Running Cadence - Triathlon Week

08-23-2004, 07:09 PM

I know this debate comes up everyone once in awhile. I would like to
not get into the debate but talk about some success that I've
witnessed.

For years I've been a hill striker. I walk like a duck, my feet spade
out and when I run I enjoy taking advantage of my long legs. But I
plateaued year after year at around a 7:10 mile (My best year was at a
6:45). Not bad - not great.

In the past I read in multiple sources that in general this was like
"putting the breaks on" which made sense to me - I just didn't feel
comfortable changing my stride. I read that ideally that you should
run "flat" or on the "ball of your foot" rather than heel first. This
part I just "didn't get". In fact I tried it with horrendous results.
- Lots of pain within 5 minutes. Needless to say I gave up on this
pretty quickly.

So this year I began my year like every normal year. Trying to build
up to the previous years 7:10/mile speed. In my quest for "training
smarter not harder", and that little voice in my head telling me
"Maybe it's your form" I began to research the stride issue again.

This time instead of stride length I focused on cadence. This after
reading that your ideal cadence should be around 90 foot strikes (180
if you count both feet) per minute. This sounded reasonable
considering the ideal cycling cadence is about 95 rpms.

So instead of changing my foot strike I changed my turn-over. To my
shock my I was immediately able to run 9 miles (my long runs are about
12 miles and I figured changing running style would limit me). More
shocking was that my last 6 miles was only 5-10 seconds off my best
10k time which I posted just three week earlier. I've kept this "high
cadence" training up - and found that it was particularly useful on
hill training.

Two weeks ago I ran my fastest (in recent history) 3 miles at a 6:45
pace. This past weekend I beat that - in a triathlon no less -
maintaining a 6:38 for 3 miles.

The lesson learned (as applicable for me) was that I did not need to
change my foot strike. I needed to change my cadence. My foot strike
and gate adjusted naturally on it's own.

Will I end up injured, well that remains to be seen. Will my times
drop? I don't feel like I've found my limit yet - so I suspect they
will. Should you try it? I'm not recommending that you do. But this
seems to have worked for me.

-CF

08-23-2004, 07:09 PM

The revelation you have come to is precisely what Dr. Romanov espouses with
his Pose Method of Running ([Only registered and activated users can see links. ]). In order to increase
cadence, the biomechanics of running gait change more naturally when loading
response is transferred away from the heel and towards the midfoot. This is
not to say that one has to run on the balls of their feet, but that the
weight acceptance of the movement shifts more so away from the heel, which
can act as a brake otherwise. How you come about this neuromuscular
re-education is variable but the results are essentially the same. Proper
technique also has the benefit of diminishing ground reaction forces (GRF)
absorbed by the kinetic chain and harnessed instead to facilitate movement
(in particular, knee flexion). With decreased GRF to contend with, one can
also ameliorate the deleterious effects of impact with running. Injuries and
vulnerability to injuries improve. Life becomes happy. An increased desire
to own a puppy is promoted. Yadda yadda.

Hope this fills in some gaps.

