The Running Form Thread
- Thread starter Last Place Jason
- Start date
Watching your video made me think of something, you have a pretty duck footed footfall when you run Agel. I have read that this is something you should actively try to correct so your foot falls straight or just slightly off center either direction. What do you guys think? Bad advice?
Abide,
IMO, the goal for the runner should be to move over and off the balls of the forefoot. Whether or not the foot is straight or slightly duck footed is irrelevant
IMO, the goal for the runner should be to move over and off the balls of the forefoot. Whether or not the foot is straight or slightly duck footed is irrelevant
Regarding hip rotation- I agree it's one of those elements of form that most people do successfully without conscious thought assuming other elements of gait are present. The problem with teaching hip rotation, just like any other element of gait, is there's a happy medium. Biomechanics become less efficient if there's too little or too much. Based on my observations, runners do fine with hip rotation if they have adequate hip extension as the body moves over the foot. The hip extension motion is associated (not sure of which way the causal relationship goes) with the pelvis rotating down and back. The other side of the pelvis is coming forward and up, which theoretically assists the passive pulling of the upper leg/knee forward.
I would hypothesize it would be better to have too much hip rotation. When you don't have enough, you lose some power from hip extension and are forced to activate more muscles to "pull" the other leg up and forward.
If you watch a lot of new barefoot/minimalist runners, you'll notice they have virtually no hip rotation. I think this is because they follow the "lift the knees" advice, which inhibits pelvis rotation (and hip extension). This is probably part of the reason why barefoot runners have such difficulty learning to run faster... they're robbing themselves of their major power source. It works fine when we're tooling around at a 12 minute pace, but doesn't work when we ramp it up.
As a teaching tool, you can teach hip rotation to solve the problem. You can also solve the problem by having the new runner run fast first, then work on generalizing the same gait to a slower pace. Of course, this is the exact opposite of what most of us teach because we're paranoid of TMTS injuries.
I would hypothesize it would be better to have too much hip rotation. When you don't have enough, you lose some power from hip extension and are forced to activate more muscles to "pull" the other leg up and forward.
If you watch a lot of new barefoot/minimalist runners, you'll notice they have virtually no hip rotation. I think this is because they follow the "lift the knees" advice, which inhibits pelvis rotation (and hip extension). This is probably part of the reason why barefoot runners have such difficulty learning to run faster... they're robbing themselves of their major power source. It works fine when we're tooling around at a 12 minute pace, but doesn't work when we ramp it up.
As a teaching tool, you can teach hip rotation to solve the problem. You can also solve the problem by having the new runner run fast first, then work on generalizing the same gait to a slower pace. Of course, this is the exact opposite of what most of us teach because we're paranoid of TMTS injuries.
All this makes a lot of sense to me Jason. Why are you so sensible and everyone else seemingly so wacky? Today I tried manipulating hip rotation just to see what it felt like, and it felt really weird. Then I upped the pace a bit and felt my hips naturally open up a bit, just as Abide suggested. Overall, more and more, I'm coming 'round to what I call the Kenyan protocol, which was implied in your last few sentences: first work on pace, and then on distance. Form just seems to come together for me at sub-9mm paces. Above 10mm I have to consciously check it from time to time. Now that I'm building back up from my knee-tweak, I'm going to keep distance limited and try to get to 8mm pace before I start adding it again. I really think it's the way to go for me. Thanks for helping confirm it. And I wonder about the TMTS injury-risk, because I read somewhere, I think it was Magness but it could be Coach Dean, that training volume and not velocity is the best predictor of injury rates. Not sure if that translates to the kind of low-mileage recreational running I do, but it's something to keep in mind.
To dig up a topic from a few pages ago:
If we're talking about steeper uphills (like we see in ultras), I use a very similar technique. Almost all runners make two fundamental errors:
1. They take long steps, and
2. They push hard uphill, usually with a lot of quad activation.
The results can be witnessed at the end of a race when everyone complains about dead quads. Downhills contribute to this, but I believe uphills are the major culprits.
Like Damian, I teach people to take shorter, faster strides. The steeper the climb, the shorter the stride. It's more efficient to take three short steps versus one long step. I like to demo this on stairs. Run up a flight of stairs using every step. Then do it while taking two then three steps at a time.
