{scratching head} I don't know of any legit running coaches who say that 180 is good for all runners in all cases. But, I do know that the observational studies show that a cadence in the 180 range is optimal in terms of efficiency. And, looking at your numbers for cadence, that is what it also says. The median (not to be confused with average) cadence is actually close to 180 for ALL RUNNERS. This is NOT to be confused with different cadences for EACH RUNNER during the race. The median cadence is 184.2 to be exact. And, if you want to be more accurate, you would use a WEIGHTED average cadence for the run. If so, you would likely see the number come even closer to 180 spm since the outliers of dramatic cadence changes at the finish would be moderated by total time running. The cadence stays relatively consistent BETWEEN runners until the end of a race when cadence increases to produce more speed (and NOT necessarily more efficiency). It appears you may be confusing running cadence BETWEEN runners and running cadence for EACH runner. If so, then you miss the point as to why a median 180 spm exists as a fact among runners and NOT related to shifting cadence for EACH runner. Shifting cadences is a concept based on efficiency and endurance that is, in turn, a PER RUNNER fitness level and running environment impact. Efficiency for runners in a race becomes less important as the finish line approaches. Or, more accurately, ENDURANCE represent a runners' ability to expend energy over time. With little time left in the race, the endurance demands have largely been met. Thus, runners will prioritize speed over efficiency to try to win. So, runners increase cadence to win... not to be efficient. BUT, 180 spm range is a valuable TRAINING BENCHMARK for most since your own numbers show 184.2 MEDIAN cadence is maintained among ALL runners (not to be confused with "for EACH runner"). A median 184.2 cadence does NOT infer constant cadence. It simply means 180-ish spm is what the cadence was most of the time because it reflects the most efficient cadence for most of the race. As for stride distance, you hit it on the nose. But, I am bit confused because you say it takes BOTH stride AND cadence changes to increase speed. I think you mean you gain a longer stride by increasing conversion of vertical movement to horizontal movement to increase speed. That would mean both a taller runner and shorter runner can increase speed simply by pushing-off (increase power output) to gain more forward momentum thus increasing stride. That would mean you could you can change ONLY stride OR cadence and also gain speed. What does all this mean? It means you can change stride OR cadence to effect speed but an increased speed does not always equal efficiency. This why the numbers you show have a median cadence close to a median 180 (say, 175-185 range) for the bulk of the race among ALL runners. Also, the best cadence is a by-produce of fitness level and environment. But, the optimal cadence is shown to be better in the 180 range but sometimes optimal is not achievable because of the environment or fitness level. OR, sometimes optimal running efficiency is unnecessary because the runner is sprinting toward the finish line and wants speed at all cost. And, no one trains predominately at a finish line cadence. Nope, ...according to your numbers, they should train close to 180 spm but also know that cadence will change for EACH runner as environment and fitness level demands changes as they run - just like the pros.
I've been running for over 55 years +. I thought I'd try this 180 spm Church idea, gave it a good go for 3 months, it was the most uncomfortable experience; eventually I gave up on it and my body went back to its normal comfortable cadence and I also reduced my 5K time back 1:30 seconds to what it used to be :)
Thanks for the video - I wish you edited it 5-10yrs ago when I was - as an amateur runner - hopelessly defending fellow runners against "the Church of 180" (since 2/3 years I notice here in France this Church is losing his believers). Most runners following this idiotic rule don't even realize the basic 1-o-1 math: if you had to target 180 ppm at every given pace.. this means you would just vary your stride length and every runner would need the exact same stride length to reach that given speed! It makes no sense given we all are of different heights , leg lengths etc, period! Funny fact I'm a rather tall runner (1m84) and my cadence ranges from as slow as 173 to up to 185/195 at 3K and above paces but I've seen sub-elite runners (much stronger than I am) hitting low 160s in their jogs. For the next videos you could think about arguing against other "religions"... a.k.a "The Church of Heel striking", (I'm a forefoot striker but I've seen too many (very) good heel striking runners being preached to change their strike for no reason), "The Church of avoiding too much vertical oscillation", etc . Kudos for your videos which are very well done.
