|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Magic Number: 180 steps or 90 Strides Was: Cycling Cadence and Running Stride Rate
Ozzie:
Remember my thoughts on how elite runners tended to shuffle (higher stride rate and shorter stride length)? This data comparing the elite with the sub-elite seems to support that observation. The difference is even more striking when you compare elites to the merely above-average runner. The Cavanagh/Pollock results seem to imply that running economy is the major difference between the groups, not just VO2 max. A longer stride at a given speed means more vertical lift (and less efficiency). I had a 76.4 vo2 max (predictive of 2:15 marathon), but couldn't get to 2:30, due to my poor economy (too much bounce). I got trounced in short races by a guy with a 62 vo2max who was smooth as silk -- short quick shuffle steps and very little bounce. -- Dan "Ozzie Gontang" wrote in message .. . Any otherideas on this? - Tony From Peter Cavanagh and Michael Pollock's work back in the 70's one was a comparison of Elite and Good Distance runners. See the Marathon in Volume301 of the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1977 for all aspects on the marathon. Elite Marathoners (Frank Shorter was included in that group) numbered 9 (mean marathon time: 2:15:52) and good runners made up of 3 with a mean time of 2:34:40. When you are talking about 90 cycles a minute in biking, the equivalent is 90 strides a minute which we all know as the 180 steps/minute ideal. In the research between elite and good: Elite: 191 steps/minute SD 10.74 Good 182 steps/minute SD 8.80 Elite stride length: 1.56 M SD 0.17 M Good stride length: 1.64 M SD 0.16 M If you want to see various people playing with the 90 cycles/stides or 180 steps/minute check out http://www.breathplay.com Ian Jackson was an early writer for Runner's World and was into breathing and running form. He did a booklet for them on Running and Yoga. He's worked with some top cyclists. http://www.chirunning.com Danny Dreyer has arrived at the same conclusions that I have. His training program is all about "Running is falling and catching oneself Gracefully." GAPO Well done CD. If you get a chance to take his half day class I would say, Don't miss it, if you want to learn to run gracefully over the surface of the earth. I'm looking at taking Danny's certification program as my thinking melds right into his program. In health and on the run, Ozzie Gontang Director, San Diego Marathon Clinic, est. 1975 Maintainer - rec.running FAQ http://www.faqs.org/faqs/running-faq/ Mindful Running: http://www.mindfulness.com/mr.asp |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Cycling Cadence and Running Stride Rate
"Lyle McDonald" wrote in message ... Andy Coggan wrote: "Tony" wrote in message First, I think you are taking things a bit too literally here...the difference between, say, a cadence of 70 vs. 110 is quite small when you consider that the minimal (concentric) cadence is 0 and the maximum (at least theorectically) up around 250, or even higher. There is therefore no such thing as a true "strength" workout when pedaling, at least not in the way you're viewing it. Most of the recs for muscle tension types workouts (Carmichael and Morris) are in the 50RPM range against a higher resistance than what you'd use at a higher cadence. From the Force-Velocity curve, as you move closer to isometric (0 RPM against maximal resistance), you are increasing tension requirements. It is moving closer to a 'strength' stimulus becuse of this. Strength-endurance would be a better description. Second, while intuitively appealing, the notion that varying your cadence affects fiber type recruitment is far from proven (despite what Carmichael might have you believe). In fact, the only study that has addressed this question using the classical means of assessing motor unit recruitment pattern (i.e., PAS staining) yielded results that suggest that cadence does *not* have any significant influence (although the authors interpreted the data differently). I think I know the study you're referring to, it used a fairly narrow range of high cadences, didn't it. Also, did the study change power/force requirements with the changing cadence? Third, hypertrophy is a consequence of muscle use, period. The degree to which hypertrophy occurs of course varies with the force requirement, but some amount of hypertrophy will result even from very low force activities (e.g., running). Yes, hence all those super muscular runners. Right. What you generally see with endurance training is a slight incrase in size of some Type I fibers (and a decrease in others, both approaching an optimal size:capillary ratio) and a loss of size in Type II, at least with only low intensity endurance work. LSD work at 20% of maximal force output can be maintained almost exclusively with Type I fibers (until exhaustion at which point Type II will come into play). Running or cycling uphill (or faster) will have higher tension requirements. Meaning greater recruitment of Type II fibers. This is why it tends to be more anaerobic, b/c of increasing use of fibers that tend to rely more on anaerobic glycolytic metabolism (which is the point of training the Type II fibers to be more endurance and rely less on anaerobic glycolysis with intervals). distance cycling has higher tension requirements than distance runnning, which is part of why cyclists tend to have more muscular legs. Sprinters trump both of them. Of course, they also lift weights. Lyle Hey Lyle...is that you...Lyle of the Ketogenic Diet book? If so WHAT ARE YOU DOING POSTING TO THIS NUTTY GROUP??? Seriously, good to see you are still alive and kicking. Cat the ex-speedskater back to cycling chick who you corresponded with about weight training and dieting a few years back; |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Magic Number: 180 steps or 90 Strides Was: Cycling Cadence and Running Stride Rate
Ozzie Gontang wrote in message ...
