Finally, a question on treadmill jogging, something he's qualified to comment on.
Donovan Rebbechi said:In article said:
"Mark Hickey" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...Quoted message said:"apusapus" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>"Chris Maginn" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>"]news:[email hidden]...
>
>> Anyone have an expert opinion on this subject or can point me to a
siteQuoted message said:>that has an indepth discussion?
>
>Sack you coach and forget about this trivia. Just run.FWIW, I experimented with my own optimal cadence on the treadmill. Just set the speed to race
pace, and then try to find the cadence that produces the lowest heart rate.Crude, yes. But it did seem to work for me (I run very little due to knee issues, but do OK in
races).So Mark, what were the specifics of your treadmill test? For a given running speed, there must be
a trade off between the additional energy required for a faster leg turnover and the probable
losses due to increased vertical body displacement with a longer stride. For shorter events,
effectiveness overshadows efficiency but for long distance, the 180+ bum shuffle would arguably
be more efficient as well as possibly reducing fatigue inducing foot strike forces.Anecdotally, some have observed that the mile is approximately the point at which turnover
increases notably. I've observed that I start getting slight turnover increases as I get close to 1
mile race pace when doing track intervals.For shorter distances like 400m or less, turnover would probably be much faster than 180/min,
possibly as high as 240/min.Cheers,