running - is there a cadence "sweet spot"?

Forum guidelines BT super discount
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » running - is there a cadence "sweet spot"? Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
2012-04-24 12:26 PM

User image

Extreme Veteran
640
50010025
Subject: running - is there a cadence "sweet spot"?

I'm fortunate that my natural running cadence seems to be about what is recommended (average 93 for all runs year-to-date).  If I look at a long steady run, the cadence stays pretty straight.  I almost always run with negative splits, and my cadence increases during my last mile when I'm pouring it on.  Is there such a thing as a cadence that is too high where you need to be thinking of more power per step vs. more steps?

To be honest, this is not something I'm terribly concerned with - my running is going very well (it is my strength).  Just curious about it.

2012-04-24 4:16 PM
in reply to: #4169913

User image

Member
448
10010010010025
Clemson, SC
Subject: RE: running - is there a cadence "sweet spot"?
Self selected is what I would stay with.
2012-04-24 5:51 PM
in reply to: #4170594

User image

Master
2767
20005001001002525
Los Angeles, CA
Subject: RE: running - is there a cadence "sweet spot"?

beebs - 2012-04-24 2:16 PM Self selected is what I would stay with.

I agree, though you might see some people say try to aim for 90... so you're already there. =)

2012-04-24 5:52 PM
in reply to: #4169913

User image

Pro
5361
50001001001002525
Subject: RE: running - is there a cadence "sweet spot"?

180 is a really good cadence number.  Or, anywhere reasonably near that.

I don't think I've ever seen anyone with too high of a cadence.  I've certainly seen runners with too low of a cadence.  this generally results in a lot more up and down motion- wasting energy, and landing with your foot too far in front of you so that you waste more energy as when your foot hits out there it slows you down a little. 

if your foot is striking pretty close to your center of gravity- you're good.  at a cadence of 93 (186), that's nice and fast.  So- no worries there. 

2012-04-24 8:46 PM
in reply to: #4170720

User image

Extreme Veteran
640
50010025
Subject: RE: running - is there a cadence "sweet spot"?
morey000 - 2012-04-24 5:52 PM

180 is a really good cadence number.  Or, anywhere reasonably near that.

I don't think I've ever seen anyone with too high of a cadence.  I've certainly seen runners with too low of a cadence.  this generally results in a lot more up and down motion- wasting energy, and landing with your foot too far in front of you so that you waste more energy as when your foot hits out there it slows you down a little. 

if your foot is striking pretty close to your center of gravity- you're good.  at a cadence of 93 (186), that's nice and fast.  So- no worries there. 

I never measured cadence before January and that is the same time I made a conscious effort to switch to mid/fore foot strike. Before January I was striking way out in front of my center of gravity as evidenced by every race photo I've ever had.
2012-04-24 8:51 PM
in reply to: #4169913

Expert
732
50010010025
Subject: RE: running - is there a cadence "sweet spot"?
michael_runs - 2012-04-24 12:26 PM

I'm fortunate that my natural running cadence seems to be about what is recommended (average 93 for all runs year-to-date).  If I look at a long steady run, the cadence stays pretty straight.  I almost always run with negative splits, and my cadence increases during my last mile when I'm pouring it on.  Is there such a thing as a cadence that is too high where you need to be thinking of more power per step vs. more steps?

To be honest, this is not something I'm terribly concerned with - my running is going very well (it is my strength).  Just curious about it.

My short answer is no.  I don't think within reason you will get too high especially if a natural cadence.  I would watch elite runners at almost all distances (Usain Bolt at like 70 footstrikes in 9.5 seconds, to any top marathoner often around 120) and just count manually as you see seconds tick by, you will be amazed how high some runners cadence is.  

2012-04-24 10:20 PM
in reply to: #4170981

User image

Extreme Veteran
561
5002525
Wauwatosa, WI
Subject: RE: running - is there a cadence "sweet spot"?
michael_runs - 2012-04-24 8:46 PM
morey000 - 2012-04-24 5:52 PM

180 is a really good cadence number.  Or, anywhere reasonably near that.

I don't think I've ever seen anyone with too high of a cadence.  I've certainly seen runners with too low of a cadence.  this generally results in a lot more up and down motion- wasting energy, and landing with your foot too far in front of you so that you waste more energy as when your foot hits out there it slows you down a little. 

if your foot is striking pretty close to your center of gravity- you're good.  at a cadence of 93 (186), that's nice and fast.  So- no worries there. 

I never measured cadence before January and that is the same time I made a conscious effort to switch to mid/fore foot strike. Before January I was striking way out in front of my center of gravity as evidenced by every race photo I've ever had.

I'm working on the same - switching to a midfoot strike and paying attention to cadence. I think I was at about 160. My husband used to tease me that I was all vertical bounce and zero travel forward. The faster cadence, while not *yet* improving my speed per mile, certainly feels more efficient and wastes much less energy on bouncing. However, it still feels unnaturally fast to me. I have to use music as an aid to remind my feet of the tempo. I'm going to give it several months, though, it's only been 7 weeks of gently getting started.

New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » running - is there a cadence "sweet spot"? Rss Feed