Any otherideas on this? - Tony From Peter Cavanagh and Michael Pollock's work back in the 70's one was a comparison of Elite and Good Distance runners. See the Marathon in Volume301 of the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1977 for all aspects on the marathon. Elite Marathoners (Frank Shorter was included in that group) numbered 9 (mean marathon time: 2:15:52) and good runners made up of 3 with a mean time of 2:34:40. When you are talking about 90 cycles a minute in biking, the equivalent is 90 strides a minute which we all know as the 180 steps/minute ideal. In the research between elite and good: Elite: 191 steps/minute SD 10.74 Good 182 steps/minute SD 8.80 Elite stride length: 1.56 M SD 0.17 M Good stride length: 1.64 M SD 0.16 M If you want to see various people playing with the 90 cycles/stides or 180 steps/minute check out http://www.breathplay.com Ian Jackson was an early writer for Runner's World and was into breathing and running form. He did a booklet for them on Running and Yoga. He's worked with some top cyclists. http://www.chirunning.com Danny Dreyer has arrived at the same conclusions that I have. His training program is all about "Running is falling and catching oneself Gracefully." GAPO Well done CD. If you get a chance to take his half day class I would say, Don't miss it, if you want to learn to run gracefully over the surface of the earth. I'm looking at taking Danny's certification program as my thinking melds right into his program. In health and on the run, Ozzie Gontang Director, San Diego Marathon Clinic, est. 1975 Maintainer - rec.running FAQ http://www.faqs.org/faqs/running-faq/ Mindful Running: http://www.mindfulness.com/mr.asp The chirunning.com site leads off with this quote: "A good runner leaves no footprints." – Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching If that be true does that mean that shoe wear would be drastically reduced? Maybe I could save enough on shoe replacement to justify the expense of the books. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Cycling Cadence and Running Stride Rate
Cat Dailey wrote:
"Lyle McDonald" wrote in message ... Andy Coggan wrote: "Tony" wrote in message First, I think you are taking things a bit too literally here...the difference between, say, a cadence of 70 vs. 110 is quite small when you consider that the minimal (concentric) cadence is 0 and the maximum (at least theorectically) up around 250, or even higher. There is therefore no such thing as a true "strength" workout when pedaling, at least not in the way you're viewing it. Most of the recs for muscle tension types workouts (Carmichael and Morris) are in the 50RPM range against a higher resistance than what you'd use at a higher cadence. From the Force-Velocity curve, as you move closer to isometric (0 RPM against maximal resistance), you are increasing tension requirements. It is moving closer to a 'strength' stimulus becuse of this. Strength-endurance would be a better description. Second, while intuitively appealing, the notion that varying your cadence affects fiber type recruitment is far from proven (despite what Carmichael might have you believe). In fact, the only study that has addressed this question using the classical means of assessing motor unit recruitment pattern (i.e., PAS staining) yielded results that suggest that cadence does *not* have any significant influence (although the authors interpreted the data differently). I think I know the study you're referring to, it used a fairly narrow range of high cadences, didn't it. Also, did the study change power/force requirements with the changing cadence? Third, hypertrophy is a consequence of muscle use, period. The degree to which hypertrophy occurs of course varies with the force requirement, but some amount of hypertrophy will result even from very low force activities (e.g., running). Yes, hence all those super muscular runners. Right. What you generally see with endurance training is a slight incrase in size of some Type I fibers (and a decrease in others, both approaching an optimal size:capillary ratio) and a loss of size in Type II, at least with only low intensity endurance work. LSD work at 20% of maximal force output can be maintained almost exclusively with Type I fibers (until exhaustion at which point Type II will come into play). Running or cycling uphill (or faster) will have higher tension requirements. Meaning greater recruitment of Type II fibers. This is why it tends to be more anaerobic, b/c of increasing use of fibers that tend to rely more on anaerobic glycolytic metabolism (which is the point of training the Type II fibers to be more endurance and rely less on anaerobic glycolysis with intervals). distance cycling has higher tension requirements than distance runnning, which is part of why cyclists tend to have more muscular legs. Sprinters trump both of them. Of course, they also lift weights. Lyle Hey Lyle...is that you...Lyle of the Ketogenic Diet book? Shhh.. If so WHAT ARE YOU DOING POSTING TO THIS NUTTY GROUP??? had some questions that only the runners could adequately answer for me. Cat the ex-speedskater back to cycling chick who you corresponded with about weight training and dieting a few years back; Yeah, well I moved back into speedskating last year. Training for it anyhow. Only to find out that the 10k distance I like is all but gone. Blech. Why are you an ex-speedskater? Lyle |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Magic Number: 180 steps or 90 Strides Was: Cycling Cadence and Running Stride Rate
