Home General Training Discussions

IDEAL RUNNING CADENCE?

Is there a "sweet spot" for run cadence? I´ve been running 88-90 for the last couple of years and currently while working on improving my stride to recruite glutes consistently, I´m having a hard time to do both at the same time and my "confortable" stride (while priorizing good form) has dropped to 85-86. And rather than continuing to "fight the cadence" I call for haus wisdom in search of that " sweet spot" (if there is one!!!!).

Comments

  • A lot of people will say the sweet spot is in the low 90s. This derives from it forcing you to have a short enough stride that you're not braking vs a long enough stride that you're not wasting energy with extra leg swings.

    The problem with fixating on a specific cadence is that it DOES depend on how fast you're going (no matter what anyone else tells you....the vast vast majority of people's cadences is NOT constant with velocity).

    There are two mechanisms to go faster: by going longer per stride or going more strides per second....and human physiology says "I'm going to do both". For most people, MOST of the change comes from distance per stride, rather than for cadence, but the cadence DOES go up with speed. Therefore, you're just NOT going to run your IM marathon at the same cadence that you run a 10K unless you are artificially running in an odd and unnatural way.

    For me, my fastest running is up to the mid 90s (94-95) and my tempo/MP running is in the low 90s (90-92) and my slow running is 88-90 or so. I am pretty happy with this
  • Juan - If the question is about running in an IM marathon, then I advocate working on making sure your cadence in bricks and coming off the bike in races is 90 or so, at least after the first 3-4 minutes. The simple fact is, longer strides are harder work; you'll use less energy taking more, but shorter strides (we're talking centimeters here).

    While it's good you've been working on your running form, you should also make it a point of emphasis to monitor your cadence at those times when you are most tired - the end of runs, cool downs, bricks, etc, and concentrate on hitting 90, until it's ingrained second nature. 

     

  • To Williams point do you maintain a 90 or 90+ at all speeds? I just can't see how someone is hitting a 90 cadence running a 10 minute mile for example. I'm sure I don't have the ingrained muscle memory Al mentions and my slow is way slower than most of you run but I've tried this many times and at a pace like a 10/mile I felt like a prancing horse trying to hit higher cadence numbers.
  • I think we all have a personal sweet spot based on the pace/effort. It's knowing what that target cadence is for that effort and then being able to hold it when, say on race day, it all starts going to hell. :)
  • From your recent race I think your natural ability has all ready figured itself out. Congrats on an awesome race.

    For others reading this thread, I started years ago pre-tri days to run with purpose. That was a lesson of efficiency. So me and my ADD/ADHD started reading books. Jeff Galloway, he was great for learning the value of walk run which I have used a lot in hot races. Dr. Romanov who developed pose running introduced me to running more on the balls of my feet to leaning into the run, adjusting my body position.

    In reading other books and experimenting with myself, I went from a low 80 ish cadence to 89-91 cadence. My 89-91 is just about right for all circumstances of running, bar an IM.
    If I'm running 92> I'm pushing myself. Throw in an age adjustment here I'm 57. Like above Dr Jenkins hits 94 however he is much younger than me and can handle that pace it would just wear me out.
    Lot of good advice here^^^ Juan something to think about.

  • Posted By Attila Matyas on 11 Jun 2014 06:23 PM


    To Williams point do you maintain a 90 or 90+ at all speeds? I just can't see how someone is hitting a 90 cadence running a 10 minute mile for example. I'm sure I don't have the ingrained muscle memory Al mentions and my slow is way slower than most of you run but I've tried this many times and at a pace like a 10/mile I felt like a prancing horse trying to hit higher cadence numbers.

    I thought that too but then I look at my dad's workouts where he is always above 90. He runs his EP slower than 10:30/mi at that cadence. I don't understand how he does it but somehow it happens.

    Personally I can't go slower than about 7:30/mi at 90 cadence. But I can be at 90 from 7:30 to about 6:40. Faster than 6:40 and the cadence seems to go up a few spm, maybe 92 or so when doing LT intervals. Sometimes the first 1 or 2 intervals are at 94-95 cadence, but then it comes down to about 90-91 (with no difference in pace).



  • 3 or 4 yrs ago, I got a Garmin foot pod, and it took me close to a year of concerted effort to get my cadence to 90 when I was tired and running slow ... the specific issues for an IM marathon. My most recent RR, two days ago, the first 3-5 minutes I built from 80-90, and the held it there doing miles which progressed from 10:20 down to 8:40 as I got into it. It certainly was not natural, nor what I wanted to do, but it makes each step./hop a little bit easier, and that adds up over the course of 4 hours at the end of an IM. One of several factors which I believe contributes to my holding a steady pace thruout the IM run. Start out slogging along @82 or so, and it soon becomes a death march.
    Aside: When going @ a 6:40 pace, my cadence is 96-100.

  • Posted By Attila Matyas on 11 Jun 2014 06:23 PM


    To Williams point do you maintain a 90 or 90+ at all speeds? I just can't see how someone is hitting a 90 cadence running a 10 minute mile for example. I'm sure I don't have the ingrained muscle memory Al mentions and my slow is way slower than most of you run but I've tried this many times and at a pace like a 10/mile I felt like a prancing horse trying to hit higher cadence numbers.

    I couldn't agree with you more.


