You can also use an existing song and increase/decrease the speed to fit your cadence. However when the next song starts, the gap between the songs often doesn't fit and ruins your cadence. That's why I prefer "natural metronome" an app for my phone. It is free, but the sound I like the most costs extra (not much). It's called "wood block".
Almost everyone who wants to adjust cadence wants more frequency. Strengthen the hip flexors (accelerators) and hamstrings (brakes) to get the feet moving quicker from toe off to foot strike. Done. If your quads and/or calfs get very tired while running, you actually want to strengthen the hip flexors and hamstrings to balance out the effort.
@@roderickhurley3624It only affects how the bpm of a song is displayed. If you search for 180 BPM songs, by default you will get songs between 177.5 and 182.5BPM. If you have it set to “Real” it will show e.g 179.3, while “Group” will show 180, since the song is the result of that search. It’s not terribly useful, I had some thought behind it but it was two years ago and I can’t recall it. 😝
@@Enkzan Hello, the generated playlist sounds super exciting! ... but I can't find it in Spotify either. It worked once when I clicked "create playlist" but when I modified the playlist and tried again, it didn't work anymore.
Strange how you accept the fact that elbow swings by top runners is OK to copy. That means it is OK to swing out (or what is most comfortable) rather than close to the body. But when anyone points out the demonstrable fact that a majority of runners (including top runners) have fewer injuries and better form as cadence approaches 180, you call it nonsense. Hmmm... It appears you do not grasp how 180 cadence can be a valuable training tool/benchmark AND that has NOTHING to do with what is the "best/right" cadence for a particular runner since they are (for the most part) not top runners.
You've taken his point out of context and missed a lot of nuance. His arm swinging video was about lateral movement and the energy taken to stop the swinging exceeding the lateral energy loss. He talks in other videos about the benefit of keeping your arms close to increase cadence.
@@davidharrison4615 Nope. I understand the context of the arm swinging video. The point I am making is referencing his double standard and cherry picking. His idea of downplaying 180 cadence represents his misunderstanding of how to use 180 cadence in training. The observational studies don't say that a runner should run at 180 spm. But, the studies do say that cadence around (or, as it approaches) 180 is more optimal. The term "optimal" is not to be confused with the "best" cadence since the fitness level or environment of the runner may prohibit a 180 cadence. Instead, "optimal" is the preferred training goal in more ideal conditions. And, that is the point he is missing or confused about when he writes off 180 cadence as nonsense.
And causation does not imply correlation. This statement that a “cadence” cures or reduces injuries is just flat out wrong. Runners that can hit higher cadences generally are more established runners and have worked on running form to remove faults/inefficiencies. However, less experienced runners generally cause themselves a lot more problems for any number of reasons (too much too soon; poor pacing; poorly fitted shoes; inability to listen to their body; etc).
@@jboz24 These studies (and others) say your (mostly) wrong when it relates to cadence. Cadence (as it relates to stride) and rate of increase in cadence is directly related to injury. uwnmbl.engr.wisc.edu/pubs/acsm10.pdf pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19915501/ www.abstractsonline.com/Plan/ViewAbstract.aspx?sKey=05638c80-ff0d-4a8f-bb3a-305181acca26&cKey=331499e8-0a57-46d7-beff-a31ef7ca8002&mKey=3eb8314a-ad3b-4c19-a614-2013255f7f19 What the studies say is this...: Increasing cadence reduces over striding. This in turns, reduces the chance of injury. And, none of them say increasing cadence does not cure anything.. Plus, I never said that. What I said is this (rephrased)...: Higher cadence is not an end in of itself. Higher cadence is an effective training tool that can help reduce injury potential and increase efficiency. That does not mean that higher cadence should be 180 spm for every runner because each runner has a different level of fitness and particular biomechanics as it relates to power production from push-off. HOWEVER, the observational studies show that as runners approach 180 spm, their chances of injury decline and efficiency of running increases. A 180 cadence is an important part of learning to run more effectively in situations where 180 may or may not be best. In other words, 180 spm is an optimal cadence benchmark but NOT necessarily the BEST. As for "causation and correlation", I have no clue how that relates to observational studies that reflect - facts... not causes or correlation. 180-ish cadence simply exists as a generally prolific area where efficient and effective running exists (in general). That is what makes it an effective training benchmark designed (if used correctly) to help improve running performance for most runners regardless of fitness level or experience. Don't read into the last previous sentence to say that runners should run at 180 cadence. But, rather it means this. Runners should try and achieve an optimal 180 spm at a a systematic rate of increase (i.e., 10% incr.) until the "best" cadence for that runner is found based on their fitness level and running environment. But, with the 180 spm being a consistent part of their training goal that is designed to achieve optimal running performance with less injury potential as fitness level increases.
WOOOOOAH how did this product NOT exist until now?
Absolutely brilliant!
OMG, I just finished a run with a Brothers of Metal playlist and it was the best ever! AND I got to my year-end quota of dragons, thank you!
Thank you for the Biitrunner recommendation. Will try it out today to create a playlist for my run tomorrow.
Thank you so much for this tip!
Fantastic idea!! Many thanks, using it already :]
You can also use an existing song and increase/decrease the speed to fit your cadence. However when the next song starts, the gap between the songs often doesn't fit and ruins your cadence. That's why I prefer "natural metronome" an app for my phone. It is free, but the sound I like the most costs extra (not much). It's called "wood block".
