Some improvement running at Bethpage

Making strides

Today's run (Bethpage trail): 5.1 miles

I'm happy to report that I was not the dog's dinner on today's run. I wanted to break away from my neighborhood and headed over to Bethpage to run the bike trail. I know I should be running 6 or more miles at least once a week to raise my base, but that hasn't been happening. I wasn't prepared to do six today, but I thought five was reasonable.

With 9 MPH winds, the real-feel temperature was 42°, although it felt much chillier. If my running jacket hadn't been ruined yesterday, I may have worn it as a top layer. I was lucky not to have that option because I heated up a lot as I progressed. By the end, I was regretting my second layer, hat and gloves.

The run went okay, but the hilly route felt ponderous. I felt a little rough throughout the first half mile and realized that I'd only covered a tenth of my targeted distance. I hoped that my aerobic engine would soon kick in. I cruised along, tolerating the ups and downs of the rolling course and dreading the mini-mountain I knew I'd need to climb at the start of my last mile.

Most of the run was at my usual speed but, near the end, I began experimenting with different pacing. I shortened my stride and increased my cadence while maintaining the same level of effort. I didn't know this at that time, but this change provided a measurable improvement in my pace.

I don't know if I can permanently adapt to this running style, but if I'm successful, I should be able to improve on my current performance. I plan to try doing it for longer periods in hopes that it will begin to feel more natural.

The two dimensions of running speed

Sample combinations

Today's run (street): 3.4 miles

I was looking at the metrics of today's run on Garmin Connect and thinking about the factors that determine pace. I recently put a new battery into my foot pod so I can capture my cadence as well as time, pace, heart rate and elevation. Besides steps per minute (SPM), the foot pod also shows average stride length. After looking at new and past data, I'm seeing some correlation to pace.

When you think about it, running speed is controlled by two factors -- how far you are propelled with each step and the frequency of these steps. As an example, last year I ran the Hot Chocolate 5K averaging 178 SPM, but with an average stride length of 1.03 meters. That translated to an 8:46 pace. A month later I did the LIRCC Hangover Run averaging 172 SPM and .95 meter stride length and averaged 9:50. Fairly small differences translated into almost a minute difference in pace.

Interestingly, my data shows when I run intervals, my stride length drops to half a meter. However, average cadence jumps up to 188. That usually results in an 8:00 pace or better. I've read that, to improve performance, increasing cadence is a better approach than increasing stride length. I'm sure that's due to the danger of over striding which can put excessive pressure on the knees, tendons and ligaments.

Today both my cadence and stride length were middling and I ended up pacing in the mid 10's. That was by design as I wanted to minimize wear and tear on the muscles that may be aggravating my sciatica. Once I'm past this annoyance I'll start playing more with cadence and will try to make my way to the ideal (180 SPM). I'd like to run some intervals this week get that started, but I want to make sure I don't do more harm than good.

Great weather, great run, weird cadence

Curious cadence

Today's run (street): 3.4 miles

This morning's weather was nearly perfect for a run. I needed to go out early due to today's business schedule. It was still dark when I got ready and I considered starting my run with a head lamp. I managed to stall long enough to do without it. I was out the door a little after 7:00 and ready to run.

I had a lot of trouble falling asleep last night. It was probably because I drank so much coffee that morning during breakfast. With that, I expected to be tired. Instead, I was fully energized and was able to maintain a decent pace from the beginning. I give most of the credit to the weather that kept me cool and dry. Perhaps some credit goes to all the standing I've been doing while working.

I ended up with the best performance I've seen in weeks. While I'm encouraged by this, I know it could be related to the circumstances of the day. I ended up with some puzzling data about my cadence, as Garmin reported my SPM to be less than 30% of normal. Not only that, Garmin reported my average stride at 3.15 meters (10.3 feet). Perhaps it's time for a new battery in the foot pod.

