180 steps/min is NOT the optimal cadence for all runners - Myths of Running

Yes, many recreational runners have a slightly too low cadence when they run. But that doesn't mean that everyone has to have a higher cadence and it certainly doesn't mean that 180 steps per minute is some kind of optimal cadence. It can be good, but it can also be bad. What is optimal depends on a wide range of factors. What are they? Watch the video and you'll see.
___________________________________________________

Fredrik Zillén is an running technique specialist that has over the years helped thousands of runners to a more efficient running technique - from the slowest beginners to members of the Swedish national team in running and triathlon who have participated in the World Championships and the Olympics. Fredrik also writes articles on effective running technique for Runner's World magazine.

"Fantastic running course. Fredrik is an excellent teacher with a unique approach. I highly recommend this course to runners of all levels."
Kevin, UK

"The best money I have ever spent. Great mix of humour, practical technique and theory. It’s brilliant and I have been telling all my friends about it. I’ve knocked 30 secs off my average pace to 4:30 and at 53 I’m absolutely astonished how relaxed I feel running. It’s also really helped my cycling my adapting similar techniques and visualisation. Thanks so much."
Paul, UK

"Just wanted to say Im 2/3 through your running program and WOW what an insane difference".
Runner, Texas, USA

”I have done the first two audio lessons now. It's amazing what a difference you made for me. I ran 90 minutes yesterday and have never felt so refreshed both during and after the workout, and then I have never run so fast with the same low heart rate. Thanks for that!!”
Update from a runner after two of the six audio lessons

"I can honestly say it is some of the clearest and best instruction I have ever recieved in any topic. After a year of shin splints I went for a run yesterday and was almost in (joyful) tears because I had zero pain, so thank you!!"
Andrew

”I got your online course and it almost instantly fixed my running form. I can prove that by having half an hour faster marathon finishing time.”
Runner, Indonesia

"I knew nothing about running other than put one foot forward in front of the other...and fast. Then I signed up for his course. Mind blowing!... and too cheap if you ask me. Totally recommend it."
Runner

[xuchenglin]

Man you are so underrated! Your content does bring a breeze to the running youtuber scene.
Just to share my own experience with the cadence: When I first started running, as an unset adult, little bit overweight, we were told that we should shorten our stride length, focus on a high cadence, namely 180+, the higher the better. I do have to note that this advice works out pretty well especially for beginners because the short stride length / high cadence model puts less stress to the muscle and joints, hence it enables more people, who could barely run 2K, to be able to actually jog several miles injury free. It transfers loads from your muscle and joint to your cardio system, which is not a bad thing at all for beginners, because that means you could run longer with a higher cardio effort, which improves aerobic fitness. You can't improve much if you can't run beyond 1K. High cadence model enables more running time -> improved aerobic fitness and speed.


However the thing is when you have a reasonably good aerobic fitness and want to go even faster, the high cadence / short stride model is self-limiting. The hilarious experience of my own from last year is, when I tried to run a 5K PB at 22:00, I find myself "running out of revs" at a cadence of 210. I just can't imagine how funny I would be if someone was there out filming me. One guy that runs not particularly fast but moves his legs like those cartoon figures. The real problem here is, you can only increase your cadence so much, no one even the pros could run a 230 cadence, it's impossible and you can feel it. The cardio just explode and HR is 200 bpm+. So the question is, how could I get even faster??? 230 bpm is only 10% faster than 210 bpm, so theoritically the fastest I can go is 20:00 5K, but people are running 18:00 5K and it's not even considered "that fast". So how could I do that?? This is a big ask and as a result I almost completely changed my form from that 200 spm fast "jogging" to 170 bpm "moderate running", with a much longer stride length and more power coming from the muscles. And once that change is completed, I get a lot more faster and it just opens so much more room to improvement.

So I guess this cadence myth does have its base and once you are out of the "starting villiage of noobs" you are free to explore options other than that. You can't be so wrong to follow 180 bpm when you just start running, actually that's good tips that makes a difference to a lot of people. However that's just not the case when you are out of that beginner phase.

[pmhwong]

When I first got a Garmin watch, I found that I had a running cadence in the 160s.
Then I strived to aim for a cadence of 180 by deliberately trying to run faster.
Which felt stupid because I felt like I was trying to sprint while jogging.
Thanks for clearing things up!

[MysteriusB]

One of my favorite channels. Humor + amazing advice! Makes running technique both fun and interested

[TheDeclancox]

Finally, some common sense in this debate, thank you Fredrik 😊

[rturrado]

Great explanation, thanks!

