Need Some Advice On Cadence

2»

Replies

  • lporter229
    lporter229 Posts: 4,907 Member
    OldAssDude wrote: »
    collectingblues wrote: »
    OldAssDude wrote: »
    Ok. Here is a run i did today...

    https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/3126848517

    I walked the first third of a mile to warm up, the ran the rest at a slow pace. At first i tried to control my cadence (set up a cadence/pace data screen on my Garmin) at a certain pace. It felt awkward so i just ran at a comfortable cadence and pace that felt natural, and observed as i went. Seems like i feel comfortable and natural at about 150 to 160 at a 14:00 to 15:00 pace.

    My heart rate and breathing felt fine too, and i felt like i could have gone for quite a while like that.

    My MHR according to the 220-age formula should be 159 (220 - 61), but i have got my HR up to 165 several times using a chest strap monitor, so i have my MHR set to 165.

    Feel free to analyse my data and add some pointers.

    Keep in mind that i'm just an OldAssDude trying to improve my fitness. :)

    And less than a year ago, i could only run for 30 seconds. :(

    My advice?

    Do you have actual health reasons for needing a certain heart rate? Any cardiac history?

    If not, why not just try running, without over analyzing the data?

    I'll share the best advice that I got from one of my running and drinking buddies: Running becomes a lot more fun when you don't give a rat's *kitten* about the details or pace.

    If you want to focus on improving your running, just run.

    What is the benefit to your training or weight loss from overanalyzing details that make little to no difference in amateur-level performance?

    hey, i'm just looking to be able to do longer slower runs at a pace/cadence/HR that i can sustain without fizzling out.

    There is no need to point out that my performance is amateur-level. I think that's already apparent, and i'm making an effort to improve that.

    didn't you have to work at it, and learn stuff?
    Or were you born an athlete?

    Sorry, I didn't get this from your previous posts. If this is truly your goal, then I would encourage you to have a look at a book called "80/20" running by Matt Fitzgerald. It explains why the best way to become a better endurance runner is to do 80% of your running at a slow, comfortable pace and push yourself into or near the anaerobic zone only 20% of the time. Running at a slower pace than you are able can be challenging, especially if you are used to pushing your limits. It takes patience and also a bit of pride swallowing. But it is the best way to build your aerobic base and allow you to run at a pace/cadence/HR that you can sustain "without fizzling out." It involves finding your lactate threshold and monitoring your HR as you run. Pace and cadence will naturally fall in line. i credit the book with getting me to the starting line of the Boston Marathon, so I believe pretty strongly in its principles.
  • ritzvin
    ritzvin Posts: 2,860 Member
    dewd2 wrote: »

    The thing that keeps me going faster is running with folks who are of similar abilities (or a little faster). This keeps me motivated or I will fall behind. IMO, nothing beats a group of friends to make you faster.

    definitely this... I never push myself as fast as I do with a fast group.
  • ritzvin
    ritzvin Posts: 2,860 Member
    dewd2 wrote: »
    FWIW - My plan to kick Matt's *kitten* next year includes significant core and hip work. Working resistance training into your routine is important. As I am learning, running can only take me so far. Cross training (smart cross training) is important.

    This. After running for years, strength training made a tremendously huge difference in my pace. Stronger arms make a difference in what cadence you comfortably maintain. Strong hamstrings (usually not worked all that much when running) make a major difference in the uphill speed in particular. Stronger leg muscles (strength training makes a bigger impact much faster than running does) = much less fatigue over distance and you can maintain cadence & stride better.
  • ritzvin
    ritzvin Posts: 2,860 Member
    If you do want to aim for a faster cadence, you can try a music playlist that's set to a certain range. Spotify has quite a few across a handful of genres (you can search playlists for "bpm"). (note: genre choices will of course be limited by bpm range)
  • dewd2
    dewd2 Posts: 2,445 Member
    https://www.outsideonline.com/2359986/dont-think-too-hard-about-your-running-form

    "The message seems pretty straightforward here: you know instinctively how to run and how to breathe, so stop trying to tinker with the details. "

  • OldAssDude
    OldAssDude Posts: 1,436 Member
    lporter229 wrote: »
    OldAssDude wrote: »
    collectingblues wrote: »
    OldAssDude wrote: »
    Ok. Here is a run i did today...

    https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/3126848517

    I walked the first third of a mile to warm up, the ran the rest at a slow pace. At first i tried to control my cadence (set up a cadence/pace data screen on my Garmin) at a certain pace. It felt awkward so i just ran at a comfortable cadence and pace that felt natural, and observed as i went. Seems like i feel comfortable and natural at about 150 to 160 at a 14:00 to 15:00 pace.

