bike cadence vs run turnover

What Kathy said.

Hi Possum,

I'll third that... Ken's book on my wishlist but I have the Evolution Running DVD which IMO does an excellent job of illustrating visually why higher running turnover is more efficient.

I had actually posted this question previously, but I do think it's interesting that there is a mathematical relationship between recommended bike cadence (90) and running turnover (180).

I have been an injury-free slow-and-steady recreational runner for years so I am a bit cautious about changing anything with my run. But I have slowly started to increase turnover/reduce stride length.

- Heidi

Keeping turnover high is much more important on the run than keeping cadence highon the bike. Longer strides require greater vertical displacement and dramatically increase impact stress. Below is an article about why high turnover is necessary for running.

Ken

Optimal Turnover for Efficient Running
© 2003 by Ken Mierke

Few runners understand what a critical role stride length and stride frequency play in running efficiently and without injuries. The very best runners use high turnover instead of long strides to run fast. Running with quick, short steps decreases the energy cost of fast running, decreases the stress on the muscles, and minimizes landing impact.

Long strides are inefficient for a number of reasons. First of all, the more distance a runner covers with each stride, the more he must run up and down. This wastes energy at push-off and increases impact stress, dramatically raising the risk of injuries. Imagine you throw a baseball to someone only 15 feet away. If you threw the ball fairly hard, you could throw it on basically a straight line. If you were throwing it to someone 50 yards away, you would have to throw it higher in the air. The same applies to runners. Longer strides demand more vertical movement which is terribly inefficient. Efficient runners move almost perfectly horizontally.

Longer strides also demand more work from the muscle fibers that are designed more for sprinting than for endurance. The endurance fibers cannot create enough power at push-off for long strides, so the sprint fibers are called into play. Unfortunately, the sprint fibers don’t have much endurance. Short, quick strides allow the endurance fibers to contract frequently and repeatedly at high running speeds, and decrease reliance on sprint fibers. That means you can run longer at a fast pace!

Perhaps most critically, using short, quick steps maximizes the “free speed” gained through elastic recoil. Every time an efficient runner’s foot hits the ground, his muscles and connective tissues stretch out like a rubber band. These tissues then snap back powerfully. This is called elastic recoil and it provides propulsion that requires no energy expenditure. Running with high turnover is the key to optimizing elastic recoil. When you stretch muscles and connective tissue and let go, they snap back like a rubber band, but when you stretch and hold them – they just stretch! Running with long, slow strides causes the energy return from elastic recoil to dissipate because the tissues are stretched for a prolonged period. Learn to take short quick strides and take advantage of this “free speed.”

Running with quick, short strides is quite unnatural for taller runners, who have been told to take advantage of their long legs by using a long stride. To gain the “free speed” of elastic recoil, tall runners must use the same high turnover as shorter runners. This means they must learn to use steps which seem proportionally shorter for their leg length. I have had tremendous success teaching tall runners to take quick, short strides and increase their efficiency. My wife, who is 6 feet tall, learned to run with high turnover and as a result won a triathlon national championship last year.

Certain biomechanical techniques are key to increasing turnover to maximize efficiency.
1. Efficient runners have no pause at the completion of the leg’s follow through. The leg pulls back to provide propulsion and then immediately the knee drives forward.
2. During leg recovery, the knee is driven forward powerfully by the hip flexor muscles at the front of the upper thigh.
3. The foot lands directly beneath the hips to prevent braking, instead of landing out in front.

Make sure that you do not attempt to increase turnover by pulling the leg back faster during the weight bearing phase of running. That will increase both turnover and stride length, leading to premature fatigue. That isn’t efficient fast running; that is sprinting. Work toward a significantly higher turnover with slightly shorter steps and you will increase speed without increasing energy expenditure.

Most efficient runners take very close to 180 steps per minute. At this high turnover rate, a runner can cover ground at a very respectable rate without needing long steps.