On really steep trails, I also like to have people keep their legs as relaxed as possible by using a visualization technique. It starts with the foot touching the ground. Don't actively contract any muscles (some will be contracting, but not consciously). Move your body over the foot on the ground. At the same time, straighten your leg by moving your knee backward so your leg ends up straight. This motion uses your glutes as the primary muscles that move your body forward and up the hill without having to unnecessarily contract the quads or hamstrings.
The description is a bit sloppy, but it is incredibly effective. I use this all the time in hundos and the leg muscles never get fatigued... even on courses like Bighorn and Grindstone that have over 20k of climbing.
Whew, I checked on this morning's run and my feet point straight ahead. At least that's one thing I don't have to worry about . . .
Interesting, makes sense, as this is especially true for high-altitude hiking. Gotta take baby steps or you'll be Ralphing in no time.
I teach to let the stride flow with the speed of the core of the body. This allows the stride to be optimally short or long depending on the speed of the moving body.
I'm dumb. As such, I need simple explanations for the excessively-scientific explanations. I'm also curious, so I need to understand the science behind the folk advice given by barefoot runners/Chi instructors/Agile. I'm also skeptical, so I automatically assume everything is wrong. Finally, I've spent enough time as a teacher to understand what we know is worthless if we can't effectively communicate in a way that makes sense to the receiver.
Generally-speaking, I would agree with this. Making the transition from raised-heel supportive shoes does seem to increase the injury risk as a function of volume, however. I would agree with the hypothesis that the soleus, Achilles tendon, intrinsic foot muscles, and metatarsals all have to adapt from the "maximally-shod" condition to the minimally or non-shod condition. I would expect future research to confirm this. For example, measure metatarsal bone density before BFR/MR, then again six months later. I think we'll see higher bone density versus a control. This is the only reason training volume should be limited.
Having said that, I don't think speedwork as a teaching tool should be thrown out. As long as the same "listening to your body" injury prevention measures are taken, it should be fine.
Duck-footedness (or pigeon-footedness) may or may not affect gait, probably depending on the severity. According to Dicharry and Cucuzzella, the big toe locks when the foot touches the ground. I believe this occurs reflexively and may be triggered with toe splay. The locked big toe causes the foot to act as a lever that maximizes the elastic recoil from the Achilles. Would that action be affected by the foot pointing in another direction?
I would guess no, though it may put a little more stress on something like the knees.
I would guess no, though it may put a little more stress on something like the knees.
I'm also skeptical, so I automatically assume everything is wrong.
Right, skepticism is at the heart of the scientific enterprise. But I have a particularly instinctive skepticism about idea-based approaches to running and the attendant conscious manipulation of virtually every aspect of form. So often it seems these are derived from observing elites running at 5mm pace and then misapplied to recreational runners running slower paces where the cadence and range of motion is naturally less.
But then again, maybe I just like your approach cuz it confirms my own biases, and your vastly greater experience helps justify this laziness . . .
Generally-speaking, I would agree with this. Making the transition from raised-heel supportive shoes does seem to increase the injury risk as a function of volume, however. I would agree with the hypothesis that the soleus, Achilles tendon, intrinsic foot muscles, and metatarsals all have to adapt from the "maximally-shod" condition to the minimally or non-shod condition. I would expect future research to confirm this. For example, measure metatarsal bone density before BFR/MR, then again six months later. I think we'll see higher bone density versus a control. This is the only reason training volume should be limited.
Having said that, I don't think speedwork as a teaching tool should be thrown out. As long as the same "listening to your body" injury prevention measures are taken, it should be fine.
Right, so even in the beginning it's a trade-off between the greater stress of faster paces versus the greater repetitive stress of longer runs, right? In my case, though, I don't have to worry about adaptation too much any more, so my main concern is running at a pace at which my form feels best, and then letting distance come with gains in conditioning.
Right, skepticism is at the heart of the scientific enterprise. But I have a particularly instinctive skepticism about idea-based approaches to running and the attendant conscious manipulation of virtually every aspect of form. So often it seems these are derived from observing elites running at 5mm pace and then misapplied to recreational runners running slower paces where the cadence and range of motion is naturally less.
But then again, maybe I just like your approach cuz it confirms my own biases, and your vastly greater experience helps justify this laziness . . .
