Technique, cadence and shoes: what changes something and what is noise
Cadence as the one technique variable with clear support, the foot-strike debate, and how much carbon-plated shoes really contribute.
Running technique is the area with the most opinion per unit of evidence. There is one variable with reasonable backing — cadence — one that is overrated — foot strike — and a product that works, but less than the marketing says: plated shoes.
Cadence: the useful lever
Raising cadence by 10% clearly reduces knee load
A musculoskeletal simulation study with runners measured that increasing stride frequency to 110% of preferred reduces peak patellofemoral joint force by around 14%, by shortening the stride and cutting braking on each footfall. The trade-off is more footfalls: you swap magnitude for frequency.
There is no magic cadence of 180 steps per minute: it depends on your height and your speed. What is actionable is comparing against yourself: if you have knee niggles or feel you are landing on the brakes, raise your usual cadence by 5–10% for a few weeks and see.
How to do it without obsessing
Count your steps for 30 seconds on an easy run. Raise them by 5% with a metronome or music, in 5-minute blocks inside easy runs, for 3–4 weeks. Then let the cadence settle wherever it wants to.
Foot strike: less important than you think
Switching from heel to forefoot is not an automatic improvement: it redistributes load. Less on the knee, more on the Achilles and calf. The review on graded running describes it the same way: the strike pattern modulates where forces are applied, it does not remove them.
Strike pattern modulates load, it does not reduce it overall
The running biomechanics literature agrees that a forefoot strike reduces initial impact forces and patellofemoral load, at the cost of raising demand on the Achilles–calf complex. Changing pattern without a clinical reason and without a gradual transition is a fast route to tendinopathy.
What is worth avoiding is overstriding: landing with the foot well ahead of your centre of mass and the knee extended. And the simplest way to fix it is, once again, raising cadence.
Shoes
Carbon-plated shoes improve economy by around 2–3%
A systematic review with meta-analysis of the metabolic effect of plated footwear found a reduction in metabolic cost of roughly 2–3% versus traditional shoes. It is a real and relevant improvement in competition, but it is below the 4% the marketing popularised and it does not replace training.
- Comfort first. There is no solid evidence that any shoe type prevents injuries; there is evidence that discomfort encourages them.
- Rotate between two pairs if you run more than 4 days a week: it varies the loading pattern slightly.
- Carbon plates for quality work and racing. They are expensive, they last less, and they stop tissues adapting to the work that normal easy runs do provide.
- On trails, grip rules, not the plate.
Takeaways
- Cadence is the one technique variable with a clear lever: +5–10% if you have knee niggles.
- Avoid overstriding; do not chase 180 spm as a magic number.
- Changing foot strike moves the load, it does not remove it.
- A carbon plate gives 2–3% economy: use it on race day, not every day.
- The good shoe is the one that feels comfortable to you.
Sources for this chapter
- [1]Lenhart RL, Thelen DG, Wille CM, Chumanov ES, Heiderscheit BC (2014). Increasing running step rate reduces patellofemoral joint forces. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. trial
- [2]Lu Z, Suo B, Deng L, et al. (2025). A review of uphill and downhill running: biomechanics, physiology and modulating factors. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology. review
- [3]Kobayashi EN, Toledo RRF, Almeida MO, et al. (2026). Metabolic effects of carbon-plated running shoes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living. meta-analysis