Jump to content
dazaau

Vertical Oscillation - what's going on?!

Recommended Posts

So I consistently get a vertical Oscillation measurement over 12cm on my Garmin, apparently higher than 95 per cent of other runners. Red data and apparently it's no good.

Everything else looks good to me, so should I be addressing something or is it all good? Stride is 1.4m generally, ground contact is typically short and cadence looks fine.

This Particular run got faster towards the end so you can see that in the data. I was a bit fatigued but typically the numbers are fairly constant no matter the run. 

So. What am I doing wrong? Should I be concerned? Or is it just useless data?

C02046EF-6342-4843-981F-CBF2E76E235B.png

6611C188-C3C8-455B-B15A-BD9F53553CCD.png

8DF17A93-ABB0-444C-8441-E07761E5040E.png

Edited by dazaau

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't even know that was a thing. i rarely look that deep into the stuff,  unless you have a neck like a giraffe, just run :)

Edited by FatPom
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, FatPom said:

Didn't even know that was a thing. i rarely look that deep into the stuff,  unless you have a neck like a giraffe, just run :)

Ha ha, you are probably right! But data telling me I suck is tormenting me 😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reducing ground contact time often increases vertical oscillation. I'd hate to see these sort of stats for my swimming.

Given a choice, I would pick a short ground contact time over a good vertical oscillation. Although compared to me, your cadence is on the low side, but this can vary between athletes. I don't know if your slightly slower cadence is contributing to you bounding higher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a correlation at the end with increased cadence, decreased ground contact and decreased vertical oscillation? Maybe something in that? Maybe not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of things going on here, best if you can take a video of yourself running and analyze from there... 

But based on the data, seems like you're bounding/moving a little diagonally forward. You might be pushing off harder vertically because you're loading yourself up longer on the ground. Maybe try increasing your cadence a little more nearer to 180, your stride length with reduce along with gct and vo too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Supamau said:

Lots of things going on here, best if you can take a video of yourself running and analyze from there... 

But based on the data, seems like you're bounding/moving a little diagonally forward. You might be pushing off harder vertically because you're loading yourself up longer on the ground. Maybe try increasing your cadence a little more nearer to 180, your stride length with reduce along with gct and vo too. 

yeah as soon as my cadence increased from 168 to 178, VO went right down. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks all, I'll also see if it is a strap issue. 

I might also work on my cadence to see if it helps. It would seem from the data that I am spending not that long on the ground but leaping up to high and that is energy wasted as I should be going forward not up ;)

But would be funny if it is the strap. Maybe I'll go for a walk with it on and see how the vertical oscillation looks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Get a running coach to look at you and give you "real world advice" - you may have to pay a small amount for it but it'll give you better end results than gadgets 😏

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, dazaau said:

Thanks all, I'll also see if it is a strap issue. 

I might also work on my cadence to see if it helps. It would seem from the data that I am spending not that long on the ground but leaping up to high and that is energy wasted as I should be going forward not up ;)

But would be funny if it is the strap. Maybe I'll go for a walk with it on and see how the vertical oscillation looks. 

I see you're in Lillydale. I know someone local to you who can help you out with your running form and technique. Probably answer your questions as well. Send me a PM if you're interested in details. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AP said:

Get a running coach to look at you and give you "real world advice" - you may have to pay a small amount for it but it'll give you better end results than gadgets 😏

This.

Good advice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks all and Greyman, I'll keep it in mind if I pursue this further. At the moment I'm just trying to get to Geelong in good form and then have a baby. I'll probably never run again after that 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You had better get a doctor to look into this excessive vertical oscillation otherwise I predict you will have a many more babies.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggest you oscillate less vertically to reduce your vertical oscillation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, AP said:

Get a running coach to look at you and give you "real world advice" - you may have to pay a small amount for it but it'll give you better end results than gadgets 😏

Doesn't your run form naturally improve the more you run?

Also one small change (increasing cadence) can really help with your running efficiency, can it not?

Dazaau - I'd be looking at your cadence instead of your VO. I'm not a run coach, but I just tinkered with my cadence using my watch and went from 168 to 176 in a few weeks and felt much more comfortable and efficient.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, zed said:

Doesn't your run form naturally improve the more you run?

Also one small change (increasing cadence) can really help with your running efficiency, can it not?

Dazaau - I'd be looking at your cadence instead of your VO. I'm not a run coach, but I just tinkered with my cadence using my watch and went from 168 to 176 in a few weeks and felt much more comfortable and efficient.

 

They're both important. Cadence is this new buzz word for running faster and easier. It has long been known the faster you move your legs the faster you run and the fitter you get and the easier it starts to feel 😮

Efficiency isn't as important as economy. Economy is where it's at (commonly they get confused, I still mix em up as well). 

Go see someone in person. It can quite literally take minutes away from your 5km times and more as you go longer (everyone in my squad has dropped a minute or more in 2018, except me. I gained abiut 30secs and 6kgs). One guy went from 18.40 to 16.05 😮 he's got a 14.xx in him this year. 