You sound rather gullible. For one noone recommends maintaining 180spm uniformly at all paces, the rule is aim for over 180. For two every runner in that race was over 180 except two. Thirdly black athlete physiology is wildly different to other races. They are capable of greater stride length since they can have a hugely longer leg length to overall height ratio. Fourthly this guy only provides evidence in ONE race. If his theory holds over more races he'd provide it so this is most likely cherry picked "evidence" Look I get it he wants to be contrarian and seem like the smartest guy in the room to get followers. But "churches" get that way because they generally work. Like why racial stereotypes exist. Sure someone can "debunk" the "church" that only black men get to the final of the 100m in the Olympic games by showing me one final where there is a single asian or white guy but that doesn't apply in 99.999999% of cases. In short unless you have the leg length of mo farah the 180 rule applies to you. Also this dude gets so emotional he reveals he is emotionally invested in the topic. That is not a recipe to discovering truth. Most likely makes him defensive about this aspect and unwilling to look at evidence to the contrary
@@troycambo Thanks for your comment - interesting but you didn't get at all my point (I see why, I was just joking about the idea of 180 cadence and for churches is just that they focus too much on a single aspect of running gait instead of looking it as a whole). When you claim "the rule is aim for over 180.". This is blatantly wrong unless you specify your statement as follows: "the rule is aim for over 180 AT race pace(s) (and we mean race pace for elite athletes above which means very - very - fast paces). I can tell you runners above won't ever get 180 for their easy paces (which turns to be race pace for many recreational runners!!). Myself I constantly hit 180++ from 42K pace and above.. but definitely not for easy paces. The point he wants to make here in the video is that most runners (so non elite runners) shouldn't NECESSARILY focus too much on getting tor 180 and above given their paces / running gaits / etc are far far away from the ones in the video!!!!!
Love this. Aligns with Shane Benzie great book ‘lost art of running’. Similar argues to increase stride length whilst maintain a reasonable cadence then getting more air/vertical oscillation via strong push off up and forward helps reduce GCT as landing more underneath so get longer stride but don’t lose much cadence.
Good vid. Point well evidenced. However, for many recreational runners who've not worked on form before, low cadence might be a sign to practice form, reduce injury risk and improve efficiency. Thanks 👍
Leg length seems like it, rather than overall height, should be the basis for the relative stride length metric. Two people could be the same height but one have a long torso/short legs and the other the opposite.
Jump a bit higher with each step - allows for longer stride by increasing percent flight time per step. Each step is a jump, not a pushing of ground. Feel a slight feeling of flying with each step; it will let you extend your stride.
i think everyone should aim at least at 175 spm, for me the magic numbers are is 180 in zone 2 and between 185-190 at LT... The problem with most people i see running is that they have way too much of a slow cadence 160 and so on.. or way too high with super short stride lengths... to me if you land properly below your centre of mass, you need to work first on stride length and strenght and then try to slowly increase the cadence, because it's useless to run at 200 spm with mini steps.. Kiptun is a great example, he runs the first marathon part at around 185 spm, and in the second half he changes gear to 190-197 spm, especially in the last 10 k,,, the key factor is to change cadence a little bit during a race
I agree, to me the most important finding is not a single one of these runners ever drops below 170. I targeted 180 for a while to correct my technique, then relaxed into my own temp which ended up being more like 175 in Z2.
I have tried increasing my stride. The only thing I get each time is hurt. Perhaps because I am a senior runner but for me increasing cadence is easier, more natural for me and less injuries. After years of running the secret seems to be is be yourself and do what works for you. No I will never be a Sir Mo but I can be me. I can still run and do so simply because I can.