Many of the athletes we coach use metronomes during running. A modern metronome is just slightly larger than a credit card and will beep at any rate you set it for. (Most music stores carry these devices) We usually have runners determine their natural turnover and gradually increase it over time, with the ultimate goal being approximately 180 steps per minute. We generally have runners increase turnover by three to five steps-per-minute each week until approximately 180 steps per minute feels natural.

Learning to run in a relaxed manner at high turnover with short to moderate stride length takes concentration, effort and patience, but these techniques will help almost every runner to maximize efficiency and minimize the risk for injuries.


Ken Mierke, two-time World Champion triathlete (Disabled Division, 1997,1998) and exercise physiologist, developed the techniques of Evolution Running. Ken has coached 3 World Champions, 13 National Champions and 28 Team USA athletes. www.EvolutionRunning.com

awesome, thanks a lot-- I think it make s alot of sense, esp the idea of not going up and down as much if paces are shorter. I can see how that is less pounding. cool. can;t wait to experiment.

WOW!!! Great article!!!

faris al sultan= genetically superior, professional athlete
possum= average bop runner excited to try something new since same ole same ole brings same ole results.

I never tested Faris, but I have tested hundreds of runners at every level and all have run more economically with a turnover of at least 180 spm once they learned correct technique.

One of my clients averaged 4:39 per mile off the bike at USAT Junior Nationals last year, outrunning the rest of the US Junior National Team by 26 seconds per mile.

Another won overall female at ITU Worlds by 3:01, the greatest margin of victory in history.

More information about efficient running technique is available in my book The Triathlete's Guide to Run Training or my DVD Evolution Running: Run Faster with Fewer Injuries. Both are available at www.EvolutionRunning.com

Ken

Ken-

Does the 180 spm apply to all runners in general or should shorter people have an even faster turnover?  I have a relatively short inseam (29-30" so I figured I might want an even higher turnover.  I'm not sure what my natural turnover is but I do know that it has increased over the past season as I began to run more and longer preparing for my first HIM and marathon.  I didn't intentionally make this change...it just sort of happened which is strange because I've been running for 15 years although this was the first time I've trained for longer distances.  I've got your book but have a hard time considering any major changes to my very comfortable natural running style since running is the one thing that I am fairly good at already.  I guess I need someone to convince me that it's broken so I can talk myself into fixing it

Yes, but consider that Faris might be able to run even faster if he changed his technique.  He ran 2:54:51 at Kona this year.  If you look at the splits from the top 5 you will see that he won the race in the water and on the bike.

1 Al-Sultan, Faris - 08:14:17 49:54 4:25:24 2:54:51

2 Brown, Cameron - 08:19:36 52:23 4:33:08 2:50:13

3  Reid, Peter - 08:20:04 52:23 4:27:51 2:55:59

4 Beke, Rutger - 08:22:30 55:01 4:30:30 2:52:41

5 Widoff, Cameron - 08:23:01 52:16 4:28:44 2:57:47

Yeah, but we'd rather have you at BT than Faris al Sultan, because you're WAY more fun!

A turnover of 180 is the minimum turnover that enables optimal use of elastic recoil to store energy from one stride and release in as propuslion in the next stride. Consider 180 spm as the minimum level.

I do have several athletes - one who is 6'2 and a 30:08 10K runner - who we have found optimal turnover to be in the 190s. Higher turnover, at extremes, may increase the workload on your heart and lungs, but will reduce the workload of the legs (less FT recruitment).

I coach some of the fastest runners in the sport and we are constantly improving their technique. Lance Armstrong significantly changed his pedal stroke after winning a World Championship and the Tour de France. Just because it isn't broken doesn't mean it can't be even better! If you are going to make changes, make them gradual and start now - when volume and intensity are low and without the pressure of upcoming races.

Ken

My comment about Faris was just an observation.  Just by watching him run, his strides are way longer and I'm assuming less turnover than someone like for example Peter Reid.  That said, I will leave the analysis to the experts like Ken who is a coach.   