Almost everyone who wants to adjust cadence wants more frequency. Strengthen the hip flexors (accelerators) and hamstrings (brakes) to get the feet moving quicker from toe off to foot strike. Done. If your quads and/or calfs get very tired while running, you actually want to strengthen the hip flexors and hamstrings to balance out the effort.
You explain very nicely ❤
Dear creator of biitrunner ❤❤❤ Thank-you!
Hey! Creator of Biitrunner here. Please let me know if you have any issues. 😬
I can't find in Spotify
How do the "real" and "group" BPM settings work?
@@ValhallaGuildDid you click create playlist?
@@roderickhurley3624It only affects how the bpm of a song is displayed. If you search for 180 BPM songs, by default you will get songs between 177.5 and 182.5BPM. If you have it set to “Real” it will show e.g 179.3, while “Group” will show 180, since the song is the result of that search. It’s not terribly useful, I had some thought behind it but it was two years ago and I can’t recall it. 😝
@@Enkzan Hello, the generated playlist sounds super exciting! ... but I can't find it in Spotify either. It worked once when I clicked "create playlist" but when I modified the playlist and tried again, it didn't work anymore.
When running i must hear the birds singing and the sqiurrels farting😅
Thanks Frederick
Fredrik, be honest. Are you a member of Brothers of Metal? 🤘🏼 🎸 Thanks for the tip. 😂
demonstration would be good
I like running to music ❤
Ha, like The Office CPR episode. Ah - ah - ah - ah - stayin' alive - stayin' alive. For anyone that wants that sweet 100 bpm confident stride cadence.
or just get a metronome app and set the cadence you like :P
Congrats for the forerunner 965
Is there something similar if you dont have Spotify?
🤘
I very much doubt Kipchoge trains to Brothers of Metal... 😂
He listens to Kelly Clarkson...
i just play music and metronome at the same time
It's hard to get the tempo matched in time.
@@mnlw1363 you just gotta have to focus on only the metrome or the music.
BuT I DoN’t liKe ruNNinG to MuSic! 🤪
Strange how you accept the fact that elbow swings by top runners is OK to copy. That means it is OK to swing out (or what is most comfortable) rather than close to the body. But when anyone points out the demonstrable fact that a majority of runners (including top runners) have fewer injuries and better form as cadence approaches 180, you call it nonsense. Hmmm... It appears you do not grasp how 180 cadence can be a valuable training tool/benchmark AND that has NOTHING to do with what is the "best/right" cadence for a particular runner since they are (for the most part) not top runners.
You've taken his point out of context and missed a lot of nuance. His arm swinging video was about lateral movement and the energy taken to stop the swinging exceeding the lateral energy loss. He talks in other videos about the benefit of keeping your arms close to increase cadence.
@@davidharrison4615 Nope. I understand the context of the arm swinging video. The point I am making is referencing his double standard and cherry picking.
His idea of downplaying 180 cadence represents his misunderstanding of how to use 180 cadence in training. The observational studies don't say that a runner should run at 180 spm. But, the studies do say that cadence around (or, as it approaches) 180 is more optimal.
The term "optimal" is not to be confused with the "best" cadence since the fitness level or environment of the runner may prohibit a 180 cadence. Instead, "optimal" is the preferred training goal in more ideal conditions. And, that is the point he is missing or confused about when he writes off 180 cadence as nonsense.
And causation does not imply correlation. This statement that a “cadence” cures or reduces injuries is just flat out wrong. Runners that can hit higher cadences generally are more established runners and have worked on running form to remove faults/inefficiencies. However, less experienced runners generally cause themselves a lot more problems for any number of reasons (too much too soon; poor pacing; poorly fitted shoes; inability to listen to their body; etc).
@@jboz24 These studies (and others) say your (mostly) wrong when it relates to cadence. Cadence (as it relates to stride) and rate of increase in cadence is directly related to injury.
uwnmbl.engr.wisc.edu/pubs/acsm10.pdf
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19915501/
www.abstractsonline.com/Plan/ViewAbstract.aspx?sKey=05638c80-ff0d-4a8f-bb3a-305181acca26&cKey=331499e8-0a57-46d7-beff-a31ef7ca8002&mKey=3eb8314a-ad3b-4c19-a614-2013255f7f19
What the studies say is this...:
Increasing cadence reduces over striding. This in turns, reduces the chance of injury. And, none of them say increasing cadence does not cure anything.. Plus, I never said that.
What I said is this (rephrased)...:
Higher cadence is not an end in of itself. Higher cadence is an effective training tool that can help reduce injury potential and increase efficiency. That does not mean that higher cadence should be 180 spm for every runner because each runner has a different level of fitness and particular biomechanics as it relates to power production from push-off.
HOWEVER, the observational studies show that as runners approach 180 spm, their chances of injury decline and efficiency of running increases. A 180 cadence is an important part of learning to run more effectively in situations where 180 may or may not be best. In other words, 180 spm is an optimal cadence benchmark but NOT necessarily the BEST.
As for "causation and correlation", I have no clue how that relates to observational studies that reflect - facts... not causes or correlation.
180-ish cadence simply exists as a generally prolific area where efficient and effective running exists (in general). That is what makes it an effective training benchmark designed (if used correctly) to help improve running performance for most runners regardless of fitness level or experience.
Don't read into the last previous sentence to say that runners should run at 180 cadence. But, rather it means this.
Runners should try and achieve an optimal 180 spm at a a systematic rate of increase (i.e., 10% incr.) until the "best" cadence for that runner is found based on their fitness level and running environment. But, with the 180 spm being a consistent part of their training goal that is designed to achieve optimal running performance with less injury potential as fitness level increases.
lol