Ozzie Gontang
A Short 180 Steps/Minute to Improved Running Form and Style
c. 2001 Robert Grumbine, Denny Anderson, Oliver, Board, Tom Osborne, Miles Lakin, Brian Wakem, Bill
Cary, and Austin "Ozzie" Gontang, Ph.D.
In article <cCdP7.8326$Sf4.955828@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com>, "Brian Wakem"
<no@email.com> wrote:
> "bill cary" <blister_remove-spam-protection_@winternet.com> wrote in message
> news:3c0d236c.90696702@news.winternet.com...
> > I've read that 180 steps per minute is generally the most efficient stride rate for distance
> > running. Is this rate recomended for easy training runs also, or only for speed & races ? it
> > seems when i keep up this cadence on easy runs I end up running faster than my goal pace.
> >
> > Also, is 180 typical for men and women ? does being long legged / short legged change the
> > recommended rate ?
>
>
> I've tried running at 180 but it seems like a waste of energy. I feel much more comfortable at
> about 130-150, and run much faster at that pace. Although, I do have long legs, so maybe that has
> something to do with it.
>
> --
> Brian Wakem
1. Running at 180 steps/minute or 3 steps/second is directly related to lifting the knees and not
the whole center of gravity.
2. The 180 steps/minute require a ball/heel or midsole landing.
3. The heel always touches down since the ball/heel is the platform from which the body is
catapulted forward, or the leaf spring (ball/heel) that catches the body so that there is
minimal vertical motion. Watch a football player run through the holes in a set of tires on
the ground.
Tire Holes Ladder o _________________________________________ o | | | | | | | | | | | o
_________________________________________ o o o o o
or in between spaces between the rungs on a rope ladder placed on the ground. You realize that as
one foot is quickly lifted as gravity carries the body forward, the other foot is quickly placed
down so that the center of gravity is minimally moved vertically up...or down.
To do this one must land on the ball/heel.
4. The greater the lean or angle of falling forward measured from the ankle to the top of the head,
the foot must go through a larger/longer range of motion to keep the cadence. The cadence can
stay the same. It's just more work to get the foot through an increased range of motion.
5. To teach a slower runner to do 180 steps/minute, requires first having the runner
march in place.
5a. Experiment: I have just marched in place for two one-minute segments. The first minute of
marching in place without thinking about it was 184 steps in place in the first minute. I
started the second minute and got to 168 steps in the second minute. So this is how I start
people toward the 180 steps/minute. The next exercise is to do the same steps of marching in
place (notice that the knees lift up and down/the foot lands ball-heel/ 120 degree bentarms do
short swings-elbows swinging forward an inch or two) and then lean forward half a degree from
the ankle while keeping the body erect. Every step now lands an inch or two in front of the
other foot as gravity carries the body forward.
6. When the lean is a degree or two one has to run slowly with the steps now 5 inches to a foot
apart, one is aware that the center of gravity has to be lifted up so as to land lightly and be
able to recover as quickly.
7. Taking the heel striking runner back to their heel first after doing the above shows them that
they can't as easily and with minimal effort keep the 180 steps/minute going back of the heel
of the shoe first.
8. Gradually faster runners realize they can do 180 steps/minute at an 8 to 10 minute/mile pace and
they can run and socialize with slower runners while working out in good form and style. For the
first time many learn the secret of GAPO and how one is able to run a ten minute pace or a 6
minute pace and still do 180 steps/minute. Gradually they realize the wisdom of Breathing
Rhythms and how they can increase their cycles of air from 9 steps per in/out cycle to 3 steps
per in/out cycle to 2 steps per in/out cycle. They begin to enjoy playing with other heel
striking runners by keeping cadence with them and by their lean from the ankle maintain the
cadence of the heel striker and pull away from them. The heel striker speeds up, only to have
ball/heel runner pull away again without any effort. Ah, damn, what is the secret. What is it
that Denny and Robert know that many don't. Oh,"it seems like a waste of energy." "Must be it's
that they're just better runners" "They must be lying or trying to lead us astray."