Just a constructive opinion: there are a couple of very loud sounds (red screens, NO screen) that do not help at all with the rest of the video experience. I'd actually make your voice sounds a bit louder (and reduce those other noises considerably). Good work anyway!

[Thomas-dpeb]

Might not be true for everyone but I have found that I have the lowest hr at the same pace at about 180-182

[docmartin]

Thank you so much for taking deep dives into running biomechanics. I have been looking for information like this for years and it’s nowhere to be found or at least buried beneath a lot of bullshit.

[TheSutov]

Cadence is in connection with BMI: same height, same speed in two runners with different BMI shows different cadence, wich is proportionate to weight. It is because the leg return and other contrary motions in the body spend more energy and do heavier work in higher BMI case. The lesser fat index at same BMI/HEIGHT/SPEED runners, the higher the cadence. Cadence decreases with height due to geometry of leg movement ( compare McColgan vs. Purdue or R.Hall vs S.Wanjuru)

[ebrensi]

I like this! A more nuanced analysis of cadence than I've seen before. I personally found that deliberately increasing my cadence for most easy runs from ~160spm to 170+ feels a lot better and it looks much less sloppy too. My old hamstring and glute issues are gone. I find that there is more stress on my hip flexors though. But overall much better.

[OdanUrr]

This video was recommended to me just as I was looking into "the cadence problem." I also read online about the magical 180 spm and was disappointed I'm very far from that number. Looking at today's "recovery" run (another issue entirely, my Forerunner recorded it as a Threshold run), my cadence was around 150 spm at an average speed of 8.4 km/h. Perhaps, as you said, this is related to my pace, and if I did a Tempo run, my cadence would go up a bit. Having said that, I decided to look up runs from several months ago, something with a slightly higher pace, and guess what? My cadence was even lower. Conclusion: even if my watch isn't getting my cadence right, there is still one undeniable fact... my cadence is climbing!

[shaner]

Great video, can you demonstrate visually how the each cadence looks while u running, it would give us a good idea of whats a good running form with each cadence.

[fatmansprinter]

cadence increases as speed increases. jog and its low sprint and its high - all the other cadences are somewhere in between. it`s that simple.

[alex.sparrow]

A scary movie. Watch out for loud sounds!

[inazumagou]

A fun way to think about Stretch Shortening Cycle is if a tennis ball is perfectly elastic, it can bounce up and down forever without any external input of energy.

[JohnBKerkhoven]

First of all, I like to look at (most) videos you make. They are entertaining and informative.
In this case though, you are creating a straw man.
No serious runner, who has been doing this for a while, will argue that "180 is the optimal cadence, for all ages, all distances, all training levels and all surfaces".
So thank you for shooting down an issue nobody has. :)

[pdev]

Finally someone not buying the 180 cadence rule. I thought I was alone in that respect

[saiforos]

Thanks. I've only started running a little bit, but was definitely trying to outsmart my body by dragging the feet.

[honza]

That's right. I have dilemma in my running style - to run with low or high cadence? Sometimes I hear advice "use what is more natural for you" - but what does it mean "more natural"? And is more natural always better? With both (high or low cadence) I gain approximately the same speed with the same amount of fatigue but to compare both ways:

Higher candence:
+ less vertical oscilation, less impact on the ground
- higher leg turnover - higher injury risk bacause of (too) fast leg movements (happened many times to me)
+ with higher leg turnover, legs naturaly pushes "faster" the ground "back"
+ using less power (less risk of injury), more relaxed (sometimes it seems like i am using no power and everyting flows by itself by inertia)
- using shorter steps - so I don't use full range of motion of the legs, feeling like I am allowed to make only "too short" steps and to be "too constrained"

For lower cadence the opposite is true.
How to tell what is better for me? I have no apparent reason to choose one of it. (In my case - higher cadence means 180-190, lower cadence means about 170.)
I also cannot say that one alternative is better according to risk of injury - with low cadence injuries come with using more power, with higher cadence injuries come from too fast leg movements - and maybe from the unnaturally shortened stride lenght.
Maybe the solution will be "to use something in between" but maybe this will mean to lose positive advantages of both alternatives...

Do you have some advice please? Thank you.

[eamonnw]

your 180 music and sound effects were too loud and unfunny on headphones here

[standUpForTurtles]

Thanks I really like your energy and humor but more than that I love your thoughtful insites into how we can be better runners. I have a newbie question about something that comes up in cycling discussions of cadence. Is it preferable to do more reps at lower load or fewer reps at higher load if we control for total work done? Cycling is simpler in the sense that there is less interaction between cadence and biomechanical efficiency but the school of thought I find most persuasive says if you can sustain a higher cadence without any deterioration in form you should.