Please point me to a study that proved form drills led to improved performance.
If you bothered to comprehend my post, you’d see that I wrote “form drills might help, but are not enough on their own”. I’m not personally convinced that they are effective.
Landing under your center of mass whilst leaning forward and trying to do a powerful push off?
Nope.
Post a video of you trying to do that. It should be good for a laugh.
Actually, yes. If you want to quibble over minor details, I should have written “slightly in front of your center of mass”. There, happy now? The rest of what I wrote is correct in regard to how elites run.
Nope. Millions of runners got "good form" and do the right training. Don't make em elite.
Actually, yes. If you want to quibble over minor details, I should have written “slightly in front of your center of mass”. There, happy now? The rest of what I wrote is correct in regard to how elites run.
Nope. Millions of runners got "good form" and do the right training. Don't make em elite.
The question I assume assumes similar talent levels? Because if not clearly talent is the diff. Everything else generally held equal. Talented people can have a weakness or two, Dont even have to have good form. But nobody without elite talent can get to the show. Nobody.
Running form/economy/efficiency at speed. Whatever you want to call it.
Improving running form is underrated on these forums as a means to improving performance. Often when the subject is raised, the dogmatic advice is to “just run more miles and your form will take care of itself”. This is bad advice. Improving running form, all else being equal, will improve your performance more than any other lever provided you are training at a reasonable level.
How to improve running form? You have to re-train fundamental movement patterns. Strength training might help but is not enough on its own. Drills might help but are not enough on their own. You have to practice running differently. Forward lean, powerful push off, strong engagement of the hamstrings and glutes, superb hip extension, elbows back, landing under your COM. These are fundamental characteristics of elites’ running style.
Discus.
Bad news: You've provided no research proof for your assertion about, at a minimum, the significant importance of improving form. My guess is that it doesn't exist.
Worse news: Even if it exists, it's way, way, way less important than the physiological (and biomechanical?) advantages gifted - or not - by your parents.
Nope. Millions of runners got "good form" and do the right training. Don't make em elite.
That’s not really what you said though in your previous post. You took issue with my description of how elites run. Now you’re moving the goal post to say that form doesn’t make someone elite or non-elite (which is the topic of the thread and a fair point of debate). But, my original description of how elites run, with my slight edit regarding landing slightly in front rather than underneath your center of mass, is absolutely correct. There are outliers, sure, but if you had to pick a sample of 50 elite distance runners, the vast majority of them would have most of the qualities I listed. The same size sample of non-elites would show that the vast majority do NOT run as I described.
Nope. Millions of runners got "good form" and do the right training. Don't make em elite.
That’s not really what you said though in your previous post. You took issue with my description of how elites run. Now you’re moving the goal post to say that form doesn’t make someone elite or non-elite (which is the topic of the thread and a fair point of debate). But, my original description of how elites run, with my slight edit regarding landing slightly in front rather than underneath your center of mass, is absolutely correct. There are outliers, sure, but if you had to pick a sample of 50 elite distance runners, the vast majority of them would have most of the qualities I listed. The same size sample of non-elites would show that the vast majority do NOT run as I described.
No, I said you were posting nonsense. And so did everyone else.
You're telling us how to run. And you're grasp of Biomechanics is weak.
We know how to run. Joe Hobbyjogger knows how to run. He learned good technique when he was a kid, like almost everyone else did.
That’s not really what you said though in your previous post. You took issue with my description of how elites run. Now you’re moving the goal post to say that form doesn’t make someone elite or non-elite (which is the topic of the thread and a fair point of debate). But, my original description of how elites run, with my slight edit regarding landing slightly in front rather than underneath your center of mass, is absolutely correct. There are outliers, sure, but if you had to pick a sample of 50 elite distance runners, the vast majority of them would have most of the qualities I listed. The same size sample of non-elites would show that the vast majority do NOT run as I described.
No, I said you were posting nonsense. And so did everyone else.
You're telling us how to run. And you're grasp of Biomechanics is weak.
We know how to run. Joe Hobbyjogger knows how to run. He learned good technique when he was a kid, like almost everyone else did.