"eddy eagle" wrote in message
om... Ozzie Gontang wrote in message ... Any otherideas on this? - Tony From Peter Cavanagh and Michael Pollock's work back in the 70's one was a comparison of Elite and Good Distance runners. See the Marathon in Volume301 of the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1977 for all aspects on the marathon. Elite Marathoners (Frank Shorter was included in that group) numbered 9 (mean marathon time: 2:15:52) and good runners made up of 3 with a mean time of 2:34:40. When you are talking about 90 cycles a minute in biking, the equivalent is 90 strides a minute which we all know as the 180 steps/minute ideal. In the research between elite and good: Elite: 191 steps/minute SD 10.74 Good 182 steps/minute SD 8.80 Elite stride length: 1.56 M SD 0.17 M Good stride length: 1.64 M SD 0.16 M If you want to see various people playing with the 90 cycles/stides or 180 steps/minute check out http://www.breathplay.com Ian Jackson was an early writer for Runner's World and was into breathing and running form. He did a booklet for them on Running and Yoga. He's worked with some top cyclists. http://www.chirunning.com Danny Dreyer has arrived at the same conclusions that I have. His training program is all about "Running is falling and catching oneself Gracefully." GAPO Well done CD. If you get a chance to take his half day class I would say, Don't miss it, if you want to learn to run gracefully over the surface of the earth. I'm looking at taking Danny's certification program as my thinking melds right into his program. In health and on the run, Ozzie Gontang Director, San Diego Marathon Clinic, est. 1975 Maintainer - rec.running FAQ http://www.faqs.org/faqs/running-faq/ Mindful Running: http://www.mindfulness.com/mr.asp The chirunning.com site leads off with this quote: "A good runner leaves no footprints." - Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching If that be true does that mean that shoe wear would be drastically reduced? Maybe I could save enough on shoe replacement to justify the expense of the books. Please don't crosspost this stuff to rec.bicycles.racing - nobody here is interested. Andy Coggan |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Cycling Cadence and Running Stride Rate
"Lyle McDonald" wrote in message
... Andy Coggan wrote: "Tony" wrote in message First, I think you are taking things a bit too literally here...the difference between, say, a cadence of 70 vs. 110 is quite small when you consider that the minimal (concentric) cadence is 0 and the maximum (at least theorectically) up around 250, or even higher. There is therefore no such thing as a true "strength" workout when pedaling, at least not in the way you're viewing it. Most of the recs for muscle tension types workouts (Carmichael and Morris) are in the 50RPM range against a higher resistance than what you'd use at a higher cadence. From the Force-Velocity curve, as you move closer to isometric (0 RPM against maximal resistance), you are increasing tension requirements. It is moving closer to a 'strength' stimulus becuse of this. Strength-endurance would be a better description. Closer, but not close enough to matter. If it did, then endurance-trained cyclists would be stronger than untrained individuals, which they are not. Second, while intuitively appealing, the notion that varying your cadence affects fiber type recruitment is far from proven (despite what Carmichael might have you believe). In fact, the only study that has addressed this question using the classical means of assessing motor unit recruitment pattern (i.e., PAS staining) yielded results that suggest that cadence does *not* have any significant influence (although the authors interpreted the data differently). I think I know the study you're referring to, it used a fairly narrow range of high cadences, didn't it. 50 vs. 100 rpm: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...t_uids=1385118 Also, did the study change power/force requirements with the changing cadence? Since power was held constant, average effective pedal force would have differed between trials by a factor of two. Third, hypertrophy is a consequence of muscle use, period. The degree to which hypertrophy occurs of course varies with the force requirement, but some amount of hypertrophy will result even from very low force activities (e.g., running). Yes, hence all those super muscular runners. Right. What you generally see with endurance training is a slight incrase in size of some Type I fibers I see you've been reading my research! ;-) (and a decrease in others I am not aware of any data to support this statement. , both approaching an optimal size:capillary ratio) and a loss of size in Type II, at least with only low intensity endurance work. Again, I am not aware of any data suggesting that endurance training results in atrophy of type II fibers. Andy Coggan (Coggan AR on PubMed) |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Cycling Cadence and Running Stride Rate
