Ignorance can be bliss.....
Nah, more like running naturally, instead of a programmed robot relying on numbers and data.
Ignorance can be bliss.....
I suppose you are more in tune with your body too than some of us because of this lack of reliance on technology and science...Nah, more like running naturally, instead of a programmed robot relying on numbers and data.
I'm also wondering if height and/or limb length have anything to do with it.
I'm not sure if I would draw the lesson you do from the fact that my form feels better at faster paces, but it is something to consider.
But if you have a single-gear bike, then your cadence increases with speed. Human legs are essentially single-gear, so I would expect the same thing (although perhaps stride-length complicates things?).
The knee bending I've more or less ignored right from the start, as I'm sure my feet are landing properly, except sometimes towards the end of a run when I begin to tire and then it really does help to consciously pick up the knees a bit.
BG, your grumpy, no-nonsense attitude is always a breath of fresh air, but your absolutist stance on no-tech running does come off a bit like a recovering alcoholic extolling the virtues of complete abstinence to a social drinker. Didn't you used to keep a pretty extensive running log? Isn't there a middle ground to jog over somewhere?Nah, more like running naturally, instead of a programmed robot relying on numbers and data.
I wasn’t attempting to draw a conclusion…..just was something curious I noted. Too little to draw a conclusion from.
I’m not sure the bike analogy works taken to that extent. As you inferred, on a bike you are in a fixed position. While running it seems to me that stride length is equivalent of gear changing. Running up hill, there is a shorter distance between my strides to attempt to reduce the overall effort of going up the hill. In order to keep the same stride length AND cadence I have to increase effort.
I think you and I may have a different internalization of what constitutes “knee bending”. To me it isn’t about picking up the knees, it’s more about dropping the hips and ensuring the knee has a nice bend when the front foot is landing. If I think about picking up my knees it affects only my transitioning, not my landing position…..and I tend to hit the ground as more of a “strike” and less of a “land”.
Yah, although I see this period of focused experimentation coming to a close in a month or two, I hope I'm always open to looking at things with fresh eyes from time to time. I've varied my free weights routine a lot over the years, although the basic pattern of doing back stuff one day and front stuff the other has been set for quite some time.Lee, Don't expect a forced high cadence to feel comfortable. What you see me doing at slower paced running is very relaxed automaitic reaction to posture and leg recovery. Keep up the experimenting. You never know what gems you may find in the journey ;-)
Nah, more like running naturally, instead of a programmed robot relying on numbers and data.
BG, your grumpy, no-nonsense attitude is always a breath of fresh air, but your absolutist stance on no-tech running does come off a bit like a recovering alcoholic extolling the virtues of complete abstinence to a social drinker. Didn't you used to keep a pretty extensive running log? Isn't there a middle ground to jog over somewhere?
I can relate. I've been over-data-obsessing myself lately, but hopefully it will soon come to an end. All the stuff about pace etc. will probably soon fall by the wayside as soon I get a better feel for my different paces, and a sense for how long I can run at each one. Then I'll just build on that. I'll see if anything comes of these casual cadence considerations. I never used to keep a log either, and I can't see how it really matters, but it's been a good motivational tool over the last year of getting back into shape. I've also been resisting joining a mileage forum, cuz I know with my obsessive streak I would start running for mileage rather than benefit, as I do on hills and fartleks, which are lower mileage runs. Anyway, happy trails!Alcoholic, something I can relate too. Anyways I will stop with my nonsense. Yes I used to keep a log, it drove me nuts. I ran 18 years without a watch or doing any sort of logging, studying, or reading about running. Two years ago I received a garmin as a gift, and with my addictive personality, the data and technology was consuming me and cluttering the freedom I once had with running. So I had to step away from it all. But I love your analogy, I got a kick how ironic it was such a fine match with me. It's all good!
I can relate. I've been over-data-obsessing myself lately, but hopefully it will soon come to an end. All the stuff about pace etc. will probably soon fall by the wayside as soon I get a better feel for my different paces, and a sense for how long I can run at each one. Then I'll just build on that. I'll see if anything comes of these casual cadence considerations. I never used to keep a log either, and I can't see how it really matters, but it's been a good motivational tool over the last year of getting back into shape. I've also been resisting joining a mileage forum, cuz I know with my obsessive streak I would start running for mileage rather than benefit, as I do on hills and fartleks, which are lower mileage runs. Anyway, happy trails!
Jason, when you say "most of us," to whom are you referring? I've seen 180 quoted as the target cadence all over the place. It's one of the standard pieces of advices given, like 'bend your knees' and 'land on your forefoot.'
Ha! I'm glad I never looked into fantasy football--it sounds like a dangerous waste of time. Luckily the Vikes have stunk since I got back, so it's easy to ignore football after the season has gone down the tubes and then come back for the playoffs. The NFL playoffs are about the only sporting event I really get into. I hope your daughter gets into running. I can hardly wait for my kids to get old enough for sports and running.I am very obsessive... That's why I quit using the hr part of my garmin and now just hit start and stop on it so I can keep track of my mileage. I won't look at it till I'm done running though so I don't know my pace or anything till I am done. I was getting really bad for a while there obsessing over my hr, pace, distance, etc... This is also why I had to tell my cousin I will not be joining his fantasy football league this year... I want to keep my wife happy and if I am obsessing over fantasy football too in addition to my running my wife would get awful grumpy. On a happy note I am taking my daughter in today to get some new running shoes because she wants to start running with me 3 days a week. This is a real win because she never wants to run!
Yah, in April or May of last year I read somewhere that the forefoot strike was key, and totally exaggerated it, and got TOFP. So in this instance, BG's "just do it" guideline would've served me much better. I had already run barefoot 20 years ago without any problems without any analysis. Now my strike/landing is a much more natural 'mid-foot' strike, which means my forefoot lands just a little bit before the rest of the foot, although like you say, the exact manner of strike/landing varies according to temp and terrain.BTW- bending the knees and landing on the forefoot are decent teaching cues, but should never be considered universal advice. There's such a thing as bending the knees too much or landing too much toward your toes. To make matters worse, both may vary not only between different people, but also within one individual depending on conditions.
That's basically what this discussion is all about, and hearing what has worked or hasn't worked from other BRS members is part of the process. I trust their varied experiences and suggestions a lot more than standardized advice. I like reading what the elites do, but as the article I linked to at the beginning of this thread suggests, this can sometimes be misleading for us recreational runners running at sub-elite paces.Take new ideas, experiment, and figure out if it works for you.
Nice tip!My cadence is naturally on 200+ regardless of speed my stride is what changes BUT I did read somewhere that if you bike(stationary bike) at 95/100 rpm it will help to achive the so ever elusive turnover. Tried.
If nothing else at least you'll know how 90 spm feel like when you bike @ 90 rpm.