Tomorrow morning's schedule is busy and I'm left with little choice but to do another early morning neighborhood run. I'm hoping that I can finally get together with my Runska-buddies on Sunday, but it sounds like we may need to wait until next weekend.

It's JavaScript's fault that I ran slow

What I've been staring at 

Today's run (street): 3.2 miles

I have a consulting practice that focuses on digital media business and technology. I'm in the process of expanding my portfolio of services. That involves including more strategic partners and re-branding my website. I'm spending time on the development site whenever I can fit it in. Although I get input from my partners, I'm handling both the web design and the technology. This is fun for me, but staring at HTML and JavaScript code for hours really wears me out.

I'm hoping that will explain the gap between my perceived effort (PE) on today's run and my actual performance. I didn't expect to see impressive numbers when I checked my Garmin after my run, but I ended up running over a minute slower than how the run felt. It was a more challenging workout than I'd anticipated. It was also a sign that I haven't gained back as much speed as I hoped I would by now.

It was interesting to see that the Garmin data showed that my average cadence was up measurably, compared to my last few runs (174 vs. 168 SPM). So my turnover was good. Had I opened up my stride a little more, my pace time would have likely reflected my PE. It's something to think about on my next run. But I won't be thinking about it until Saturday, because Hal gives me a rest day tomorrow. Great, more time to code my site.

Another run on that thing

 

Today's run (treadmill): 40 minutes

Not long ago, I was having lunch with some business friends who also said they ran. I espoused trail running and another friend mentioned how much he loved running in Prospect Park. Our other colleague said that he did a five mile run every day on his treadmill. I asked him if he ever ran outdoors. He said that he lived adjacent to a wooded bike trail, but still preferred running on the treadmill. I couldn't understand that at all.

To be fair, my wife does 45 minutes on the treadmill almost every day and it works for her. Time is important and the treadmill is very efficient. No ten minute process to put on layers and other gear when it's cold outside. There's even a timer to help her keep her schedule to the minute. Knowing this, I should have been more understanding of my friend. But he has a trail in his back yard.

Yesterday was devoted to meeting a tight deadline and that meant starting at 5:30 AM to ensure that I'd complete what was needed by 5:30 PM. There was no time for a run and I was okay with that. This morning I had more flexibility and planned to go out in the 24° cold, but my wife warned me that the roads were extremely icy. I have enough concerns about sanitation trucks, school buses and bad drivers in my neighborhood that I don't like to increase my risk with slick roads. So it was back to the treadmill.

 

I think the treadmill seems harder because it forces a higher cadence relative to stride length. In other words, if I require 174 SPM to maintain a nine minute pace on the road, I may need to run 177 or more SPM to manage the same pace on the treadmill. It's a lot of extra work to get to the same speed. Still, training at a higher cadence might yield a benefit that I can leverage outdoors. Until they put a bike path through my backyard, I guess I'll be stuck on that thing from time to time.

Running views and visualizations

Sure looked like fall along the trail

Today's run (Bethpage): 6.25 miles

The Hope for Warriors 10K next weekend prompted me to head to Bethpage this morning for a base run. I've plateaued on distance since Cow Harbor, having completed only a handful of 5+ mile runs since that race. After a week of rainy and windy conditions, today's clear, dry 57° weather made a run at Bethpage very appealing.

More scenes from today's run

When I arrived I saw that the right side of the lot was fairly full. There were lots of people with bikes and I wondered if there was a cycling event planned. I don't think it was anything that formal, although there were a lot more bikers on the trail than I usually see. Considering the density of cyclists on the path, along with many runners and a good number of walkers, I encountered few reckless riders.

With my headache and sinus pressure gone, I felt good energy along the trail and felt less intimidated than usual by the big hills. That isn't to say that I particularly enjoyed them. My plan was run 5K south and turn around at the 3.1 mile mark. It works for me to break a middle or long distance run into parts. For that same reason, I like to familiarize myself with a race course before running it for the first time. It's always valuable to understand the challenges of the course before you face them for real.