I don't doubt that a 180+ leg turnover is important for many, but I'm bothered by a couple of things about this:

1) If the main point is to keep from being in the air too long, wouldn't the cadence increase as your speed increases? If you train between 8 min/mi - 6 min/mi and keep the 180 stride rate, you're stride length is signifigantly longer at the 6 min/mi pace. My guess is that the stride rate is not really to control being in the air too long, but to reduce the vertical distance traveled. So, if your running at 10 mph, you cover more horizontal distance than running at 5 mph with the same vertical distance.

2) Everyone says to model the champs. Well, I can't run a 8 min/mi pace for more than 3 mi. and am base building mostly at 12 min/mi right now. I doubt I should be trying to model those that are running 5 min/mi pace. Also, if I run with a 180 stride rate, that will make my stride length 2.4 feet. That is quite short and even shorter than my walking stride length.

You are correct that the main point is not to avoid being in the air too long, but to avoid excessive vertical displacement and to keep contact time between the feet and ground minimal in order to enable use of elastic recoil as propulsion.

The goal is to minimize vertical displacement at every speed. Don't compare vertical displacement at 5 min pace to vertical displacement at 10 min pace; compare vertical displacement at a given pace to running the same pace using different techniques.

See my article on this site for a description of correct propuslive mechanics relating to vertical displacement http://www.beginnertriathlete.com/cms/article-detail.asp?articleid=... Also check out the review of my book at http://www.beginnertriathlete.com/cms/article-detail.asp?articleid=...

I have tested athletes at paces from 13:30 per mile to 4:00 per mile and, once taught correct technique ideal economy occurs at a turnover of 180+ for every runner.

The tunover I recommend is not to model the champs (like Farris above), but based on research with runners of all levels measuring oxygen consumption at different paces and different turnover. I have studied running technique in the lab and in the field for many years and I believe that 180 is the slowest turnover that will produce optimal turnover for any runner.

Learning to run efficiently isn't as simple as increasing turnover, but is a learning process, just like mastering freestyle. High turnover won't mask incorrect technique, but once technique is mastered, runners of all speeds will be more economical at high turnover. Make the effort to master this during the offseason and you will run better than ever next year.

Good luck, Ken

I have been running for over 20 years and always had a fairly long stride. In addition, I have always been injury prone. I started shortening my stride over the last year and increasing cadence. I can't comment on whether it improves performance or not but I believe my legs take much less pounding running this way. My times have certainly not suffered (I ran my fastest half this fall) and I have been injury free.

So to answer your original question, I found it to have much less pounding on the joints versus my older stride.

Mark

I ran today and focused on higher turnover. I dropped three minutes off my time on a 5.3 mile course. That is proof enough for me!

I have been working on the high turnover, lean forward from the ankles, shorter strides, let gravity pull ya running theory for two months now. I bought the Pose running book, the Thi Chi running book and have ordered Mikes running book and DVD (why is there no discount?), they each appear to be saying the same thing. It just ain't clicking like I think it should. It still gets my HR up to 170+, my calves get sore, and I stretch them 2 or 3 times a day! I will say the faster cadence makes you faster, but it does not seem any easier!

I don't know, I think I get the big picture but the details are eluding me!

Maybe Mike’s book and DVD will open my eyes to what I have been missing.


Edited by Brent1812 2006-01-04 8:50 PM

Did your HR stay about the same as when you usually run that course?

I believe the sore calves are simply a result of using those muscles more with the new technique and over time they will become stronger and not get sore...but give it time.  Do you do any strength training?  Some calf work might be a good addition to your training.  As for the HR, I believe Ken said that the faster turnover might work your lungs and heart more (hence higher HR) but it is actually easier on the leg muscles.  So even though your cardiovascular system is working hard, your legs are having an easier time.  I've been meaning to bring this up with Ken to make sure I understand the situation.

Yes typical same HR for 'normal' running and 'high' stride rate running!

The techniques of Evolution Running - including higher turnover and using larger muscle groups (hip extensors instead of knee flexors or knee extensors) - will reduce recruitment of fast twitch muscle fibers. Using your slow twitch muscle fibers 180 times per minute may cause ventilation and HR to be just as high, but at the race duration of even a sprint triathlon, we're peripherally limited - our muscles will always be the weak link - not our hearts and lungs.

Ken