9. But wait a minute, Robert said: "I'll note that the first few years I was in the group, I was
one of the people arguing that this (180 not truly being a general constant) was the case."
10 So if he's saying that, then he had to learn to do 180 steps a minute, which means he wasn't
doing it at one time.
10. Then Robert comes back and says: "More experience and observation has convinced me otherwise.
Since it took personal experience and observation for me to change my mind, I don't ask for
anyone else to just take my word. Keep your eyes open and experiment yourself. See where it
leads you, and enjoy the trip." Yo, he's talking folklore and experiment-of-one.
11. And then Tom Osborne chirped in: When my cadence was too fast...
There has been a thread about moving up to 180 or 185 steps per minute. My final thoughts on that
(as a trained mathematical physicist who is no longer one, and thinks complexity bites more people
on the bum than have ever realised it) is that "g" (9.8 m/sec^2) is responsible for 180 to 185 step
being optimal. This, in Ozzie language, is about how long you fall for (or how much you have to
rise/spring so you don't descend into the earth over one stride). If your cadence is too high you're
paying for accelerating and decellerating your limbs. If your cadence is too low, you pay for
stopping, starting and leaping/bounding (and risk joint damage).
There's an apparent argument about stride length, but that's not really material once you see a 5'2"
running and a 6'7" runner running at their best, with only a very slightly higher cadence for the
short legs.
Last year I determined that I was striding far slower than 180 step per minute and changed. I
changed so much, and drifted further, till about a month ago I found I was running at 195+ step per
minute. Very quick turnover. So I re-educated myself back to exactly 180..182, and conditioned
myself for the slow back. [The butt works differently at 180 vs 195, the calk does a bit more work
at 180, the top of the hamstring does a bit more at 180, the top of the front of thigh does a bit
less work at 180, ...].
I'd logged tempo runs, races and mini-time trials. Basically I found about 15 seconds per Km, which
I'd call economy plus more optimal form.
12. In response Ozzie replies:
Tom,
Repeating yourself is accepted as what you said and how you said it was worth the repeat. It's in my
180 steps/minute file to be woven into future dialogue. I'll accept that similar to Monty Python's
skit on don't say "Mattress" that your/our code word is calk for you know what muscle I mean that's
behind tibia and is the antagonist for the anterior tibialis. I was wondering what it is that you do
when you hear the word for our code word calk.
Thanks for your nicely worded illumination. I also now know why my gluts are often quiet sore and
bruised. At least you repeat it twice, I get caught and often cornered where I remain clear to
myself...until someone says: "What the hell did he say?"
I raise a glass to engagement, conversation and dialogue, breathing 4 out and 3 in, drinking
some iced water and digesting a meal I had several hours ago...while getting in my 10,000 steps
for the day.
13. Then Oliver throws in a few notes on cadence:
"With training, runners increase the length of their strides and reduce their stride frequency. Some
researchers believe that this optimizes running efficiency because increasing stride length is more
economical than increasing stride frequency" (from Noakes, "Lore of Running" p.31, who cites Nelson
& Gregor, "Biomechanics of Distance Running: A longitudinal study", Research Quarterly 1976)
"Very few runners overstride. Scientific studies have shown that the vast majority or runners
naturally select their optimal stride length. Runners almost always select the most economical
stride length for a given speed. Somehow, we all have a built-in ability to select the most
economical stride length. The few runners who overstride often do so because someone has told them
to increase their stride length." (from Pfitzinger & Douglas, "Advanced Marathoning": no mention of
what these "scientific studies" are).
14. And in closing out Robert answers insightfully again, following in the footsteps of Miles; a
compliment of high respect:
In article <gontang-ya02408000R0110011459210001@news.ixpres.com>, Ozzie Gontang
<gontang@electriciti.com> wrote:
>
>Here's a reply from Miles Lakin to Robert from back in April 1998:
=============reply clipped============
Note that back then I was still (I'd already been running for 2 years) one of the skeptics
regarding the 180 turnover.