New Garmin Connect cadence graph

I didn't dog the pace but I wasn't looking to simulate race conditions either. The purpose of this run was to get a 10K distance under my belt close to the real thing a week from Sunday. When I downloaded my Garmin after the run, I saw that they'd changed the data visualization on Connect and added a new metric: average stride length. Better still, the site has a pop-up that helps explain SPM and running dynamics. I felt good when I read this in the explanation: "The data values in the green, blue, or purple zones are typical for more experienced or faster runners."

Good context on cadence

Ideally, I'll see less green and more blue data points as I work to increase my cadence. Races tend to bring out our best performances (my recent history excepted) so I might even get myself into purple territory next week.

A good run today, but what have I done?

Maybe I should have thought this out

Today's run (street): 3.3 miles

Despite having my Garmin GPS, heart rate monitor and foot pod on my run today, I felt like a purist. That's because I chose not to use the metronome app. Instead, I tried to meet my targeted cadence only by feel. Like the old joke about hitting yourself in the head with a hammer because it feels so good when you stop, today's run felt extra peaceful without all that beeping.

This change seemed to pay off, as I hit 87 SPM just by focusing on a brisk cadence. I felt some awkwardness in my gait for the first 20 minutes of the run, but still achieved a mid-9:00 pace in the process. I'll take that for now. I think I understand how much harder I'll need to push to get more improvement.

Things have gotten busier in terms of work and I spent much of the day on my laptop. I did take a break before lunch and got a flu shot a the local pharmacy. Although the CDC claims that flu shots don't make you ill, last year I felt very run down a couple of days after getting mine. I really hope that was just a coincidence. But if I have any bad workouts later in the week, I'll know what to blame.

Despite real evidence, a puzzle remains

Cadence confirmed

Today's run (5.3 miles)

This morning's run brought me closer to understanding the impact of the metronome, but there is still a missing piece of the puzzle. I put a new battery in my foot pod and clipped it to my shoe for the first time since I bought my Garmin FR210 in May 2011. The FR210 uses GPS, but the foot pod allows me to capture my cadence during my run. It's a metric I've missed having when I analyze my performance data.

The good news is that I now have proof that the metronome works. I set the app for 87 SPM before I started and the data shows I averaged exactly that on today's run. This is no coincidence. I have mounds of pre-FR210 data that shows that (at best) I used to average 83 SPM on a training run. The cause and effect of the metronome's beat could not be clearer. All I have to do is jump it up to 90 SPM and my performance is optimized. Problem solved!

(Cue sound of record scratch)

What? That's not the whole story?!! Indeed it is not. While there seems to be evidence supporting the effectiveness of a metronome, the result of today's 87 SPM performance was an average pace of 9:42 per mile. I measured my route using two different browsers (Milemeter is behaving much better now) and they were pretty consistent, so I'm going with that pace. So cadence improves, and my pace gets worse. Huh?

The last puzzle piece clearly involves stride length. It's likely that I'm achieving my SPM target by maintaining a shorter stride. It makes sense that opening stride length with an increasingly higher cadence will bring my pace down to my targeted level. Sounds easy, but we all know the danger of over striding. I think I'll take one victory at a time and work my way up to 90/180 SPM and see what that gets me. Once I can do that consistently (and without the need for a metronome), I can start experimenting with stride technique.

Treadmill theory disproved

Cadence is key

Today's run (street): 2.5 miles

I counted my steps during a recent treadmill run to confirm a theory I have about cadence. My hypothesis was that I typically achieve a higher cadence when running on the machine (compared to the road), because the restricted area of the treadmill forces a shorter stride. I thought that might be the reason why a moderate pace on the road feels much faster indoors.