    My heart rate and breathing felt fine too, and i felt like i could have gone for quite a while like that.

    My MHR according to the 220-age formula should be 159 (220 - 61), but i have got my HR up to 165 several times using a chest strap monitor, so i have my MHR set to 165.

    Feel free to analyse my data and add some pointers.

    Keep in mind that i'm just an OldAssDude trying to improve my fitness. :)

    And less than a year ago, i could only run for 30 seconds. :(

    My advice?

    Do you have actual health reasons for needing a certain heart rate? Any cardiac history?

    If not, why not just try running, without over analyzing the data?

    I'll share the best advice that I got from one of my running and drinking buddies: Running becomes a lot more fun when you don't give a rat's *kitten* about the details or pace.

    If you want to focus on improving your running, just run.

    What is the benefit to your training or weight loss from overanalyzing details that make little to no difference in amateur-level performance?

    hey, i'm just looking to be able to do longer slower runs at a pace/cadence/HR that i can sustain without fizzling out.

    There is no need to point out that my performance is amateur-level. I think that's already apparent, and i'm making an effort to improve that.

    didn't you have to work at it, and learn stuff?
    Or were you born an athlete?

    Sorry, I didn't get this from your previous posts. If this is truly your goal, then I would encourage you to have a look at a book called "80/20" running by Matt Fitzgerald. It explains why the best way to become a better endurance runner is to do 80% of your running at a slow, comfortable pace and push yourself into or near the anaerobic zone only 20% of the time. Running at a slower pace than you are able can be challenging, especially if you are used to pushing your limits. It takes patience and also a bit of pride swallowing. But it is the best way to build your aerobic base and allow you to run at a pace/cadence/HR that you can sustain "without fizzling out." It involves finding your lactate threshold and monitoring your HR as you run. Pace and cadence will naturally fall in line. i credit the book with getting me to the starting line of the Boston Marathon, so I believe pretty strongly in its principles.

    Thank you. This is helpful. I did read up some on the 80/20 thing, and i do monitor my HR while running. I also don't mind swallowing my pride either as places that i run, i don't see many people my age even walking fast lol. I think i'm just fixating on form too much.
  • Djproulx
    Djproulx Posts: 3,084 Member
    Gave this thread a cursory scan and noted the "worry about cadence" vs "don't worry about cadence" discussion. While I'm not advocating for either approach, I can tell you a very easy way to play with cadence without stressing over it is to try a run or two with a metronome app. Just download a free app to your phone and set it to any cadence rate you like. Then pick the tones you want to listen to, such as a "Tick, Tock", "Ding, Dong" sound, etc and start the app once you get warmed up. My coach suggested I try that during a few runs last year and it was sorta fun. I just naturally fell into the 180bpm cadence and "zoned out" to it during the run. I carry the phone in my running vest.

    Also, as a guy who will be 61 next month, the other suggestion I'd offer is to pick up Joe Friel's book "Fast After 50", which details the physical changes and challenges faced by athletes as we move through midlife and into "The Golden Years" lol. It describes how training adaptations can prolong or increase performance capacity as we go through the 50's, 60's, 70's and beyond. It specifically talks about the need for both high intensity work, as well as the need for more "recovery paced" days between hard efforts. It is some fun reading if you're interested in endurance sports.
  • dewd2
    dewd2 Posts: 2,445 Member
    edited October 2018
    We need to run sometime @OldAssDude. You're not too far north of me. If you ever get to the Harrisburg area look me up.

    I may be up your way next year to run Steamtown (if I don't run Chicago).
  • OldAssDude
    OldAssDude Posts: 1,436 Member
    Djproulx wrote: »
    Gave this thread a cursory scan and noted the "worry about cadence" vs "don't worry about cadence" discussion. While I'm not advocating for either approach, I can tell you a very easy way to play with cadence without stressing over it is to try a run or two with a metronome app. Just download a free app to your phone and set it to any cadence rate you like. Then pick the tones you want to listen to, such as a "Tick, Tock", "Ding, Dong" sound, etc and start the app once you get warmed up. My coach suggested I try that during a few runs last year and it was sorta fun. I just naturally fell into the 180bpm cadence and "zoned out" to it during the run. I carry the phone in my running vest.