Therein lies one of the principles: experiment as you're interested.
The main thing is to stay healthy, get out and run, and enjoy yourself.
Questions of stride rate, length, whether to hold your arms this way or that, head position, neck,
... pale in to trivia compared to the stay healthy, run, have fun items.
A different principle I'd heard was from a golf pro. That is, you can only work on one
mechanical/technique point at a time. As various folks have listed off, at one time or another, we
mention quite a lot of things to consider/experiment with. There is _no_ way you can consider them
all at once.
To that end, although I've thought about the entire list (probably) at one time or another, I only
think about one at a time during a training run. During a race, I don't think about any of them.
The training is to make it automatic. On race day, my attention is elsewhere.
It was ironic to see one of my points from my debates with Miles and Denny brought up by someone
else. That is the point of whether the 180 is descriptive (great runners do this, but they do it
because they are great runners) or prescriptive (this is something we all should do because it is
a better way to run). Since I'm now running comparable speeds to 3 years ago much of the time (my
training runs are about the same pace as ever, if anything perhaps a bit slower) and have
increased my LSD turnover from the 160 mentioned then to 175+ now, I'm more inclined to think it
is a prescriptive observation.
But then again, it's been three years that I've changed the turnover across. While I'm confident I
could not have reached my present mileage while remaining at the 160 or so (a reason I ran
relatively less often and shorter was recovery), I was nevertheless able to enjoy myself and get
out routinely.
Your mileage will definitely vary. A reminder: back in training for HAT, I mentioned that in
getting solid at 180 or so (175-185), I became able to run much slower without stress. Had been
that 20 seconds a mile slower than my normal LSD rapidly lead to strains/soreness. After getting
good at a smooth 180, I could run 1-3 minutes/mile slower without strain.
In health and on the run, Ozzie Gontang Maintainer - rec.running FAQ Director, San Diego Marathon
Clinic, est. 1975
Mindful Running: http://www.mindfulness.com/mr.asp http://www.faqs.org/faqs/running-faq/
c. 2001 Robert Grumbine, Denny Anderson, Oliver, Board, Tom Osborne, Miles Lakin, Brian Wakem, Bill
Cary, and Austin "Ozzie" Gontang, Ph.D.
In article <cCdP7.8326$Sf4.955828@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com>, "Brian Wakem"
<no@email.com> wrote:
> "bill cary" <blister_remove-spam-protection_@winternet.com> wrote in message
> news:3c0d236c.90696702@news.winternet.com...
> > I've read that 180 steps per minute is generally the most efficient stride rate for distance
> > running. Is this rate recomended for easy training runs also, or only for speed & races ? it
> > seems when i keep up this cadence on easy runs I end up running faster than my goal pace.
> >
> > Also, is 180 typical for men and women ? does being long legged / short legged change the
> > recommended rate ?
>
>
> I've tried running at 180 but it seems like a waste of energy. I feel much more comfortable at
> about 130-150, and run much faster at that pace. Although, I do have long legs, so maybe that has
> something to do with it.
>
> --
> Brian Wakem
1. Running at 180 steps/minute or 3 steps/second is directly related to lifting the knees and not
the whole center of gravity.
2. The 180 steps/minute require a ball/heel or midsole landing.
3. The heel always touches down since the ball/heel is the platform from which the body is
catapulted forward, or the leaf spring (ball/heel) that catches the body so that there is
minimal vertical motion. Watch a football player run through the holes in a set of tires on
the ground.
Tire Holes Ladder o _________________________________________ o | | | | | | | | | | | o
_________________________________________ o o o o o
or in between spaces between the rungs on a rope ladder placed on the ground. You realize that as
one foot is quickly lifted as gravity carries the body forward, the other foot is quickly placed
down so that the center of gravity is minimally moved vertically up...or down.
To do this one must land on the ball/heel.
4. The greater the lean or angle of falling forward measured from the ankle to the top of the head,
the foot must go through a larger/longer range of motion to keep the cadence. The cadence can
stay the same. It's just more work to get the foot through an increased range of motion.