BOB, MSPT

"ChronoFish" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:9544e856.0408161134.2a5ca223@posting.google.c om...
> I know this debate comes up everyone once in awhile. I would like to
> not get into the debate but talk about some success that I've
> witnessed.
>
> For years I've been a hill striker. I walk like a duck, my feet spade
> out and when I run I enjoy taking advantage of my long legs. But I
> plateaued year after year at around a 7:10 mile (My best year was at a
> 6:45). Not bad - not great.
>
> In the past I read in multiple sources that in general this was like
> "putting the breaks on" which made sense to me - I just didn't feel
> comfortable changing my stride. I read that ideally that you should
> run "flat" or on the "ball of your foot" rather than heel first. This
> part I just "didn't get". In fact I tried it with horrendous results.
> - Lots of pain within 5 minutes. Needless to say I gave up on this
> pretty quickly.
>
> So this year I began my year like every normal year. Trying to build
> up to the previous years 7:10/mile speed. In my quest for "training
> smarter not harder", and that little voice in my head telling me
> "Maybe it's your form" I began to research the stride issue again.
>
> This time instead of stride length I focused on cadence. This after
> reading that your ideal cadence should be around 90 foot strikes (180
> if you count both feet) per minute. This sounded reasonable
> considering the ideal cycling cadence is about 95 rpms.
>
> So instead of changing my foot strike I changed my turn-over. To my
> shock my I was immediately able to run 9 miles (my long runs are about
> 12 miles and I figured changing running style would limit me). More
> shocking was that my last 6 miles was only 5-10 seconds off my best
> 10k time which I posted just three week earlier. I've kept this "high
> cadence" training up - and found that it was particularly useful on
> hill training.
>
> Two weeks ago I ran my fastest (in recent history) 3 miles at a 6:45
> pace. This past weekend I beat that - in a triathlon no less -
> maintaining a 6:38 for 3 miles.
>
> The lesson learned (as applicable for me) was that I did not need to
> change my foot strike. I needed to change my cadence. My foot strike
> and gate adjusted naturally on it's own.
>
> Will I end up injured, well that remains to be seen. Will my times
> drop? I don't feel like I've found my limit yet - so I suspect they
> will. Should you try it? I'm not recommending that you do. But this
> seems to have worked for me.
>
> -CF

08-23-2004, 07:09 PM

Bob Schroedter wrote:

> ameliorate the deleterious effects of impact

The biggest word I know is wheelbarrow.

Seriously though, this is very interesting.... thanks.

Brad

08-23-2004, 07:09 PM

[[ This message was both posted and mailed: see
the "To," "Cc," and "Newsgroups" headers for details. ]]

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
ChronoFish <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> The lesson learned (as applicable for me) was that I did not need to
> change my foot strike. I needed to change my cadence. My foot strike
> and gate adjusted naturally on it's own.
>
> Will I end up injured, well that remains to be seen. Will my times
> drop? I don't feel like I've found my limit yet - so I suspect they
> will. Should you try it? I'm not recommending that you do. But this
> seems to have worked for me.
>
> -CF

CF,

What's marvelous about your experience is that you now realize that
with a 180 cadence you can run a 5 minute mile or a 10 minute mile or
any speed in between. The awareness is that the increase in speed is
the lean from the ankle which will increase the stride length.

The difference is that the foot placement (ball/heel or midsole or
flat) receives less vertical impact as the center of gravity is already
passing over the planted foot.

Danny Dreyer's DVD on ChiRunning (chirunning.com) has him doing 180
steps/minute in a 4 way split screen at 4 different speeds from slow to
fast.

I'll have to go back and read Romanov's book and watch his video. I
believe that there is more about power and driving forward in the POSE
method (posetech.com). Time Noakes and some of his South African
researchers did a study using the POSE method. Good results. I
believe that the subjects were trained for several hours over seveal
days to learn the POSE Techniques.

From Danny's approach and from my own experience of teaching the
quicker cadence, the runner can experience the significant difference
in impact and ease of running in an initial 2 to 3 hour class.

Dreyer's approach is more focused on effortless. What I've shared with
rec.running for almost 10 years is more in agreement with the concepts
of ChiRunning.

For me we all hold a piece of the truth. I'm pleased that you've found
what works for you and have shared it with rec.running.

You have added to the folklore of proper running form and style.

Folklore: "If my folklore works for you, use it. If it doesn't,
don't give my folklore or me any further emotion energy or thought.
Simply continue on until you find someone who makes sense and whose
folklore works for you. If you can't find anyone who can help or
assist you, create your own folklore that works for you and share it.
Especially share it with me so that I can see if it works better than
my folklore. Then I can use it or share it with others as an
alternative to my folklore." GAPO

The basic assumption under sharing folklore is that everybody has a
piece of the truth. Some can explain their truth better. Some people
need that same truth explained, pictured, described, represented in
another way that they understand. The good folklorist of running has a
hundred different ways to share getting an idea or a concept across to
the person asking about a running issue they are having.

In health and on the run,
Ozzie Gontang
Director, San Diego Marathon Clinic, est. 1975
Maintainer - rec.running FAQ
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Mindful Running:
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

A dialogue between Steve Freides and myself back in 2000. Where I've
changed my perspective is that in actual running the knee doesn't lift
as much as in the exercise I show to relax the hamstring's
neuromuscular connection when lifting the knee.

