zzzz wrote:
This is dumb. Those are arbitrary lengths. Stride lengths are not a common measure that is thrown around and discussed, at least for distance running. Why do you get to decide that 124 cm short (assuming you did the math right, I didn't bother to check)? And you think walking at 10 min pace is a meaningful comparison? A normal walk more is more like 20 minute pace. 10 min pace is more than halfway to speedwalking.
Like I posted above, Yuki is doing 200 at marathon effort. He'd be even higher at tempo pace. It doesn't mean he's chopping his stride, and it doesn't mean he fades. It's individual variation.
Snip///
Ok, I don't get to 'decide', but at 4min/km a stride of 1.24 is 'choppy' a la a Benny Hill comedy sketch or close to it. Not sure how fast you walk, but when I walk to shop or bus, it is 100m/min, anyway we digress.
The reason for the fade opinion, is that the efficiency of running is along a bell curve of cadence/stride for a given height/leg length and speed. There is no 'one size fits all'...Yuki at 1.6 and Jager at 1.88 in track running quite different, you'd agree...and even so 'if' Yuki does 200 @ 3:06/km then that equates to about 162cm for a 1.6m runner
Now, you would agree that is quite different from the OP 124cm @ 4min/km for 1.68m runner
Now as to 'why stride lengths are not thrown around' it is damn obvious, because Daniels sitting on the side of track would be hard pressed to tape measure the strides, don't you think :-) and therefore cadence was a much better buzzword, and measures exactly the same thing if people just used common sense and did some simple arithmetic abnd realised they are not all the same height nor all the same speed.
cheers