    I did try a metronome app a while back, but it still felt more natural at 150 to 160. I tried 170 and 180, but i fizzled out pretty quickly, and it just felt awkward running at a slow pace at such a high cadence. Now if i do intervals and run at a faster pace on the run interval, 180 feels fine at a faster pace.

    Also, as a guy who will be 61 next month, the other suggestion I'd offer is to pick up Joe Friel's book "Fast After 50", which details the physical changes and challenges faced by athletes as we move through midlife and into "The Golden Years" lol. It describes how training adaptations can prolong or increase performance capacity as we go through the 50's, 60's, 70's and beyond. It specifically talks about the need for both high intensity work, as well as the need for more "recovery paced" days between hard efforts. It is some fun reading if you're interested in endurance sports.

    I do intervals a lot. I do 30 second all out effort (try to hit my MHR) and 2 minute power walking for the active rest interval. I do this over a course of almost 4 miles and probably get 15 or 16 intervals in. Other times i do 1 minute fast paced run (about 90% effort), and 3 minute power walk active recovery intervals over the same distance. I think my main problem is that i don't do enough long slow runs and it's causing my base aerobic level to suffer. I think better pace will come in time all by itself if i focus more on distance, and quit wasting so much energy over thinking form.

    Thanks for the feedback.
  • OldAssDude
    OldAssDude Posts: 1,436 Member
    dewd2 wrote: »
    We need to run sometime @OldAssDude. You're not too far north of me. If you ever get to the Harrisburg area look me up.

    I may be up your way next year to run Steamtown (if I don't run Chicago).

    Yeah @dewd2 , that would be fun, I wish we lived closer. We both know it would be a short recovery run for you and a long intense workout for me though... :)

    If you ever happen to be in the Tyler State Park area, give me a heads up. I do see groups of people that run there together some times. Maybe i should search for some "old timer" running groups that go there. :)

    And thank you for all your support.
  • DX2JX2
    DX2JX2 Posts: 1,921 Member
    One note - targeting a higher cadence is not a direct means to running faster or for longer. It's simply a way to help minimize impact to your joints. It's injury prevention instead of performance enhancement.
  • OldAssDude
    OldAssDude Posts: 1,436 Member
    DX2JX2 wrote: »
    One note - targeting a higher cadence is not a direct means to running faster or for longer. It's simply a way to help minimize impact to your joints. It's injury prevention instead of performance enhancement.

    Good point, but i am thinking a higher number of lower impacts will work out to be about the same as a lower number of higher impacts.
  • Tacklewasher
    Tacklewasher Posts: 7,122 Member
    OldAssDude wrote: »
    DX2JX2 wrote: »
    One note - targeting a higher cadence is not a direct means to running faster or for longer. It's simply a way to help minimize impact to your joints. It's injury prevention instead of performance enhancement.

    Good point, but i am thinking a higher number of lower impacts will work out to be about the same as a lower number of higher impacts.

    I always heard it as correcting for overstriding. Hard to overstride when running 180 bpm. And overstriding is what leads to injury (or at least that is my understanding).

    I find as long as I'm 165+ I don't overstride so I stopped being too concerned with it. I was concerned at one point and tried for 180 but it feels awkward to me. I'm normall right around 170 and that feels good.
  • garystrickland357
    garystrickland357 Posts: 598 Member
    You remind me of me sometimes. I'm a science guy so I love the data and the metrics - but - don't let it ruin the fun and the end goal. I want to be more fit, less fat, and enjoy life. Running helps me do that. I'm not fast. I never was. I'm 57. I've lost 74 pounds. Last January I couldn't run across the room. Last Saturday I ran 9 miles.

    Here's a question. Can you imagine running without your Garmin? Riding your bike without a bike computer? Running or riding just for the heck of it? Just because it's fun and good for you?

    I've had to remind myself to do that sometimes.

    I know in a different thread you mentioned how you "trained" yourself to visualize what a healthy serving looked like in order to wean yourself off of logging meals. That's a valid viewpoint and outlook. Think about running similarly. Maybe wean yourself away from all the data and just - run. If you feel good run fast. When you're struggling go slowly. Smell the roses. Stop during a run to take a picture of the sunrise (or whatever). Enjoy the exercise...