The results of my test surprised me. At 6.5 mph on the treadmill, my strides per minute (SPM) count was 166. That was based on counting steps for 30 seconds and doubling the result. The ideal SPM number is 180 and that explains why I'm not that fast. I was a little surprised to see my theory disproved, but I also felt that my turnover was fairly rapid, considering the results. But the stopwatch doesn't lie.

I took my new test shoes out on the road for the first time today and really liked the experience. Despite feeling great throughout my run, my time was solidly average. I thought about focusing on cadence, but honestly, I didn't feel like pushing very hard at 4:00 AM.

I'm finally realizing that if I want to go faster I have to do the work. There's no easy trick for increasing speed and cadence. It's not better engineered shoes or energy supplements. It takes interval training sessions and frequent workouts that push me past my comfort zone. Some people see those things as part of the fun of running. I'm not quite there yet.

Garmins only work when you bother to turn them on

Today's run (street): 2.5 miles

With only a couple of days left on my taper, I went out this morning with the goal of bettering yesterday's performance. I was pleased with how I ran on Tuesday so I maintained a slightly longer stride this morning. I listened to my internal metronome at 2/2 time, in hopes of keeping my SPM in the mid to high 80's.
When I was approaching what I'd guess was the 3/4 mark of my first mile, I heard my Garmin chirp. I saw that the watch was going into power reserve mode. Apparently, I never hit the start button when I began to run. I was annoyed, but I decided to run without tracking my time rather than start tracking it at that point. Still, I had a pretty good idea of how long I'd run because I began my run right at 4:00 AM.
Despite having no measurement tool, I pushed my pace using my effort level as a guide to my performance. Given my distance that I measured using Gmaps, I ran approximately the same as yesterday, which is to say, well. Tomorrow will be my final run before my workout and I plan to take that easy. No need to invite injury this late in the game.

Taking performance in stride

Today's run (street): 2.5 miles

I'm not sure why, but I've woken up with more energy this week than normal. I don't feel like I'm sleeping any better, but once I'm up, I'm good to go. That helped today when I prepared to go out for my run at 4:00 AM. I felt ready, willing and able. Maybe it's the cooler weather.

I hit the road focused on form, paying particular attention to my stride length. It still puzzles me why I don't run faster than I do, and I think I may improve speed by opening up my stride. My Garmin 210 doesn't capture cadence so it's hard to know how I'm doing in terms of achieving 180 SPM. I suppose I could count steps but I find that hard to do accurately.

I ended up having one of my better 4:00 AM runs today and averaged 15 seconds per mile faster than usual. I had plenty of energy to draw on throughout the run and still had much in reserve. Opening my stride helped me move along better than I have in recent runs. If I can feel the same way on Saturday morning, I may just meet my target splits for Cow Harbor.

Is cadence the key?

Not quite stepping lively

Today's run (treadmill): 2.51 miles

I had lunch yesterday with a friend, TC, who's just been granted entry to the NY Marathon after being accepted as a charity runner by the Boomer Esiason Foundation (Cystic Fibrosis). TC is about to start serious training and he asked me to help him set up his Garmin FR60 on Garmin Connect. Although TC has been using this watch for months, he's never uploaded his runs. I had no idea that the FR60 could hold 90 workouts but that's what was uploaded. It was interesting to see his runs displayed on Connect. I couldn't help but compare his typical pacing and cadence to mine. It wasn't much comparison though. He seems to average 90 SPM while I'm happy when I exceed 84.

I thought about cadence this morning as I ran on the treadmill. I'm past thinking that any one thing (core exercise, LSD, tempos, Chia) will produce measurable improvement. However, it seems logical that an increase in cadence would align with an increase in running speed. As I worked my way up from my easy start, I was curious to know if my cadence would increase as I moved my pace from 9:50 to 8:50 over my run. After the run I realized that the FR 210 doesn't capture cadence data off the foot pod so I'll never know how I did for SPM today. I guess I'll need to revert to the FR60 for treadmill runs in the future.