Generally-speaking, I would agree with this. Making the transition from raised-heel supportive shoes does seem to increase the injury risk as a function of volume, however. I would agree with the hypothesis that the soleus, Achilles tendon, intrinsic foot muscles, and metatarsals all have to adapt from the "maximally-shod" condition to the minimally or non-shod condition. I would expect future research to confirm this. For example, measure metatarsal bone density before BFR/MR, then again six months later. I think we'll see higher bone density versus a control. This is the only reason training volume should be limited.
Having said that, I don't think speedwork as a teaching tool should be thrown out. As long as the same "listening to your body" injury prevention measures are taken, it should be fine.
Right, so even in the beginning it's a trade-off between the greater stress of faster paces versus the greater repetitive stress of longer runs, right? In my case, though, I don't have to worry about adaptation too much any more, so my main concern is running at a pace at which my form feels best, and then letting distance come with gains in conditioning.
Abide,
Unfortunately I don't have any hilly trail video. None close by but next time I get on a hilly trail I will do my best to get some footage
Unfortunately I don't have any hilly trail video. None close by but next time I get on a hilly trail I will do my best to get some footage
What do you guys think about this poster as a teaching aid for running technique? http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/257519_414090641989843_1662537523_o.jpg
No matter how objective we try to be, we'll always fall for the confirmation bias. Our brains are just too lazy. We didn't get to the top of the food chain by working hard; we got to the top by finding shortcuts.
Yes, I agree about the speed versus distance stress. The focus on distance first makes sense in a wider discussion of running because it seems to be more effective to build aerobic fitness first, then add speed. That's why people have been following Lydiard and Maff with so much success over the years. I've tried both approaches (speed first via Crossfit Endurance and distance first via a combination of approaches), and the latter was definitely more effective.
Learning better running form is a different process, though, and that leads to the misapplication of principles. I'd like to chalk it up to our evolutionarily-developed mental laziness. This might just be a BFR/MR issue, though. I don't think competitive running coaches try to teach better running form during aerobic base-building runs.
Yes, I agree about the speed versus distance stress. The focus on distance first makes sense in a wider discussion of running because it seems to be more effective to build aerobic fitness first, then add speed. That's why people have been following Lydiard and Maff with so much success over the years. I've tried both approaches (speed first via Crossfit Endurance and distance first via a combination of approaches), and the latter was definitely more effective.
Learning better running form is a different process, though, and that leads to the misapplication of principles. I'd like to chalk it up to our evolutionarily-developed mental laziness. This might just be a BFR/MR issue, though. I don't think competitive running coaches try to teach better running form during aerobic base-building runs.
I like how the first frame mentions the data that found Pose reduces the load on the knee by 50%, but fails to note the dramatic increase of the load on the Achilles/calf.
[edit- this isn't a knock on Pose, rather a knock on all of us for failing to note the negative tradeoffs that come with this change in running form]
Ken S. told me he had a good conversation with Romanov regarding the whole gravity thing. I believe they agreed that Pose had to do a much better job of relaying his (Dr. R) thoughts because the theory was grossly misinterpreted by Pose coaches here in the US.
I wonder if you have any thoughts about the Kenyan approach. I read that they train less mpw than is typical of elite distance runners, but 35-40 percent of their training is at or close to race pace. Coach Dean and Magness also have suggested that training at lactate threshold is a better way to build aerobic fitness than traditional Maff-type HR training, which is based on VO2max, although Magness is quick to point out that no one variable should be taken as a predictor of performance. Plus, I read that Lydiard runners actually did a lot of their base running at threshold, nothing like the Maff protocol, although the two are often lumped together as similar approaches.No matter how objective we try to be, we'll always fall for the confirmation bias. Our brains are just too lazy. We didn't get to the top of the food chain by working hard; we got to the top by finding shortcuts.
Yes, I agree about the speed versus distance stress. The focus on distance first makes sense in a wider discussion of running because it seems to be more effective to build aerobic fitness first, then add speed. That's why people have been following Lydiard and Maff with so much success over the years. I've tried both approaches (speed first via Crossfit Endurance and distance first via a combination of approaches), and the latter was definitely more effective.
Learning better running form is a different process, though, and that leads to the misapplication of principles. I'd like to chalk it up to our evolutionarily-developed mental laziness. This might just be a BFR/MR issue, though. I don't think competitive running coaches try to teach better running form during aerobic base-building runs.
