Pose = crazy???

Jhuffman,

I understand that. My point was that POSE people SAY that Geb runs resembling Pose. I say he runs resembling what I think is good technique. In the end it's a matter of opinion what he more resembles.

That's what that sentence boils down to.

Please list these characteristics you talk about? And what is the standard you are assessing him with?

JHuffman- As I mentioned above, there are some good things about pose that I agree with.

I just watched the Geb video by Dr. R. Here's my thoughts on his analysis.

1st off the foot landing. Basically flat with the knee bent. Completely agree with that. Geb's foot lands slightly in fron of his body, but nothing to be concerned with as his knee is still flexed and it's relatively close to under his knee. Geb also doesn't mess with the ankle joint or try and open it up or mess with it which is good. The difference in my analysis and Dr. R's come on the push off/application of force mostly.

One point I disagree on in pose comes to the pull. As I stated in my above post. You don't pull the leg through the cycle. You allow that to happen. If you allow the foot to load up, then apply force and allow the hip to extend, you'll get a stretch reflex that will bring the leg through faster than consciously trying to do it.

Also, I think the arms are used for more than just balance. But that's another subject.

So in essense we agree on the foot placement and landing, although we might disagree on knee drive or something like that (I don't know pose's thoughts on knee drive or lift). We disagree on pulling, application of force, arms, and probably a couple minor things.

As to what standard I'm assesing him with. As I said, I don't have a fancy name. I just know it as what I have learned as correct running form.

sjm1368 wrote:

You don't consciously pull. See you think you can get the leg to cycle through faster by pulling it from the ground and pulling it through the cycle back to the ground.

I was on the fence about whether or not the “no one running style fits all” idea was true. Now after reading this post, I believe it is true.

If you can give a good run thinking like that, then more power to ya' mate.

sjm1638,

"One point I disagree on in pose comes to the pull. As I stated in my above post. You don't pull the leg through the cycle. You allow that to happen. If you allow the foot to load up, then apply force and allow the hip to extend, you'll get a stretch reflex that will bring the leg through faster than consciously trying to do it"

Yes, this is what seperates Pose Method with the traditional running mechanics. In theory the Pose Method technique says to pull the foot up and let gravity take over. Your theory is that a stretch reflex after push off is ideal.

I believe that gravity is more than capable of doing the work without my help, so I choose to let it do the work and recommend that to every runner as well. BTW, I was taught tradional mechanics in highschool and this was the basic form I used throughout the first 15 years of my running. After about 7 months of learning the Pose Method technique, lets just say I wish I had learned the technique when I was in highschool. So what part does gravity play in your running technique?

Who is Jhuffman people?

I know he is some sub4miler, but is it just me or do the style of his posts sound like they were put through some translator or something. What does Jhuffman do for a living now? Im just curious because the guy is to running form what Islamic extremists and radical Christians that shoot up abortion clinics are to religion.

Regardless of whether or not he knows his stuff, he has no idea how to argue, sound credible, or just not come off as a prick.

Brawn,

I have not been very found of your communication skills either.

As to what I do for a living. I am continueing to train full-time as an elite runner/coach div. III XC country/and personal train individuals in strength training and running. What do you do?

Jhuffman wrote:

I believe that gravity is more than capable of doing the work without my help, so I choose to let it do the work and recommend that to every runner as well.

Since neither you nor Gatorade have been willing to answer a simple 'correct/incorrect' to the four straigtforward questions posted earlier, how about we try and define what is/is not POSE versus our previously established definition of a running stride.

We know and accept without question that POSE and good running form entails landing on the forefoot, under the CM. But where is this new paradigm they mention numerous times?

- Does POSE believe there is no concious, voluntary push-off beyond the return of energy loaded up on landing?

- When POSE refers to 'gravity doing the work', are they referring to returning the trailing foot towards the ground, or motion of the entire body?

- Does POSE believe that gravity provides a benefit to forward motion that does not require a voluntary push-off to compensate for?

