though just getting back to it after doing something to my back in Jan) so figure I can’t be doing too much wrong. Just wondering re cadence and stride since I tend to drop a lot on the easy runs compared to faster sessions. I find the faster running more natural but I’m just not able to keep it up over time.

I think we all have our limiting factor's 🙄ðŸ˜

SuspectZero

I made this post a few years back, might help with discussion here:

I know this cadence of 180 gets thrown around alot but most people don't know where it came from. Jack Daniels(a famous coach and physiologist, not the whiskey) came across this observation when watching elite marathoners running at a pace faster than 12mph were running at around 180spm(faster than most threadmills can go) and this was then correlated to a magical cadence.

Elite 800/1500m runners have a cadence of 200-220, try aand go out on a track and run 210spm for 800m and you'll see the flaw in this causation and effect. Most of the elite marathon runners who are running at these 180+ cadences are running faster for 26 miles than the average fit runner can run for 400m. World class 5k runners are averaging 15.5 seconds per 100m 50 times back to back when their all out 100m sprint is probably 12 seconds. They are almost sprinting for a 5k.

If normal walking cadence is 120
And sprinting cadence is 260
And 800m cadence is 220
And marathon cadence is 185
In elite athletes

What does that say? Speed dictates cadence. Running at 6mph(10min/mile) at a cadence of 180 would mean that your stride length would be .89m. The average human WALKING stride length is .80m. Running slowly at high cadence is not efficient, you are basically racewalking if you do which uses completely different muscles which are not efficient for running.

Stride rate is self-selecting. Are you tall with longer legs? You'll have a slower cadence. Are you a much slower runner? You'll have a slower cadence etc.

Now, you can try and improve cadence by 3-5spm but the magic 180 formula holds no substance as an ideal and efficient number, it was just something that was observed in elite athletes and got drawn out to everyone else.

BeginnerRunner

SuspectZero wrote: »

I made this post a few years back, might help with discussion here:

I know this cadence of 180 gets thrown around alot but most people don't know where it came from. Jack Daniels(a famous coach and physiologist, not the whiskey) came across this observation when watching elite marathoners running at a pace faster than 12mph were running at around 180spm(faster than most threadmills can go) and this was then correlated to a magical cadence.

Elite 800/1500m runners have a cadence of 200-220, try aand go out on a track and run 210spm for 800m and you'll see the flaw in this causation and effect. Most of the elite marathon runners who are running at these 180+ cadences are running faster for 26 miles than the average fit runner can run for 400m. World class 5k runners are averaging 15.5 seconds per 100m 50 times back to back when their all out 100m sprint is probably 12 seconds. They are almost sprinting for a 5k.

If normal walking cadence is 120
And sprinting cadence is 260
And 800m cadence is 220
And marathon cadence is 185
In elite athletes

What does that say? Speed dictates cadence. Running at 6mph(10min/mile) at a cadence of 180 would mean that your stride length would be .89m. The average human WALKING stride length is .80m. Running slowly at high cadence is not efficient, you are basically racewalking if you do which uses completely different muscles which are not efficient for running.

Stride rate is self-selecting. Are you tall with longer legs? You'll have a slower cadence. Are you a much slower runner? You'll have a slower cadence etc.

Now, you can try and improve cadence by 3-5spm but the magic 180 formula holds no substance as an ideal and efficient number, it was just something that was observed in elite athletes and got drawn out to everyone else.

I this massively. Very informative. And quite logical too.

I wonder if anyone here has a large enough data set so they could see how their cadence changed as their pace/fitness/experience improved.

AhhHere

Simple trick from my favourite running YouTuber for foot strike. https://youtu.be/wiDr54nFcfk

Might be of help for those questioning their cadence.

Heat_Wave

Out of curiosity, what runners do you all wear? I wear ASICS gel kayanos for stability but for example i found the saucony speed endorphins helped me run a lot faster. Curious to hear people’s experiences.