Running

Apologies if repost:

Barefoot Running Club - YouTube

Strava are doing some running challenges, I just saw. This month's is to run a half. I just joined and it marked me "completed" straight away. I think that's the only Strava challenge I've ever completed and it took less than a second. Deflating.

Next month is 20 miles in one go, then April is a full marathon.

Here are the links: http://blog.strava.com/join-the-marathon-training-series-5526/

Ha, done. As you say, something of a letdown. Still, 20 and Mara will be good and will sync nicely with London

Talking of racing: Surrey league at Wimbledon, anyone? Guy in our club was running on the common at the weekend and said it was very boggy.

Bramley 20 is a good race to try out if you're running a spring marathon - 2 laps of 10 miles, good fairly flat course, mostly traffic free, chip timing, regular water & energy stops, lots of goodies (bag, cake, other food, can of coke etc) and decent medal to show for it.

It was a bit demoralising though carrying on at the 10 mile point whilst everyone else around me stopped for a lie down. (they run a 10 mile race at the same time)

8miles last night in the wind.
End of report

10k this morning trying to keep my cadence over 95 for the last 3k - it hurt.

I do have the advantage of very short legs...

Seems to use the muscles in a different way, as there is much less impact and the individual efforts are less as momentum is maintained much more than my usual 80-85 rangem

First time that I've used the data coming from my foot pod for anything other than "oh that's interesting"

^That's the barefoot running strategy, ofc. High cadence, low impact. I find it combines well with commuting on a low gear ratio ;-) Can be comical to see the effect on walkers, when you approach from behind; it sounds as if you're running faster than you actually are.

For me, cadence of 95 (by which I do hope you mean 190 steps ;-) ) would mean around 7.5 miles an hour. Don't know how it translates for you. Another parallel between barefoot and fixed is that cadence maps closely to speed; lengthening the stride is not really an option.

I noticed my average is between 83 and 85 and trying to get closer to 90 is actually very hard, I couldn't imagine getting over 95 for 3K. I also have the advantage of long legs but I'd like to improve on this aspect.

Itsbruce I have no idea, its just what my garmin says so I don't know if that's half of total or total!

Truemilk, it requires a really concious effort to run with shorter steps, the barefoot theory is that you land your foot practically under your body rather than in front.

8miles last night in the wind.
End of report

rep

Itsbruce I have no idea, its just what my garmin says so I don't know if that's half of total or total!

If it also reports the number of steps, you can work it out. Just divide number of steps by minutes run, then compare to cadence; should be twice the cadence figure.

posted on that grauniad blog but its vanished....
maybe I was too enthusiastic not warrior enough?

I land on the ball of my foot and try to keep the landing point as close as possible to my barycenter. I am definitely not a heel striker anymore (it took a good 6 months las year to switch from heel to fore/midfoot strike). Still I am struggling to maintain a high frequency but I guess I should just keep trying to get used.

itsbruce: the cadence with the garmin footpod is definitely based on strides, not steps. the footpod is on one foot only, then you have to multiply by 2 so yes, it makes sense.

Question for garmin footpod users:

which one is more reliable as speed source betwrrn GPS and footpot where both are present?

EDIT: provided the footpod has been calibrated, that is.

Footpod is definitely more consistent, although I've never bothered calibrating mine.

Be aware though, that as far as I can tell it won't make your uploads to garmin connect or strava etc any more accurate since they appear to rely solely on the gps.

Gps is more accurate for me, but again I haven't calibrated it.

Footpod was about 1km short on 10km for me...

Where do you get the distance measured by the footpod? I'm using mine with a forerunner 405cx and thought it was only used to show pace and cadence?

Even since getting the footpod, the end of my regular 5k route still varies by up to 1/10th mile, which I assumed was cos distance was still derived from GPS.

Mine gives me the option at the start of each run whether to use the footpod for distance or wait for gps.

According to Garmin's manuals/forums if you disable the GPS at the beginning of the run (my 610 calls it 'indoor mode') everything is saved from the footpod.
If GPS and footpod are enabled it's possible to select the speed source which is only used for instant pace, the total distance and the average pace is always saved from the GPS track, if active.

The interwebs suggest to use GPS as it's more precise on long runs, although instant pace showed by the footpod might be more smooth and consistent (unless it's used indoor on a treadmill, of course).

^That's the barefoot running strategy, ofc. High cadence, low impact...

...the barefoot theory is that you land your foot practically under your body rather than in front.

Not just barefoot but all forms of running. It's simply more efficient.

Foot strike is merely a personal thing though. Some people benefit greatly from moving to a more midfoot strike. Others (I know a few pretty quick guys in my club) actually find running this way hinders their speed and ability to run with a fast cadence. Each to their own in this respect.

I just did my weekly run with a mate from work. He has a strong running background, so it is good for me to guage my running fitness against him.

Like truemilk, I have been changing my running style to land forefoot and after 5-7 months it is now a natural way to run.

Our lunch run is from Chancery Lane, up to Regents Park, a lap of the park (outer ring on the road where we HoP) and back. It is 6.5 miles. Todays total time was 39.35 with the lap of the park (gate to gate 2.90 miles) in 17mins 18secs. We are both doing the Greenwich Park 10k in March. Never looked forward to running, but I am now looking forward to the 10k.

Have realised recently I have underestimated how 'good' running makes me feel.

Ok, so Mark at Runners Need was SUPER helpful. Let me try out about five pairs on the treadmill. My right foot was splodging right over to the left on landing (over-pronating?) so he showed me some more supportive shoes. He also warned about changing things this close to be marathon. I think we went for a happy medium pair, with a little more stability, but not massively different from my LunarGlide 2s. Forget what they were called. But they're blue! £95 though. Ouch.

Buy them online. Send Mark at Runners Need some nice chocolates as thanks for his help.