    I'm just offering this as something to think about. I overthink things as well. As to the original question - I find a faster cadence is easier on my old body. I usually run the first couple of miles between 155 and 165 until I warm up. Then I usually fall into a cadence of about 170 to 175. I might have a max cadence of 185 on a run.
  • OldAssDude
    OldAssDude Posts: 1,436 Member
    edited November 2018
    garystrickland357 wrote: »
    You remind me of me sometimes. I'm a science guy so I love the data and the metrics - but - don't let it ruin the fun and the end goal. I want to be more fit, less fat, and enjoy life. Running helps me do that. I'm not fast. I never was. I'm 57. I've lost 74 pounds. Last January I couldn't run across the room. Last Saturday I ran 9 miles.

    Great progress!

    Here's a question. Can you imagine running without your Garmin? Riding your bike without a bike computer? Running or riding just for the heck of it? Just because it's fun and good for you?

    I've had to remind myself to do that sometimes.

    i never go without wearing my fitness device (currently a Garmin). I have recorded every activity since 2015, and right now i'm on my 3rd 60 day streak with at least 10,000 steps a day. I do at least 1 activity a day, 7 days a week, and so far this year i only missed 2 days. I love the data, but the data is not the problem. The problem is all the crap i read on the internet about running form that makes me think i'm doing everything wrong. I get too caught up in that stuff and it makes me exert more energy and have less fun. The link that @dewd2 posted made me realize that i should just do what feels natural. I did that for may last 2 runs and it was fun and felt good. Sure i check my data as i'm running, but that's just for reference and to monitor my progress.

    I know in a different thread you mentioned how you "trained" yourself to visualize what a healthy serving looked like in order to wean yourself off of logging meals. That's a valid viewpoint and outlook. Think about running similarly. Maybe wean yourself away from all the data and just - run. If you feel good run fast. When you're struggling go slowly. Smell the roses. Stop during a run to take a picture of the sunrise (or whatever). Enjoy the exercise...

    Yeah. I'm just going to do what feels good. The only thing i need to worry about is keeping a good posture and striking center mass. I don't care how fast i am or how high my cadence is any more.

    I'm just offering this as something to think about. I overthink things as well. As to the original question - I find a faster cadence is easier on my old body. I usually run the first couple of miles between 155 and 165 until I warm up. Then I usually fall into a cadence of about 170 to 175. I might have a max cadence of 185 on a run.

    When i run slow i hit about 150 to 160 and when i do intervals and run faster on the run intervals i hit 180 no problem. I just got caught up in all the stuff i read that you should run at 180 even if you run slow.

    Thanks for the feed back.
  • OldAssDude
    OldAssDude Posts: 1,436 Member
    garystrickland357 wrote: »
    Read this yesterday. I’m throwing it in just for the humor.
    https://dumbrunner.com/news-blog/2018/1/12/pitiful-dog-clueless-about-pace-heart-rate-foot-strike?rq=Dog%20

    Hahaha!

    That was awesome.
  • Tacklewasher
    Tacklewasher Posts: 7,122 Member
    garystrickland357 wrote: »
    Read this yesterday. I’m throwing it in just for the humor.
    https://dumbrunner.com/news-blog/2018/1/12/pitiful-dog-clueless-about-pace-heart-rate-foot-strike?rq=Dog%20

    Wanted to thank you for posting this. Beyond the article, I've bookmarked the site and will read there.

    Saw one comment that I like.

    "If you are a new runner, you can and should ignore virtually everything you see, hear, and read about running. "
  • garystrickland357
    garystrickland357 Posts: 598 Member
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    garystrickland357 wrote: »
    Read this yesterday. I’m throwing it in just for the humor.
    https://dumbrunner.com/news-blog/2018/1/12/pitiful-dog-clueless-about-pace-heart-rate-foot-strike?rq=Dog%20

    Wanted to thank you for posting this. Beyond the article, I've bookmarked the site and will read there.

    Saw one comment that I like.

    "If you are a new runner, you can and should ignore virtually everything you see, hear, and read about running. "

    I really enjoy that website. It reminds us to take our health seriously, but remember to have fun. We're not olympic athletes - just folks trying to be fit. I really get a kick out of the motivational posters.
  • Tacklewasher
    Tacklewasher Posts: 7,122 Member
    garystrickland357 wrote: »
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    garystrickland357 wrote: »
    Read this yesterday. I’m throwing it in just for the humor.
    https://dumbrunner.com/news-blog/2018/1/12/pitiful-dog-clueless-about-pace-heart-rate-foot-strike?rq=Dog%20

    Wanted to thank you for posting this. Beyond the article, I've bookmarked the site and will read there.

