I notice your cadence is quite high even on a trail run like this -- in the 90's. Mine is much lower in the 70's unless I'm doing intervals on the track. Others may run in the 80's. Do you consciously keep your cadence high, or is it just your natural style? I do find a higher turnover generally means I'm running at a higher speed and putting out more effort.
It's my hip aching, so I try to reduce the length of the down-ward stride to lessen the weight impact. I used to have around an 80 - or it is a faulty Garmin - it is in my fannypack b/c the armband is busted - how does it pick up the cadence anyway?
--- !! Forgot what I wrote. Looking back at my earlier trail runs - whenever I do tempo I have cadence > 90 - Makes sense : striding longer would make me stumble for sure.
I'm the guy averaging 155, Ernst is up there at 205, except he's going a lot faster.
I'm usually around 180 on easy terrain, more like 165-170 orienteering or if my legs are tired.
kensr> I'm the guy averaging 155, Ernst is up there at 205, except he's going a lot faster.
Exactly, as the article says, smaller stature = shorter legs = higher cadence. Another factor they mention is pace, where faster pace = higher cadence, so that’s two reasons to expect ernst to have a significantly higher cadence than kensr (or o-maps).
They mention a couple of other factors, but I think the main point of the article is that there is also significant individual variance which cannot be explained (at least according to the current state of the art, as far as the authors are aware) by any factor they can measure. As their subtitle says, “Stop overthinking your running cadence.”
I was going to say but then the last sentence. Going up or down grade is another factor. "Just do it" as the saying goes.
All true, but it's nice to have something to think about while running besides current affairs.