I reckon most triathletes run too fast when they're running slow and too slow when they're running fast. They often do intervals that are too long and too many of them (a lot do more than my runners which is crazy). 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, willie said:

 

I reckon most triathletes run too fast when they're running slow and too slow when they're running fast. They often do intervals that are too long and too many of them (a lot do more than my runners which is crazy). 

I think I run too fast in my long runs. Although the Jack Daniels calc says 4.50 -5.15. But my HR zone would be 3 for that pace. It needs to be zone 2 yeah? I got mates that are top runners, pro triathletes that run a lot slower than me. Like 6 min pace.

Edited by zed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, zed said:

I think I run too fast in my long runs. Although the Jack Daniels calc says 4.50 -5.15. But my HR zone would be 3 for that pace. It needs to be zone 2 yeah? I got mates that are top runners, pro triathletes that run a lot slower than me. Like 6 min pace.

That same guy that has dropped to 16.05 runs his long stuff at around 5.30ish... never faster than 5.20. So yes, you’re running too fast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Doesn't your run form naturally improve the more you run?

Not necessarily - running lots with poor form will never give you the results that less running with good form will 

Quote

I reckon most triathletes run too fast when they're running slow and too slow when they're running fast. They often do intervals that are too long and too many of them (a lot do more than my runners which is crazy). 

This is so true - it's a hard message to sell to a group who are always racing each other and believing that more is better 🙄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AP said:

Not necessarily - running lots with poor form will never give you the results that less running with good form will 

However running in a group, especially intervals on the Track can (but not guaranteed to) help those with poor form.  That is assuming the other runners in the group are running with good form.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/01/2019 at 6:24 PM, Rob said:

However running in a group, especially intervals on the Track can (but not guaranteed to) help those with poor form.  That is assuming the other runners in the group are running with good form.

It can be a great fun session - lots of hurt but lots of laughs 😁

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/01/2019 at 12:15 PM, zed said:

I think I run too fast in my long runs. Although the Jack Daniels calc says 4.50 -5.15. But my HR zone would be 3 for that pace. It needs to be zone 2 yeah? I got mates that are top runners, pro triathletes that run a lot slower than me. Like 6 min pace.

I would agree. My long runs are strictly HR based and are between 5:15 and 6:30 (affected by fatigue, temp etc). I am neither a top runner nor a pro but I go OK on two legs and I only started to get better when I started running slow & fast.

Edited by monkie
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you tall and do you bobble your chest a lot c.f. others when you run - run past some windows and watch your reflection, or just watch others when you're out, or get someone to video. Can always try flattening out the step, reducing stride, increasing cadence and compare.

Not that I've got one of those gadgets yet, just an old pre-GPS watch, will though. I'm interested in running dynamics. Had an argument with someone at work about how elastic/springy we are when running, seems not really resolved yet in the sports science and biomechanics. He bought maximum bounce shoes  to  go faster,  told him bunkum and whole debate about minimilist versus maximumlist shoes.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys,

First time poster, long time lurker.

I saw this thread a little while ago and wanted to have a bit of a play around with the whole cadence/vertical oscillation/stride length thing and see what I could come up with. Bit of a back story here, I'm amateur at best competing in the QTS series and a few 70.3s here and there. Anthro is 188cm and about 85-86kg. My background has been in sports where strength is a thing (volleyball, obstacle course racing) so I've adopted a long, lopey (1.3m and about 160rpm) stride and a big pedal stroke on the bike and that's just always worked for me. I'm also a sport and exercise scientist so as soon as numbers and data come into it, I'm always a bit more interested. I'm currently building towards the Tweed Coast Enduro race and my 90 minute long run on Mondays is slowly shifting more and more towards my race pace which is hopefully around 5:30/km. Each week, I take 5 minutes of Z2 and swap it for Z3 after a 15 minute Z2 warmup. Last week, it was a 35' Z3 effort, and this week it was a 40' Z3 effort. The other point to note in this story is that I raced the Sprint distance at Robina on the weekend so I was going into this run with fatigue, whereas last week I was relatively fresh.

Data collection in the attached image is a comparison of the Z3 components as recorded by my Garmin 935, HRM-TRI and also the Stryd footpod and then analysed with Golden Cheetah. The route was pretty much the same, with laps around my neighbourhood, with obviously an extra 5 minutes worth on the end of the 40 minute effort. 

The difference in aerobic decoupling, average power, normalised power, average heart rate all convinced me pretty strongly to change my running style dramatically from what feels natural (160rpm) to what is much better from a performance perspective (180rpm). Also, what isn't shown in the data is that the Z2 after last week's effort was done at about 7:00/km and I couldn't keep my HR down without walk/run intervals. This week, I slotted straight into 6:15/km without walking at all and was actually quite comfortably inside Z2 and not tapping the upper limit at all. 

Sorry for the long first post, but I thought it might be interesting to some of you instead of it all being anecdotal. Obviously this is also a n=1 situation so don't take it as gospel. Let me know if you have any questions. Happy to share any of my other data. 

Ben

49937909_2019525788144300_669773791596904448_n.png

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...