    Saw one comment that I like.

    "If you are a new runner, you can and should ignore virtually everything you see, hear, and read about running. "

    I really enjoy that website. It reminds us to take our health seriously, but remember to have fun. We're not olympic athletes - just folks trying to be fit. I really get a kick out of the motivational posters.

    Holy crap those are funny.

    https://dumbrunner.com/posters
  • collectingblues
    collectingblues Posts: 2,541 Member
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    garystrickland357 wrote: »
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    garystrickland357 wrote: »
    Read this yesterday. I’m throwing it in just for the humor.
    https://dumbrunner.com/news-blog/2018/1/12/pitiful-dog-clueless-about-pace-heart-rate-foot-strike?rq=Dog%20

    Wanted to thank you for posting this. Beyond the article, I've bookmarked the site and will read there.

    Saw one comment that I like.

    "If you are a new runner, you can and should ignore virtually everything you see, hear, and read about running. "

    I really enjoy that website. It reminds us to take our health seriously, but remember to have fun. We're not olympic athletes - just folks trying to be fit. I really get a kick out of the motivational posters.

    Holy crap those are funny.

    https://dumbrunner.com/posters

    I see so many that I wish they actually sold. And I resemble a few just a little too much.
  • DX2JX2
    DX2JX2 Posts: 1,921 Member
    OldAssDude wrote: »
    DX2JX2 wrote: »
    One note - targeting a higher cadence is not a direct means to running faster or for longer. It's simply a way to help minimize impact to your joints. It's injury prevention instead of performance enhancement.

    Good point, but i am thinking a higher number of lower impacts will work out to be about the same as a lower number of higher impacts.

    Unfortunately I don't think it works that way. Think of it more as probability for injury with each stride.
  • MelanieCN77
    MelanieCN77 Posts: 4,047 Member
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    garystrickland357 wrote: »
    Tacklewasher wrote: »
    garystrickland357 wrote: »
    Read this yesterday. I’m throwing it in just for the humor.
    https://dumbrunner.com/news-blog/2018/1/12/pitiful-dog-clueless-about-pace-heart-rate-foot-strike?rq=Dog%20

    Wanted to thank you for posting this. Beyond the article, I've bookmarked the site and will read there.

    Saw one comment that I like.

    "If you are a new runner, you can and should ignore virtually everything you see, hear, and read about running. "

    I really enjoy that website. It reminds us to take our health seriously, but remember to have fun. We're not olympic athletes - just folks trying to be fit. I really get a kick out of the motivational posters.

    Holy crap those are funny.

    https://dumbrunner.com/posters

    I'd pick one to highlight but I dirty laughed at a lot.
  • picheakasha262
    picheakasha262 Posts: 10 Member
    I run a 20 min 5K, and my Garmin constantly puts my cadence at 160-170
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    edited November 2018
    I'll throw on the Garmin foot pod when I'm starting up running again from either winter or sickness or lack of time, just to see where it's at.
    I don't set a screen to view it live, but on review will try to make some changes if it's too slow.
    And I do tend to be slower turnover if left to my own feeling, but I also know recovery is easier from less pounding with higher turnover, and once I've done desired level a few times - that level now feels right.

    It's all what we get used to.

    Like so many things with workouts - if the frequency and duration is pretty short, potential improvements really aren't going to matter much overall.
    But even if no where near pro level endurance or pace, if you are pushing your own limits they same as they are pushing theirs, and doing it often enough - I find making those changes does make a difference.

    From treadmill testing I know the turn-over that results in lowest HR for any pace, showing a difference in efficiency.
    I know which pace appears to be most efficient, even if cardio system can't keep up totally at some point in the training.

    I don't think there is anything wrong with trying other turn-over's that may not "feel" as good as whatever is normally done - that other level could start to feel just as good, and be better - at the least for potential injury prevention.
  • dewd2
    dewd2 Posts: 2,445 Member
    I found the book I read last year (or maybe 2 years ago) that really put things in perspective for me. I highly recommend it.

    k5atfyw3y741.jpg

Categories