Cyclists with a "Running" Problem

[rudi-h]

I'm no coach, but I've been running pretty consistently for better part of 15 years.  Being heavy(ish) for a runner, even in my prime years at 26 I couldn't run more than 3 times a week.  If I'd step it up to 4 or more runs a week it'd be knee aches, next time it would be shin splints, achilles tendon and the list goes on.

 

I bought a Garmin for the first time about 4 years ago and noticed that all my running metrics were RED.  My cadence was a tad shy of 160spm, but at first I laughed it off.  I then read some of the white papers from "First Beat" and realized there was quite a bit of science behind Garmin's metrics that made me think I should work on cadence.

 

Long story short, I increased my running cadence to 180 spm and it made the world of difference.  Now even at 8kg's heavier and touching 40, I've recently been running as good as ever and I hardly remember what a running injury feels like...

 

So from my experience, goal spm is super important and stepping it up to ~180 spm was the best thing I've ever done for my own running ability and pleasure.

 

 

 

 

Anyone who runs at the speed of Brownlee and Farah will have large stride length in comparison to someone running at a more “normal person” speed.
If I go to the track and (try) smash a 400m lap at the speed they run I Guarantee my stride length would increase significantly.

My point was that training using spm specifically as a training metric (like effort or speed) is pointless, what is a persons goal spm?

It will happen naturally as your speed increases using the conventional training metrics.
I’ve yet to see a training program that tells you to go and run at a specific high cadence, 190 spm for example.

Edited March 23, 2021 by rudi-h

[Stretch]

How do you guys n girls with multiple running shoes keep an accurate track of each pairs km?

 

Polarflow... does not provide any automatic feature

Strava free... allows you to record multiple shoes but you have to manually select which pair you run in.

Strava..I have a default pair and then if I run in another I edit the activity

[ridr]

How do you guys n girls with multiple running shoes keep an accurate track of each pairs km?

 

Polarflow... does not provide any automatic feature

Strava free... allows you to record multiple shoes but you have to manually select which pair you run in.

Also Strava for me - edit the pair of shoes I used after each run.

[ridr]

THERE IS HOPE FOR ME YET!!!!

 

IF you don't mind me asking, how old are you and what is your VO2 Max?

 

I am fascinated by the stats. I think about them all the time while running and do mental maths all the time. I totally nerd out on the data.

I'm 42. Not sure how accurately Garmin works it out - but it says V02 Max 66. (I also just saw it has some ridiculous race predictor times on the next screen.)

[shaper]

How do you guys n girls with multiple running shoes keep an accurate track of each pairs km?

 

Polarflow... does not provide any automatic feature

Strava free... allows you to record multiple shoes but you have to manually select which pair you run in.

Same for me too, Strava with the default pair being the daily runners.  If change shoes for speed work or a race, then edit and change the shoes after the workout

[Stretch]

I'm 42. Not sure how accurately Garmin works it out - but it says V02 Max 66. (I also just saw it has some ridiculous race predictor times on the next screen.)

Running 17min 5km's...66 sounds about right!

 

My garmin calculated one is 58

[Shebeen]

https://www.freedomchallenge.org.za/

 

560km down, about 20km to go

[soslow]

Am i doing something wrong ?

 

i ran a 4km in 19.53

 

my step cadence was 169 spm

 

Average stride length was 1.19m

 

I am 1.79m in height

 

If i take shorter but quicker steps will this not increase my spm, Or should i concentrate on longer strides ? 

 

I feel that the longer strides will lessen my stp .

 

I am not too clued on the running metrics etc, so apologies if my question sounds stupid.    

[SwissVan]

I wonder how accurate all these given stride lengths that are calculated by the various watch algorithms are ....

 

Reason i wonder is i have seen how different watches measure distance differently by a fairly large margin, even when they were started and stopped at the same time.

 

For example, often the wiff and i will jog together starting and stopping our watches at the same time (since we noticed this we make a point of doing it in perfect timing) and they never equal the same distance. Same thing with my bike computer, i once measured a TT route on my bike computer and then ran it numerous times... and the distances were not the same either, out by 100m or so.

 

Now we talking about mm wrt to stride length... just saying 

[Shebeen]

I wonder how accurate all these given stride lengths that are calculated by the various watch algorithms are ....