In article . net, Andy
Coggan wrote: "Lyle McDonald" wrote in message ... Andy Coggan wrote: "Tony" wrote in message Somebody wrote: Most of the recs for muscle tension types workouts (Carmichael and Morris) are in the 50RPM range against a higher resistance than what you'd use at a higher cadence. From the Force-Velocity curve, as you move closer to isometric (0 RPM against maximal resistance), you are increasing tension requirements. It is moving closer to a 'strength' stimulus becuse of this. Strength-endurance would be a better description. I don't know who wrote this but I think you're right. This past winter I did one-legged squats once per week for about 5 weeks. Then I started doing intervals near LT (4mMol) power (HR was lower than HR @ 4mMol) using 40-50 rpm's, on a hill. Each week the total time of the intervals was increased, begining with 4 x 3' and working up to 7 x 5'. Even after not doing the squats for about 8 weeks when I tried another session of them I could do higher resistance and more of them, not that this alone meant I could ride faster, but strength as most would define it, and strength endurance definitely increased. I think Armstrong uses high cadences to reduce the force needed to produce a given power. His demonstrated ablities, and his mention of rarely producing more than 4-6mMol of lactate indicates that he isn't using a lot of Type 2 fibers even when he is producing high power output. -WG |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Magic Number: 180 steps or 90 Strides Was: Cycling Cadence and Running Stride Rate
"Andy Coggan" wrote in message news:vy2Hc.8981
From Peter Cavanagh and Michael Pollock's work back in the 70's one was a comparison of Elite and Good Distance runners. See the Marathon in Volume301 of the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1977 for all aspects on the marathon. Elite Marathoners (Frank Shorter was included in that group) numbered 9 (mean marathon time: 2:15:52) and good runners made up of 3 with a mean time of 2:34:40. When you are talking about 90 cycles a minute in biking, the equivalent is 90 strides a minute which we all know as the 180 steps/minute ideal. In the research between elite and good: Elite: 191 steps/minute SD 10.74 Good 182 steps/minute SD 8.80 Elite stride length: 1.56 M SD 0.17 M Good stride length: 1.64 M SD 0.16 M If you want to see various people playing with the 90 cycles/stides or 180 steps/minute check out http://www.breathplay.com Please don't crosspost this stuff to rec.bicycles.racing - nobody here is interested. Andy Coggan Not true at all, Andy.--Shayana Kadidal |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Magic Number: 180 steps or 90 Strides Was: Cycling Cadence and Running Stride Rate
"Andy Coggan" wrote in message news:vy2Hc.8981
From Peter Cavanagh and Michael Pollock's work back in the 70's one was a comparison of Elite and Good Distance runners. See the Marathon in Volume301 of the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1977 for all aspects on the marathon. Elite Marathoners (Frank Shorter was included in that group) numbered 9 (mean marathon time: 2:15:52) and good runners made up of 3 with a mean time of 2:34:40. When you are talking about 90 cycles a minute in biking, the equivalent is 90 strides a minute which we all know as the 180 steps/minute ideal. In the research between elite and good: Elite: 191 steps/minute SD 10.74 Good 182 steps/minute SD 8.80 Elite stride length: 1.56 M SD 0.17 M Good stride length: 1.64 M SD 0.16 M If you want to see various people playing with the 90 cycles/stides or 180 steps/minute check out http://www.breathplay.com Please don't crosspost this stuff to rec.bicycles.racing - nobody here is interested. Andy Coggan Not true at all, Andy.--Shayana Kadidal |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Magic Number: 180 steps or 90 Strides Was: Cycling Cadence and Running Stride Rate
In article , eddy
eagle wrote: The chirunning.com site leads off with this quote: "A good runner leaves no footprints." – Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching If that be true does that mean that shoe wear would be drastically reduced? Maybe I could save enough on shoe replacement to justify the expense of the books. I believe that the value of the book is that for many it will make sense and show them to run lightly. It will save on shoe wear, and even moreso on the effects of inefficient and improper form and style years down the road. Ozzie |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|