Great insights on pace, cadence, and stride length, with data to back it up. I agree that normal running and racing should be done with a cadence that feels best. However, I have had good success with running 100m and 200m reps with "forced quick" cadence in practice. Normal speed work cadence would be around 185, and final sprint could be 225 or higher. I'll run interval pace for the 100m and 200m reps at 195 to 220. It works the muscles that you use when sprinting without the high forces of actually sprinting. Train, don't strain.
Let me suggest there is a 3rd way to increase speed. Leg power to push off stronger= longer flight time. This might appear to a longer stride but purely reaching for a longer stride usually results in heel striking. Increased air time can keep you forward decreasing braking action of heel striking. Am I way off? 🏃♂️🏃♂️
Hey Fredrik, I recently had a running analysis (same software as you show from time to time in your videos) and my running economy was assessed as 3.10 joules/kg/m however I overstride by around 100 mm and I have a horrible ground contact time of 370ms! I now try to land closer under under the hips. I was looking into the pose method to help me with this. Do you think this will help? Any tips that will help to land under the hips? It just feels so difficult to get out of my current running style.
Where does Juaquim Cruz factor into this? Longest stride I have ever seen and did ok for himself in the 800... Myself at 6-3 my cadence has always been slow 150-160 per minute, the 180 never worked for me, I have been excommunicated from the church.
Love the way you deliver your information very interestingly with great humor and subtle scarcasm😂
Fredrik Zillen x Mo Farah - the collab we all need
{scratching head} I don't know of any legit running coaches who say that 180 is good for all runners in all cases. But, I do know that the observational studies show that a cadence in the 180 range is optimal in terms of efficiency. And, looking at your numbers for cadence, that is what it also says. The median (not to be confused with average) cadence is actually close to 180 for ALL RUNNERS. This is NOT to be confused with different cadences for EACH RUNNER during the race. The median cadence is 184.2 to be exact. And, if you want to be more accurate, you would use a WEIGHTED average cadence for the run. If so, you would likely see the number come even closer to 180 spm since the outliers of dramatic cadence changes at the finish would be moderated by total time running.
The cadence stays relatively consistent BETWEEN runners until the end of a race when cadence increases to produce more speed (and NOT necessarily more efficiency). It appears you may be confusing running cadence BETWEEN runners and running cadence for EACH runner. If so, then you miss the point as to why a median 180 spm exists as a fact among runners and NOT related to shifting cadence for EACH runner. Shifting cadences is a concept based on efficiency and endurance that is, in turn, a PER RUNNER fitness level and running environment impact.
Efficiency for runners in a race becomes less important as the finish line approaches. Or, more accurately, ENDURANCE represent a runners' ability to expend energy over time. With little time left in the race, the endurance demands have largely been met. Thus, runners will prioritize speed over efficiency to try to win. So, runners increase cadence to win... not to be efficient. BUT, 180 spm range is a valuable TRAINING BENCHMARK for most since your own numbers show 184.2 MEDIAN cadence is maintained among ALL runners (not to be confused with "for EACH runner"). A median 184.2 cadence does NOT infer constant cadence. It simply means 180-ish spm is what the cadence was most of the time because it reflects the most efficient cadence for most of the race.
As for stride distance, you hit it on the nose. But, I am bit confused because you say it takes BOTH stride AND cadence changes to increase speed. I think you mean you gain a longer stride by increasing conversion of vertical movement to horizontal movement to increase speed. That would mean both a taller runner and shorter runner can increase speed simply by pushing-off (increase power output) to gain more forward momentum thus increasing stride. That would mean you could you can change ONLY stride OR cadence and also gain speed.