 

Reason i wonder is i have seen how different watches measure distance differently by a fairly large margin, even when they were started and stopped at the same time.

 

For example, often the wiff and i will jog together starting and stopping our watches at the same time (since we noticed this we make a point of doing it in perfect timing) and they never equal the same distance. Same thing with my bike computer, i once measured a TT route on my bike computer and then ran it numerous times... and the distances were not the same either, out by 100m or so.

 

Now we talking about mm wrt to stride length... just saying 

 

must be pretty accurate really.

 

just need to measure distance and cadence correctly and it's a simple sum

[Chris_]

I wonder how accurate all these given stride lengths that are calculated by the various watch algorithms are ....

 

Reason i wonder is i have seen how different watches measure distance differently by a fairly large margin, even when they were started and stopped at the same time.

 

For example, often the wiff and i will jog together starting and stopping our watches at the same time (since we noticed this we make a point of doing it in perfect timing) and they never equal the same distance. Same thing with my bike computer, i once measured a TT route on my bike computer and then ran it numerous times... and the distances were not the same either, out by 100m or so.

 

Now we talking about mm wrt to stride length... just saying 

 

Maybe some of these other metrics you just need it to be consistent. Even if its consistently wrong. So as long as your own watch/device keeps giving you (incorrect) data, if its always relative maybe thats good enough to work with seeing longer term progressions etc.

 

Wrist-based heart rate on the other hand, as I keep seeing myself (when my HRM battery dies), and often read about, is inconsistently wrong. Which is just the worst of both worlds. And basically useless.

[Edgar]

I'm 42. Not sure how accurately Garmin works it out - but it says V02 Max 66. (I also just saw it has some ridiculous race predictor times on the next screen.)

 

That race predictor is a laugh. 

[Chris_]

Am i doing something wrong ?

 

i ran a 4km in 19.53

 

my step cadence was 169 spm

 

Average stride length was 1.19m

 

I am 1.79m in height

 

If i take shorter but quicker steps will this not increase my spm, Or should i concentrate on longer strides ? 

 

I feel that the longer strides will lessen my stp .

 

I am not too clued on the running metrics etc, so apologies if my question sounds stupid.    

 

I view stride length as a by-product and not a goal.

 

Start with a cadence that is most comfortable. Get fitter/stronger/better form and whatnot so that your push/pull leg power increases. More power equals more speed which then equals more ground covered. 

 

Although feel free to ignore my comments as I'm still waiting for someone else to chime in with sub 1m stride length...   

[Jehosefat]

Let me preface this by saying I'm a pretty average runner. I have found that a higher cadence has helped with all the ITB issues I used to get.

 

That said my cadence and stride length change depending on how fast I'm running. Relatively easy runs (6 - 7 min/km) I'll usually do at about 170-175 spm (and whatever the associated stride length is, about 0.9 - 1m iirc). If I'm pushing it in a TT (lets say 5km at 4:30/km) my cadence is closer to 185 spm and my stride length averages out to about 1.2-1.3m. In summary, I don't think you can look at them in isolation (and absolute pace will play a major role as well).

[Prince]

Maybe some of these other metrics you just need it to be consistent. Even if its consistently wrong. So as long as your own watch/device keeps giving you (incorrect) data, if its always relative maybe thats good enough to work with seeing longer term progressions etc.

 

This 

[Jewbacca]

I didn't know 'average' joes were privvy to this much data for running.

 

It looks like a lot to get lost in. I'm sure it's pretty cool.

 

Being a luddite, I am again in awe of the attention to detail some you you go to for training.

 

I can't run a 17:17 5km but im somewhere between 18 and 19 minutes and ran 13 peaks on a whim on Friday and was back training Monday.

 

I'm not saying 'don't enjoy the metrics and data', I think it's cool. I'm just saying that it's not as important as data sometimes makes itself out to be. 

 

I also don't know stride length is a comparable thing, much like which side you breathe in swimming. It will depend on a lot of different personal and external factors.

 

I do believe in basic metrics like time, splits, finishing 3km in a marathon/half marathon and how quickly one recovers.

 

Again, luddite and the views of a hacker who is far from elite but has a lot of miles in his legs and some decent times in the past.

 

It's super interesting for me to read though. But at the same time makes me grateful I'm not a micro numbers person.