  • Posted By Al Truscott on 14 Jun 2014 03:07 PM


    3 or 4 yrs ago, I got a Garmin foot pod, and it took me close to a year of concerted effort to get my cadence to 90 when I was tired and running slow ... the specific issues for an IM marathon. My most recent RR, two days ago, the first 3-5 minutes I built from 80-90, and the held it there doing miles which progressed from 10:20 down to 8:40 as I got into it. It certainly was not natural, nor what I wanted to do, but it makes each step./hop a little bit easier, and that adds up over the course of 4 hours at the end of an IM. One of several factors which I believe contributes to my holding a steady pace thruout the IM run. Start out slogging along @82 or so, and it soon becomes a death march.

    Aside: When going @ a 6:40 pace, my cadence is 96-100.

    Funny, I started using a Garmin foot pod and I swear it is just reading wrong.  But then I slowly realized that I was really just plodding along.  LOL

  • I have done a lot of thinking on this subject as well...in fact there was a really good thread on it a while back...link here: http://members.endurancenation.us/Forums/tabid/57/aft/10277/Default.aspx
  • my highest cadence is in the high 80s.

    for myself, when fatigued, focusing on cadence helps a lot.

    i assume, being at the extreme end of tallness, that my cadence optimum would be lower than others.

     

  • FWIW I agree with those who have said you can train your cadence up. I did this as well. However, in keeping with my previous post, I think this trains up the whole "slope" of cadence vs speed. I do believe that there is enough anecdotal "evidence" that there is also a large group of people whose slow/easy running is partly that way due to deteriorated form and that their easy pace would be a lot more efficient if they brought cadence up. In my own data of pace vs cadence, there is an obvious break in the linearity of the data with a "walk" zone, a "run" zone, and the fuzzy interface. I think there are a lot of people who could train up their easy pace running to be clearly in the "run" zone, who would currently find that they are not.


    Another way of putting this I guess is that if you make sure that your easy running is a lot more like your real running than it is like walking or some weird clomp-clomp-clomp, your easy running will be faster and more efficient. :-)
  • For me, 90-93, for all paces. 

    As cadence decreases you begin to become more and more of a heal striker vs mid/forefoot striker and are generally more prone to injury. I know I am. 

    Or rather, you can imagine that at 80rpm you are a very prominent heel striker. As cadence increases to 82, 84, 86, 88, 90, 92rpm, that foot strike typically begins to move more towards the front of the foot and begins to engage the naturally elastic structures of the mid / forefoot and achilles/calf vs a non elastic heal strike. 

    This change from low 80's to low 90's is one I purposely adopted back in 2000 when I first started running seriously. Until then I was a swimmer and loooowww cadence runner with very, very flat feet, very prone to running injuries. The change was a positive one...until I started rolling my left ankle on stupid stuff, creating a loose noodle over time with other consequences. 

  • About 18 months ago I did a running test on a treadmill with a PT.  They filmed my stride and counted my cadence.  At slower speeds (Z1) like 9:00/mile pace, my cadence was about 82-83 and my left foot flared out after pushing off.  At Z3 (7:20) or faster, my cadance increased to 89-91 and my left foot flared out less (still a little) so I was more efficient at faster cadence and speeds.  The PT suggested that I try to run @ 90 cadence regardless of the speed to increase my efficiency.  I tried doing this at 9:00 pace and it was hard.  I really had to concentrate, and it felt like I was taking baby steps.  After many sessions on the mill counting my steps and watching my left foot in a mirrow, I can now run at slower speeds at 90 cadance and with a straight foot swing.  But I still count my strides for a minute or two to make sure I'm at the right turnover.  It feels now normal and when I increase speed, my stride feels comfortable.
  • My $0.02 worth

    I came from a cross country/marathon/half marathon background. I took up this running in my mid 30s as I was getting fat etc.

    I had/have pronation issues and ended up with orthotics and heavy duty motion control shoes (Brookes Beasts).

    I wear out the outsides of my shoes while the heels and insides are relatively untouched.

    Fast forward to joining EN, I asked questions about shoes, cadence and feedback about my running form.

    Based on that feedback (thanks all, particularly WSM Al T) it turned out my foot was still moving forward when I placed it on the ground, thus providing a braking effect — very bad!

    I already had a Garmin xt310, so was advised to get a foot-pod and display lap cadence. It turned out that my cadence at all speeds was very low 80s (160s as Garmin now shows in Garmin Connect). I am 5'7" with short legs and a long body by the way.

    By working on lifting my cadence, I now am always in the 90 to 94 range. One of the form improvements that I have seen is that I now put my foot down under my centre of gravity, rather than further forward, minimising the bad braking effect that I used to have. I am convinced that the higher cadence has led to this improvement in efficiency.

    In conjunction with the higher cadence, over the same period I have ditched the orthotics and motion control shoes. I now use Saucony Kinvaras with a 4 mm drop which are considerably lighter than my old motion control shoes plus the orthotics. It's much easier to run in much lighter shoes, particularly late in an IM run.

    I should point out that I took a whole year just transitioning from an 8 mm drop to a 4 mm drop.

    BTW, I still wear out the outsides of my shoes and the heels and insides are hardly touched. But now the wear is also centered on the ball of my foot — suggesting that I am not imagining the running form improvement.

     

Sign In or Register to comment.