It's interesting how so many folks think that they know about good and bad form. But there are 2 kinds of ignorance:
1) The kind that MOST of us have, including me (runner and track fan for >40 years) - i.e., not knowing sh** about biomechanics. What is supposed to be where, when? No clue. This is probably hard to fix, as you'd have to LEARN about biomechanics, and depending on your sources and mental make-up, it might be hard to understand.
2) The OTHER kind of ignorance is far less defensible: It's the "good form is pretty" (or at least not ugly) view. Now, those who practice it would deny that they're being that simplistic. But in most cases (without the knowledge of #1 above), they almost certainly are. They'd say that Grant Fischer has good form. And the slow freshman XC runner all over the place does not. Fair enough. EXCEPT for the fact that at that SAME XC race, if large enough, you'll see MUCH faster runners who do NOT look anything like Grant Fisher - and sometimes roughly as bad as the aforementioned slow frosh. And you can spend ALL DAY on YouTube watching world class runners who don't look nearly as pretty as Grant Fisher. Indeed, way worse. Hell, JUST start with John Ngugi. And then Salazar. And Zatopek. And Tananguchi (sp?). And dozens or hundreds of others, depending on how much time you want to waste.
With all due respect, it seems like such a lazy form of ignorance.
No, I said you were posting nonsense. And so did everyone else.
You're telling us how to run. And you're grasp of Biomechanics is weak.
We know how to run. Joe Hobbyjogger knows how to run. He learned good technique when he was a kid, like almost everyone else did.
You’re repeating the same tired dogma that I mentioned in my original post. It’s exhausting. My grasp of biomechanics is most definitely NOT weak, and you have failed to explain why anything I wrote in regard to elite running form is incorrect. Just calling it “nonsense” doesn’t really do anything to advance the discussion.
Elite runners have strong glutes and hamstrings which are the primary movers at speed. They generally run with a forward lean, some more pronounced than others (see: Tim, Jakob). This forward lean results in arm carriage that generally happens behind the body. They generally land underneath or slightly in front of their COM, and push off strongly with their calves/ankles, though a big part of the strength of the “push off” comes from lower leg tendon elasticity.
please tell me what I wrote above that is incorrect. Thanks.
No, I said you were posting nonsense. And so did everyone else.
You're telling us how to run. And you're grasp of Biomechanics is weak.
We know how to run. Joe Hobbyjogger knows how to run. He learned good technique when he was a kid, like almost everyone else did.
It's interesting how so many folks think that they know about good and bad form. But there are 2 kinds of ignorance:
1) The kind that MOST of us have, including me (runner and track fan for >40 years) - i.e., not knowing sh** about biomechanics. What is supposed to be where, when? No clue. This is probably hard to fix, as you'd have to LEARN about biomechanics, and depending on your sources and mental make-up, it might be hard to understand.
2) The OTHER kind of ignorance is far less defensible: It's the "good form is pretty" (or at least not ugly) view. Now, those who practice it would deny that they're being that simplistic. But in most cases (without the knowledge of #1 above), they almost certainly are. They'd say that Grant Fischer has good form. And the slow freshman XC runner all over the place does not. Fair enough. EXCEPT for the fact that at that SAME XC race, if large enough, you'll see MUCH faster runners who do NOT look anything like Grant Fisher - and sometimes roughly as bad as the aforementioned slow frosh. And you can spend ALL DAY on YouTube watching world class runners who don't look nearly as pretty as Grant Fisher. Indeed, way worse. Hell, JUST start with John Ngugi. And then Salazar. And Zatopek. And Tananguchi (sp?). And dozens or hundreds of others, depending on how much time you want to waste.
With all due respect, it seems like such a lazy form of ignorance.
Nice straw man. I never said good form was pretty. I said elites, in general, share certain characteristics about how they run that non-elites, in general, do not share. Always outliers on either side of the spectrum but that’s not who we’re talking about.
I also don’t think Grant Fisher’s form is that pretty. Arm carriage is a bit weird/robotic looking. He has superb hip mechanics though. Jakob’s form is much prettier.