What does all this mean? It means you can change stride OR cadence to effect speed but an increased speed does not always equal efficiency. This why the numbers you show have a median cadence close to a median 180 (say, 175-185 range) for the bulk of the race among ALL runners. Also, the best cadence is a by-produce of fitness level and environment. But, the optimal cadence is shown to be better in the 180 range but sometimes optimal is not achievable because of the environment or fitness level. OR, sometimes optimal running efficiency is unnecessary because the runner is sprinting toward the finish line and wants speed at all cost. And, no one trains predominately at a finish line cadence. Nope, ...according to your numbers, they should train close to 180 spm but also know that cadence will change for EACH runner as environment and fitness level demands changes as they run - just like the pros.
I've been running for over 55 years +. I thought I'd try this 180 spm Church idea, gave it a good go for 3 months, it was the most uncomfortable experience; eventually I gave up on it and my body went back to its normal comfortable cadence and I also reduced my 5K time back 1:30 seconds to what it used to be :)
Thanks for the video - I wish you edited it 5-10yrs ago when I was - as an amateur runner - hopelessly defending fellow runners against "the Church of 180" (since 2/3 years I notice here in France this Church is losing his believers). Most runners following this idiotic rule don't even realize the basic 1-o-1 math: if you had to target 180 ppm at every given pace.. this means you would just vary your stride length and every runner would need the exact same stride length to reach that given speed! It makes no sense given we all are of different heights , leg lengths etc, period! Funny fact I'm a rather tall runner (1m84) and my cadence ranges from as slow as 173 to up to 185/195 at 3K and above paces but I've seen sub-elite runners (much stronger than I am) hitting low 160s in their jogs. For the next videos you could think about arguing against other "religions"... a.k.a "The Church of Heel striking", (I'm a forefoot striker but I've seen too many (very) good heel striking runners being preached to change their strike for no reason), "The Church of avoiding too much vertical oscillation", etc . Kudos for your videos which are very well done.
You sound rather gullible. For one noone recommends maintaining 180spm uniformly at all paces, the rule is aim for over 180.
For two every runner in that race was over 180 except two.
Thirdly black athlete physiology is wildly different to other races. They are capable of greater stride length since they can have a hugely longer leg length to overall height ratio.
Fourthly this guy only provides evidence in ONE race. If his theory holds over more races he'd provide it so this is most likely cherry picked "evidence"
Look I get it he wants to be contrarian and seem like the smartest guy in the room to get followers.
But "churches" get that way because they generally work. Like why racial stereotypes exist.
Sure someone can "debunk" the "church" that only black men get to the final of the 100m in the Olympic games by showing me one final where there is a single asian or white guy but that doesn't apply in 99.999999% of cases.
In short unless you have the leg length of mo farah the 180 rule applies to you.
Also this dude gets so emotional he reveals he is emotionally invested in the topic. That is not a recipe to discovering truth.
Most likely makes him defensive about this aspect and unwilling to look at evidence to the contrary
@@troycambo Thanks for your comment - interesting but you didn't get at all my point (I see why, I was just joking about the idea of 180 cadence and for churches is just that they focus too much on a single aspect of running gait instead of looking it as a whole). When you claim "the rule is aim for over 180.". This is blatantly wrong unless you specify your statement as follows: "the rule is aim for over 180 AT race pace(s) (and we mean race pace for elite athletes above which means very - very - fast paces). I can tell you runners above won't ever get 180 for their easy paces (which turns to be race pace for many recreational runners!!). Myself I constantly hit 180++ from 42K pace and above.. but definitely not for easy paces. The point he wants to make here in the video is that most runners (so non elite runners) shouldn't NECESSARILY focus too much on getting tor 180 and above given their paces / running gaits / etc are far far away from the ones in the video!!!!!
@@troycamboFrom my point of view, you are confusing emotional with passionate. There's quite a difference.
He is really a specialist!! 😮
Love this. Aligns with Shane Benzie great book ‘lost art of running’. Similar argues to increase stride length whilst maintain a reasonable cadence then getting more air/vertical oscillation via strong push off up and forward helps reduce GCT as landing more underneath so get longer stride but don’t lose much cadence.
