Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

theshaqattack t1_itrpts0 wrote

Reply to comment by anon2282 in [OC] Visualising 12 months of running with Strava by detalbruh

It’s likely not your stride at all tbh. It’s probably more fitness than anything right now that determines how fast you run that 1.5km in. But faster speed work as part of a training program generally just pushes your cadence higher anyway.

But manually measuring cadence when you’re talking about 170-190 steps per minute will be extremely difficult. Give it a go though.

1

anon2282 t1_itrq6eg wrote

Counted 80 steps in 30 seconds so my cadence is 160. Should be a bit faster then?

2

theshaqattack t1_itrqpcl wrote

160 is a low cadence when running but so much plays into it. Fatigue at that moment, whether you’re actually interested in what you’re doing, what you’ve eaten and how that makes you feel.

Cadence shouldn’t be measured over 30 seconds and extrapolated though in my opinion. Measuring it over the course of your run, then seeing the trend is really the only concrete way to know what it is. Could you have kept that up over 5 minutes? 20 minutes? Too much plays into that short moment.

1

anon2282 t1_its30ps wrote

Yeah great points. It was just a 2.5 km run with some decent hills. Pace was pretty constant at 6:40/km or so, I'm really shit at running downhill so I think I'm actually faster uphill, about 160 avg bpm.

2

theshaqattack t1_its96yh wrote

Haha I know quite a few people who are much quicker uphill than down, easier on the quads.

At a 6:40 pace I’d be suggesting just to shorten your stride a little, almost feels like skipping along the top of the ground a bit and keep it up, it’s hard to do it at the start. And really just focus on doing more distance but slower. Aim to do 80% of your weekly mileage at a heart rate between 115-140 and see how your body feels.

1