5. To teach a slower runner to do 180 steps/minute, requires first having the runner
march in place.
5a. Experiment: I have just marched in place for two one-minute segments. The first minute of
marching in place without thinking about it was 184 steps in place in the first minute. I
started the second minute and got to 168 steps in the second minute. So this is how I start
people toward the 180 steps/minute. The next exercise is to do the same steps of marching in
place (notice that the knees lift up and down/the foot lands ball-heel/ 120 degree bentarms do
short swings-elbows swinging forward an inch or two) and then lean forward half a degree from
the ankle while keeping the body erect. Every step now lands an inch or two in front of the
other foot as gravity carries the body forward.
6. When the lean is a degree or two one has to run slowly with the steps now 5 inches to a foot
apart, one is aware that the center of gravity has to be lifted up so as to land lightly and be
able to recover as quickly.
7. Taking the heel striking runner back to their heel first after doing the above shows them that
they can't as easily and with minimal effort keep the 180 steps/minute going back of the heel
of the shoe first.
8. Gradually faster runners realize they can do 180 steps/minute at an 8 to 10 minute/mile pace and
they can run and socialize with slower runners while working out in good form and style. For the
first time many learn the secret of GAPO and how one is able to run a ten minute pace or a 6
minute pace and still do 180 steps/minute. Gradually they realize the wisdom of Breathing
Rhythms and how they can increase their cycles of air from 9 steps per in/out cycle to 3 steps
per in/out cycle to 2 steps per in/out cycle. They begin to enjoy playing with other heel
striking runners by keeping cadence with them and by their lean from the ankle maintain the
cadence of the heel striker and pull away from them. The heel striker speeds up, only to have
ball/heel runner pull away again without any effort. Ah, damn, what is the secret. What is it
that Denny and Robert know that many don't. Oh,"it seems like a waste of energy." "Must be it's
that they're just better runners" "They must be lying or trying to lead us astray."
9. But wait a minute, Robert said: "I'll note that the first few years I was in the group, I was
one of the people arguing that this (180 not truly being a general constant) was the case."
10 So if he's saying that, then he had to learn to do 180 steps a minute, which means he wasn't
doing it at one time.
10. Then Robert comes back and says: "More experience and observation has convinced me otherwise.
Since it took personal experience and observation for me to change my mind, I don't ask for
anyone else to just take my word. Keep your eyes open and experiment yourself. See where it
leads you, and enjoy the trip." Yo, he's talking folklore and experiment-of-one.
11. And then Tom Osborne chirped in: When my cadence was too fast...
There has been a thread about moving up to 180 or 185 steps per minute. My final thoughts on that
(as a trained mathematical physicist who is no longer one, and thinks complexity bites more people
on the bum than have ever realised it) is that "g" (9.8 m/sec^2) is responsible for 180 to 185 step
being optimal. This, in Ozzie language, is about how long you fall for (or how much you have to
rise/spring so you don't descend into the earth over one stride). If your cadence is too high you're
paying for accelerating and decellerating your limbs. If your cadence is too low, you pay for
stopping, starting and leaping/bounding (and risk joint damage).
There's an apparent argument about stride length, but that's not really material once you see a 5'2"
running and a 6'7" runner running at their best, with only a very slightly higher cadence for the
short legs.
Last year I determined that I was striding far slower than 180 step per minute and changed. I
changed so much, and drifted further, till about a month ago I found I was running at 195+ step per
minute. Very quick turnover. So I re-educated myself back to exactly 180..182, and conditioned
myself for the slow back. [The butt works differently at 180 vs 195, the calk does a bit more work
at 180, the top of the hamstring does a bit more at 180, the top of the front of thigh does a bit
less work at 180, ...].
I'd logged tempo runs, races and mini-time trials. Basically I found about 15 seconds per Km, which
I'd call economy plus more optimal form.
