Curious wrote:
I'm a heal striker..big time. I've run some pretty fast times running the way I run.
I do think that running on your toes can allow one to "sprint" faster, but does it also help for entire races?
What I fear about changing my running form, is creating injury.
In some runners I've heard that landing on your toes can lead to significiant compartment syndrome (in the calves).
Is it better to run how you naturally land?
You're committing the naturalistic fallacy here - the fallacy of equating natural with correct. What's natural for someone isn't always the best for them. Go to any road race and really watch and pay attention to the 20-25+ minute people go by and try to honestly say that they're running as efficiently as possible.
Simply put, some ways of running are more efficient and less injury prone than others. What any individual person "naturally" does is largely irrelevant to what's most efficient for them (from the core downwards at least, the upper body has much more wiggle room as far as form is concerned). The ideas that simply running more will correct any and all inefficiencies, or that you can't change your form and should just leave it alone are both absurd and outdated.
The body is designed to run with a midfoot/forefoot strike, with the heel dropping down to the ground, and then lifting off again. I'll re-emphasize the dude who said to jump up and down landing on your forefoot, then on your heels, and tell me which absorbs more shock. If you want I'll save you the head-rattling experiment and tell you it's the forefoot. Even if the forefoot strikes just slightly before the heel it still allows the arch of the foot to flex and absorb some shock and the calf to lower the heel in a gentle, controlled manner. That Harvard barefoot running site had a great graph showing the impact of landing on the heel as compared to landing on the forefoot, it fits exactly with what one feels when jumping up in the air and landing on the forefoot or heel. I'll try to find it.