Music for running 1.5 miles in 14:45?

June 6, 2006 8:28 AM

Strides per minute to run 1.5 miles in 14 minutes, 45 seconds? Music for ipod to achieve this pace?

My partner needs to pass a fitness test, and I'd like to use Audacity or something similar to put together a mixtrack of just the right length and BPM to ensure 1.5 miles are covered in 14 minutes, 45 seconds.

Taking into account the fact that this is running--so I assume the strides would be longer than walking--and a person's height of 6'3", what is the proper target strides per minute? How would I even calculate this? I don't necessarily want to make this relate to my partner's current stride length/speed as the whole point is to increase both so that the run gets done in time (which it's currently not, by about a minute).

I know Nike+iPod is coming out soon, which is great, but I need this pretty much immediately.

posted by CaptApollo to grab bag (15 comments total)

A high stride-rate (80 or 90 steps/minute) is better biomechanically, as a low stride-rate means you're taking longer strides, which usually means your running mechanics are working against you (you're braking with each step because your leading foot is landing in front of your body).

Actual numbers for an individual will vary, and I have no idea if height affects it. Me (5' 11"), I just try to move my legs as fast as they're comfortable with and I get something in the low 90s.
posted by cardboard at 8:41 AM on June 6, 2006

Download any number of Army Airborne running cadences. They're available on iTunes and pretty much everywhere else. What you're trying to do is exactly what they're designed for.
posted by rentalkarma at 8:44 AM on June 6, 2006

BPM Database may be helpful, although it doesn't cover a comprehensive range of music.
posted by staggernation at 8:45 AM on June 6, 2006

Well,
5280*1.5=7920 = total distance in feet
7920/14.75=536.95 = speed needed in feet/minute

Then I would find your partner's stride while he runs. You can find that by measuring a given distance and calculates how many steps he makes to cover that distance. Make sure that he is already at running pace and account the little bit of space extra at the beginning and end.

Using this site, and the height of your partner I estimated his stride at 7.125 feet. But that is for a sprinter (the only info i could find) so make sure to find/calculate it yourself.

536.95/7.125=75.36 = about 75 strides per minute

Then either find some music at this pace or possibly speed up some favorite songs. Good luck.

DISCLAIMER: Math is not my strong point and I am not really a runner so please take this advice with a grain of salt.
posted by coolin86 at 8:46 AM on June 6, 2006

I didn't have good turnover for a long time and it was a big problem in terms of endurance for the reasons cardboard said. I'd consider having them run at a pace that might be slower than normal (though on target) before I aimed for that. Now, that said, Moby - Thousand may fit your needs here.
posted by kcm at 8:51 AM on June 6, 2006

The target time is not really that challenging. Your partner should be able to achieve this with a couple of weeks of training, running 2 or more miles every other day. If he needs to walk part of it fine, just keep at it. You want the distance a little longer than the timed distance will be so that the timed distance seems easier. Getting a shorter yet faster stride can help efficiency and reduce stress on your body. If he is already close the efficiency gain may be just enough to get him under the target time. The Airborne running cadences sound like just the ticket. I had never heard of these before.
posted by caddis at 9:02 AM on June 6, 2006

Podrunner has mixes at 140,141, 145, 150, 151 and 155 BPM, among others. somewhere in there is the BPM that coolin86 calculated.
posted by Brando_T. at 10:03 AM on June 6, 2006 [1 favorite has favorites]

Do you have a public track nearby? At a high school or college? Have your partner run a lap in ~2:27.5 and count the strides.

A workout I'd suggest is to run a lap (1/4 mile) in 2 minutes, walk a lap, repeat until your partner's run 1.5 miles (6 laps) and walked 1.5 miles.

Do that twice or three times in a week. The following week, keep the two minute pace for two laps, then walk one, but bump the distance to 2 miles.

Work up to running all 8 laps without stopping.

A lap in 2 minutes is also 27.5 seconds faster than your partner needs to run it, but shouldn't be hard, especially after the first or second week. Sort of a quick jog. :)

I went from an 18 minute two mile to a 15 minute two mile in one month, and a thirteen and a half minute two mile a month later doing not much more than what I've described above (slightly faster pace and 12 laps, not 8).
posted by cactus at 10:16 AM on June 6, 2006

For efficiency the pace should be somewhere around 180 strides per minute, maybe a little slower for a rookie. (By stride I mean foot strikes; some people seem to define a strides as a left right combo, two foot strikes, which just doesn't sound right to my ears.) Speed should be determined by stride length not stride rate.
posted by caddis at 11:28 AM on June 6, 2006

Yes, you're absolutely right that I was unclear and that I was only counting left-foot strikes. Multiply what I said by two. But then cut it in half when you're counting every second stride, because it's so much easier than counting every single foot-strike....
posted by cardboard at 11:47 AM on June 6, 2006

Not my personal cup of tea, but there are military "Run to Cadence" tapes available for purchase.
posted by frogan at 12:30 PM on June 6, 2006

frogan, riding the duck is not going to improve running times
posted by caddis at 2:16 PM on June 6, 2006

frogan, riding the duck is not going to improve running times

Damn you Microsoft Clipboard!

Here's the Amazon link.
posted by frogan at 3:47 PM on June 6, 2006

Quack, quack - I love the duck boats - I want one for myself. If my options go up in value by an order of magnitude I just might buy one, although my neighbors would probably perceive this like a dead car up on blocks, especially if I keep the colorful paint job.

By the way, I did find an article discussing the running efficiency stuff I was talking about above: Running Efficiently. If your partner runs efficiently and trains a bit this test should be no problem.
posted by caddis at 5:02 PM on June 6, 2006

LOL. That ridetheducks thing was 10x funnier for me because I just came from that water taxi thread. =)
posted by jahmoon at 1:54 AM on June 7, 2006