12. In response Ozzie replies:
Tom,
Repeating yourself is accepted as what you said and how you said it was worth the repeat. It's in my
180 steps/minute file to be woven into future dialogue. I'll accept that similar to Monty Python's
skit on don't say "Mattress" that your/our code word is calk for you know what muscle I mean that's
behind tibia and is the antagonist for the anterior tibialis. I was wondering what it is that you do
when you hear the word for our code word calk.
Thanks for your nicely worded illumination. I also now know why my gluts are often quiet sore and
bruised. At least you repeat it twice, I get caught and often cornered where I remain clear to
myself...until someone says: "What the hell did he say?"
I raise a glass to engagement, conversation and dialogue, breathing 4 out and 3 in, drinking
some iced water and digesting a meal I had several hours ago...while getting in my 10,000 steps
for the day.
13. Then Oliver throws in a few notes on cadence:
"With training, runners increase the length of their strides and reduce their stride frequency. Some
researchers believe that this optimizes running efficiency because increasing stride length is more
economical than increasing stride frequency" (from Noakes, "Lore of Running" p.31, who cites Nelson
& Gregor, "Biomechanics of Distance Running: A longitudinal study", Research Quarterly 1976)
"Very few runners overstride. Scientific studies have shown that the vast majority or runners
naturally select their optimal stride length. Runners almost always select the most economical
stride length for a given speed. Somehow, we all have a built-in ability to select the most
economical stride length. The few runners who overstride often do so because someone has told them
to increase their stride length." (from Pfitzinger & Douglas, "Advanced Marathoning": no mention of
what these "scientific studies" are).
14. And in closing out Robert answers insightfully again, following in the footsteps of Miles; a
compliment of high respect:
In article <gontang-ya02408000R0110011459210001@news.ixpres.com>, Ozzie Gontang
<gontang@electriciti.com> wrote:
>
>Here's a reply from Miles Lakin to Robert from back in April 1998:
=============reply clipped============
Note that back then I was still (I'd already been running for 2 years) one of the skeptics
regarding the 180 turnover.
Therein lies one of the principles: experiment as you're interested.
The main thing is to stay healthy, get out and run, and enjoy yourself.
Questions of stride rate, length, whether to hold your arms this way or that, head position, neck,
... pale in to trivia compared to the stay healthy, run, have fun items.
A different principle I'd heard was from a golf pro. That is, you can only work on one
mechanical/technique point at a time. As various folks have listed off, at one time or another, we
mention quite a lot of things to consider/experiment with. There is _no_ way you can consider them
all at once.
To that end, although I've thought about the entire list (probably) at one time or another, I only
think about one at a time during a training run. During a race, I don't think about any of them.
The training is to make it automatic. On race day, my attention is elsewhere.
It was ironic to see one of my points from my debates with Miles and Denny brought up by someone
else. That is the point of whether the 180 is descriptive (great runners do this, but they do it
because they are great runners) or prescriptive (this is something we all should do because it is
a better way to run). Since I'm now running comparable speeds to 3 years ago much of the time (my
training runs are about the same pace as ever, if anything perhaps a bit slower) and have
increased my LSD turnover from the 160 mentioned then to 175+ now, I'm more inclined to think it
is a prescriptive observation.
But then again, it's been three years that I've changed the turnover across. While I'm confident I
could not have reached my present mileage while remaining at the 160 or so (a reason I ran
relatively less often and shorter was recovery), I was nevertheless able to enjoy myself and get
out routinely.
Your mileage will definitely vary. A reminder: back in training for HAT, I mentioned that in
getting solid at 180 or so (175-185), I became able to run much slower without stress. Had been
that 20 seconds a mile slower than my normal LSD rapidly lead to strains/soreness. After getting
good at a smooth 180, I could run 1-3 minutes/mile slower without strain.
In health and on the run, Ozzie Gontang Maintainer - rec.running FAQ Director, San Diego Marathon
Clinic, est. 1975
Mindful Running: http://www.mindfulness.com/mr.asp http://www.faqs.org/faqs/running-faq/