Wise words as always. Thank you Fredrik 🏆
Good vid. Point well evidenced. However, for many recreational runners who've not worked on form before, low cadence might be a sign to practice form, reduce injury risk and improve efficiency. Thanks 👍
Love your humor, man! :)
Can you make a video on how to reduce shoulder swinging and keep the upper body more stable.
Fantastic videos!
Leg length seems to be a significant factor impacting the runners ability to achieve longer strides.
Leg length seems like it, rather than overall height, should be the basis for the relative stride length metric. Two people could be the same height but one have a long torso/short legs and the other the opposite.
8:26 my name is what? Wwwwiki slim fast runner bro! 😅😅😅😂
Really enjoying the content, keep up the great work!
Jump a bit higher with each step - allows for longer stride by increasing percent flight time per step. Each step is a jump, not a pushing of ground.
Feel a slight feeling of flying with each step; it will let you extend your stride.
i think everyone should aim at least at 175 spm, for me the magic numbers are is 180 in zone 2 and between 185-190 at LT... The problem with most people i see running is that they have way too much of a slow cadence 160 and so on.. or way too high with super short stride lengths... to me if you land properly below your centre of mass, you need to work first on stride length and strenght and then try to slowly increase the cadence, because it's useless to run at 200 spm with mini steps.. Kiptun is a great example, he runs the first marathon part at around 185 spm, and in the second half he changes gear to 190-197 spm, especially in the last 10 k,,, the key factor is to change cadence a little bit during a race
I agree, to me the most important finding is not a single one of these runners ever drops below 170. I targeted 180 for a while to correct my technique, then relaxed into my own temp which ended up being more like 175 in Z2.
😆 love the humor!
Yes, Increase both!
I have tried increasing my stride. The only thing I get each time is hurt. Perhaps because I am a senior runner but for me increasing cadence is easier, more natural for me and less injuries. After years of running the secret seems to be is be yourself and do what works for you. No I will never be a Sir Mo but I can be me. I can still run and do so simply because I can.
Great insights on pace, cadence, and stride length, with data to back it up. I agree that normal running and racing should be done with a cadence that feels best. However, I have had good success with running 100m and 200m reps with "forced quick" cadence in practice. Normal speed work cadence would be around 185, and final sprint could be 225 or higher. I'll run interval pace for the 100m and 200m reps at 195 to 220. It works the muscles that you use when sprinting without the high forces of actually sprinting. Train, don't strain.
Three ways.
Increase cadence.
Increase stride length.
Decrease surface contact time.
Totally random chanel i am going to consume from now
9:08 😂😂😂
Nobody say 180 bpm cadence is right for all runners.
It's always explain as an average number.
Thus some are slower, some are faster.
Let me suggest there is a 3rd way to increase speed. Leg power to push off stronger= longer flight time. This might appear to a longer stride but purely reaching for a longer stride usually results in heel striking. Increased air time can keep you forward decreasing braking action of heel striking. Am I way off? 🏃♂️🏃♂️
Hey Fredrik, I recently had a running analysis (same software as you show from time to time in your videos) and my running economy was assessed as 3.10 joules/kg/m however I overstride by around 100 mm and I have a horrible ground contact time of 370ms!
I now try to land closer under under the hips. I was looking into the pose method to help me with this.
Do you think this will help? Any tips that will help to land under the hips? It just feels so difficult to get out of my current running style.
Where does Juaquim Cruz factor into this? Longest stride I have ever seen and did ok for himself in the 800...
Myself at 6-3 my cadence has always been slow 150-160 per minute, the 180 never worked for me, I have been excommunicated from the church.
I have been telling Usain bolt to slow his cadence down for years. He is way over 180SPM.
amazing vid funny
Kan man promenera på ett sätt som gör en bättre på löpning?
Members of the Church of 180 spm... 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Excellent video for embarrassing those so called running technique coaches who go on about 180spm.
If you get this exited over run cadence it must be an amazing sight to see your reaction to Santa Claus.