Dreyer has an exercise of running in place with the hands on the front
of the thighs so that the knees don't lift. From that exercise he has
the runners lean forward and for the first time people get the sense of
the erect lean of the body creating the movement.
Ozzie

========================

Walk Correctly, Think Correctly, Run Correctly: A Dialogue with Steve
Freides
c.2000 Austin "Ozzie" Gontang, Ph.D. and Steve Freides

Steve,

First the landing on the heel. Here's my spring loaded explanation.
It's based on the fact that as you walk, your upper torso from about
chest to crown of head is slightly behind your COG. Watch people walk
and you'll see that the majority of them snap the lower leg forward
from the knee so they actually hit on the backward movement of the foot
as the back of the heel of the shoe hits the ground. That's the wear
pattern you've described for your trainers. Anyway here's the exercise
to try to break the neuromuscular pattern.

Stand and lift one knee so the thigh is parallel to the ground. Notice
that there is a high likelihood that the lower leg from knee to foot is
bent back
e.g. ________
/
/
/
/
/
\
\

relax the hamstring so that your leg looks like

__________
|
|
|
|
|
\
\

It's a neuromuscular connection so once you can lift your knee and the
lower leg hangs, you've trained the hamstring to relax. It will not be
as spring loaded in your run and you should find that you land more on
the heel of the foot which is about 1.5 to 2 inches infront of the back
of the heel of the shoe.

To train yourself to use your walking as you would run, standing tall,
and looking with your eyes to the horizon, from the bottom of the
sternum to the top of the head let your upper torso bend a quarter of
an inch forward. Now walk across the floor. Now walk back with your
upper torso that quarter of an inch back from where you put it. You
will or should notice that you cannot land on the heel of the back of
the shoe when you are that quarter of an inch forward.

Steve, you keep using "toe." The reality is that if you follow the
plumbline down through the body from the ear through the shoulder, hip,
knee, ankle you'd see that the vector force is neither the heel or the
ball of the foot, but a spot about 1.5 to 2 inches from the back of the
heel of the foot. Pete Strudwick, a marathoner, engineer and author,
ran with a slight deformity...well it was more than slight. Actually
he was born without feet. So when he ran he had created somekind of
leather or shoe like caps that he wore over his nubs where his feet
should be. He was pretty fast.

I have the book which he wrote somewhere in my library. That along
with the yoga concept of "Eye of the Foot," that spot just in front of
the actual heel bone. It is a spot that when kicked there can render
someone unconscious. It's one of those pieces of knowledge that some
policemen knew if they came across a drunk or someone sleeping on the
streets.That spot is where the foot's fulcrum is and the shock waves
are transmitted directly up the skeletal system to the skull where the
brain bangs up against the skull...and there's no telltale sign of
anything having happened.

Notice that when you jump up you always come down ball heel. Not jump
up just a quarter of an inch | | that distance between the two
parallel lines and come down on your heels. You feel the jar up the
body because there's not leaf spring effect as when you land ball heel
and the knees bend as the quads act as shock absorbers. That jarring is
pretty intense and shows you that to land on the heel of the back of
the shoe as you do in your racers, you are decelerating ever so
slightly.

As a biker, you can get the same intuition by using your bike tire.
Turn your bike over. With the fingers of your hand start to spin the
tire. Now continue to spin it so that it stays at a constant rate.
Notice that everytime your hand hits the tire it does so at the same
speed the tire is moving. You can keep the wheel moving at a constant
speed.

If you spin the tire faster, the speed of the tire accelerates. So you
have to keep spinning it at the speed its moving or slightly faster,
overwise if you hit it just a little bit slower, you will experience
your fingers decelerating the wheel. And if its going fast enough,
you'll actually get a friction burn. That blister, that instant of pain
sends a reflex action. You didn't even need to think about it. You may
even say to yourself, that was dumb. But that's the brain talking and
judging again...and not learning. Oh well, maybe another time.

Now, the wheel is the earth. The fingers are your feet. Need I say
more?