Two yes/no questions and one multiple (two) choice.

I'd also be willing to entertain answers from any of the other POSERs apparently reading this thread in horror (

).

John Richard, I think you misunderstood or misread my post or at least it definately seems that way seeing the section you quoted.

I never said to "think" about pulling the leg through. What I meant is that YOU (as in you pose people) think that an athlete can get the leg to cycle through faster by PULLING. I was saying that IMO this is wrong and that the leg will cycle through autimatically and faster (w/out any thought to pulling) if the push off is correct.

"In theory the Pose Method technique says to pull the foot up and let gravity take over. Your theory is that a stretch reflex after push off is ideal."

Exactly. That's one difference.

See I think that the stretch will help to autimatically bring the leg through the cycle, and it will do it faster than not activating the stretch and trying to pull the leg through. So while you guys pull the leg off the ground and through, I think it's more efficient to push, get the stretch and let it happen.

I know I shouldn't call you out for a typo, because we all make them, but you aren't very "found" of my communication skills? found really isn't a typo when trying to say fond, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt.

But if you do want to argue about communication skills you are very much on the short side here, as not only do I know that I am an excellent writer and can express myself clearly, so does the number 4 law school in the country, which I will be (hopefully, I don't imagine I will fail out) getting my law degree from in two years. I had an extensive internship at a consulting/investment (even I'm not sure what exactly they do) firm for the past year. I have been running for two years, having run 4:09 for the mile and 14:48 for 5k, after playing baseball in college. I was drafted but in such a late round that it really didn't make sense to sign because I was burnt out and baseball clearly wasn't my future (getting past single A would have been a miracle). So I really am quite confident of both my athletic and academic abilities.

My communication skills aren't lacking, though you seem to have quite a bit of trouble putting together a logical, substantive argument. What DIII school do you coach at, my brother runs at a NESCAC school. I would never suggest any athlete run under your tutelage, end of story.

Actually, I'll just google you.

brawn wrote:

But if you do want to argue about communication skills you are very much on the short side here, as not only do I know that I am an excellent writer and can express myself clearly, so does the number 4 law school in the country, which I will be (hopefully, I don't imagine I will fail out) getting my law degree from in two years.

That's one hell of a sentence from an 'excellent writer.'

Yes, because I proofread and put as much effort in my posts on letsrun as I did in my classes and will at law school.

Brawn,

I am happy for your success as a law student. I am in the business of improving my Running as well as helping others do likewise. No, I have never boasted of my skill of communicating elloquently over the internet. I will try to do better for the sake of helping others like yourself improve their running.

-Pose believes that the body weight should be supported on the ball of the foot with no conscious effort to push off only maintaining position while on support for a brief moment.

-When Pose refers to "gravity doing the work", we/it is refering to allowing the GCM to fall forward and down from the support point of the foot as well as after pulling the foot from support you then let gravity take over to return the foot and leg to the Pose position-(which is foot under GCM with body weight balanced on the ball of the foot with minimal tension)

-Pose believes there is no need for a voluntary push off. This will happen automatically because of momentum and muscle effort to maintain proper positioning of the foot and body.

Contrary to your assertations I am quite certain I have been very accurate as to my interpretations of Pose Method. If I have made some misrepresentations you are free to go the manual which is the Pose Method of running book, and other articles written by Dr. Romanov and I will be glad to stand corrected.

Again, my main goal here is to help other runners learn the technique that can change and improve their running forever, just as it has mine.

-

jhuffman,

You have repeadedly been asked to answer simple questions, but refuse to do so.

Is there a reason for this?

If you believe in Pose, it would seem to me you would be happy to answer these questions. If you refuse to to so, why don't you just go away and quit wasting peoples time, because you will never have any credibility with anyone if you continue to dodge legitimate questions.

Amazed,

I am not obligated to answer any specific questions. If you don't want to learn to run more efficient that is your choice.

Do you tell your "students" of Pose the same thing? Under what conditions do you answer specific questions about the program you espouse?