Ozzie

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>, Steve Freides <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote:

> Ozzie, you make several interesting observations as they relate to me
> running.
>
> First, I'm an experienced cyclist who spends quite a bit of time on a
> fixed-gear - I'm a certifiable fixed-gear cycling nut case! While
> 90-100 rpm, the lower of which matches exactly your 180
> footfalls/minute, is the usual recommended cadence for cycling, those of
> us who know the wonder of fixed gear (and some others, of course) can
> pedal _much_ faster. I've had my cadence on the bike in the 190 range,
> which is 380 footfalls/minutes, and routinely pedal between 120 and 160
> rpm during a fixed-gear ride, although most of the time I'm sure I'm in
> the 90-120 range.
>
> When I was out doing fast quarters and found my cadence to be up in the
> 210 range, it felt great - I think it may be the way to go for me.
>
> Having said all that, I also observe that I've been thinking a lot about
> your idea of running as an extension of marching in place. The thought
> of it has helped me feel more fluid on the run - thanks! - but I'm still
> by no means landing on my toes. I can - and this was my point, really -
> land on my heels, and pretty hard at that, and do a fast cadence and a
> pretty high speed. I think there are at least some of us for whom
> landing ball then heel may be pretty hard to come by. I think weight
> and body build may have something to do with it - I'm 5'7-1/2" tall and
> weigh 152 pounds with 10% body fat, which is pretty lean, and I'm
> short-legged to boot, measuring 30.5" crotch-to-floor using the method
> used for fitting a bicycle (I buy pants with a 28" inseam when I can
> find them that way). I can lose a few more pounds but not many, and I'm
> not loaded with muscles, either. When I land on my toes, which I can do
> some of the time now, I feel like I'm asking small muscles to support a
> large weight and it doesn't feel like I'll ever be able to do it for
> more than a short while.
>
> I bought a pair of lighter trainers, New Balance 828's, to use instead
> of my usual NB 712's, and it's pretty funny to look at them after only
> about five runs, all speedwork. The heels look like they've been
> through World War III.
>
> I think what I need next is someone to actually watch me run. If anyone
> would like to suggest a relatively inexpensive (if there is such a
> thing) digital video camera or other way to get some video of me running
> onto a computer and then onto the Internet, I'd love to give that a try
> and post some clips for people here to see and comment on. In the
> meantime I've signed up to join my local running club, the North Jersey
> Masters.
>
> There what's best, then there's what's best for me, and it's hard to
> make sense of everything I'm hearing and bring it home and use it. The
> thoughts of leaning forward, of placing my leading foot underneath
> instead of in front, and of not bouncing up and down too much - all that
> continues to be very helpful.
>
> -S-
>
> Ozzie Gontang wrote, in part:
> >
> > For an untrained runner not use to lifting the knees when running in place
> > he or she lifts their COG. It is that lifting of the COG that increases
> > the impact as the COG falling back down to earth is stopped by the foot.
> > Their vertical movement makes it near impossible to do a cadence of 180
> > steps/minute. If they can, and they weigh 150 pounds and lift themselves
> > an inch more than the trained knee lifting minimally displacing runner,
> > then every 12 steps they have lifted their body 150 foot-pounds and sent
> > that jarring reverberation of impact up the leg as joints are compressed.
> >
> > My quick steps as form and style kind of runner has minimal vertical
> > displacement when running in place because I can lift my knee of planted
> > foot just as my lifted foot is landing.
> >
> > So my running in place with quick steps and minimal vertical displacement
> > is not so much a matter of "push-off" as it is of me being able to quickly
> > touch with one foot (ball/heel) just as the other foot is being drawn up
> > and off the ground by my psoas with help from my quad.
> >
> > To experience the low impact of the quick touchdown (ball/heel) march in
> > place in slow motion. As the instant the ball/heel of the knee lifted foot
> > touches the ground, instantaneously lift up the other knee which lifts the
> > planted foot under it upwards in a heel/ball motion. The lifting knee
> > counters the impact of the other foot as it lands so there is minimal
> > vertical displacement of the COG into the earth. The planting foot
> > literally lands on the surface of the earth and isn't attempting to go
> > though the earth's surface.