No, I said you were posting nonsense. And so did everyone else.
You're telling us how to run. And you're grasp of Biomechanics is weak.
We know how to run. Joe Hobbyjogger knows how to run. He learned good technique when he was a kid, like almost everyone else did.
You’re repeating the same tired dogma that I mentioned in my original post. It’s exhausting. My grasp of biomechanics is most definitely NOT weak, and you have failed to explain why anything I wrote in regard to elite running form is incorrect. Just calling it “nonsense” doesn’t really do anything to advance the discussion.
Elite runners have strong glutes and hamstrings which are the primary movers at speed. They generally run with a forward lean, some more pronounced than others (see: Tim, Jakob). This forward lean results in arm carriage that generally happens behind the body. They generally land underneath or slightly in front of their COM, and push off strongly with their calves/ankles, though a big part of the strength of the “push off” comes from lower leg tendon elasticity.
please tell me what I wrote above that is incorrect. Thanks.
You're exhausting yourself kid. Calm dow and stpop preachin at us.
Firstly, we don't land under our center of mass because there would be no stance phase if that was correct.
We all know where to place our feet, we learned the technique as children.
The fore and aft arm carriage depends on whether the runner is accelerating or maintaining speed.
The discussion of the amount of forward lean is a consideration of aerodynamics. Smaller runner - more forward lean. Stronger headwind - more forward lean.
Most of us can run with powerful and efficient technique. The point you're missing is that this skill is extended in time and distance (endurance) with practice. The specifics of the movement skills and development of them are vastly complicated. A million words of text would tell less than half the story. However, hundreds of millions of years of evolution have given us the mental capacity to learn how to do it.
Genetics/talent. Two runners could have the same lifetime mileage & very different PBs. re we really gonna say one is working harder than the other? Hard work isn't always enough.
Form becomes more important when you have a fast runner looking for marginal gains. It's probably not going to be enough for a sub-elite type who is already running decent mileage to make a big jump in the sport.
You’re repeating the same tired dogma that I mentioned in my original post. It’s exhausting. My grasp of biomechanics is most definitely NOT weak, and you have failed to explain why anything I wrote in regard to elite running form is incorrect. Just calling it “nonsense” doesn’t really do anything to advance the discussion.
Elite runners have strong glutes and hamstrings which are the primary movers at speed. They generally run with a forward lean, some more pronounced than others (see: Tim, Jakob). This forward lean results in arm carriage that generally happens behind the body. They generally land underneath or slightly in front of their COM, and push off strongly with their calves/ankles, though a big part of the strength of the “push off” comes from lower leg tendon elasticity.
please tell me what I wrote above that is incorrect. Thanks.
You're exhausting yourself kid. Calm dow and stpop preachin at us.
Firstly, we don't land under our center of mass because there would be no stance phase if that was correct.
We all know where to place our feet, we learned the technique as children.
The fore and aft arm carriage depends on whether the runner is accelerating or maintaining speed.
The discussion of the amount of forward lean is a consideration of aerodynamics. Smaller runner - more forward lean. Stronger headwind - more forward lean.
Most of us can run with powerful and efficient technique. The point you're missing is that this skill is extended in time and distance (endurance) with practice. The specifics of the movement skills and development of them are vastly complicated. A million words of text would tell less than half the story. However, hundreds of millions of years of evolution have given us the mental capacity to learn how to do it.
You're exhausting yourself kid. Calm dow and stpop preachin at us.
Firstly, we don't land under our center of mass because there would be no stance phase if that was correct.
We all know where to place our feet, we learned the technique as children.
The fore and aft arm carriage depends on whether the runner is accelerating or maintaining speed.
The discussion of the amount of forward lean is a consideration of aerodynamics. Smaller runner - more forward lean. Stronger headwind - more forward lean.
Most of us can run with powerful and efficient technique. The point you're missing is that this skill is extended in time and distance (endurance) with practice. The specifics of the movement skills and development of them are vastly complicated. A million words of text would tell less than half the story. However, hundreds of millions of years of evolution have given us the mental capacity to learn how to do it.
It's interesting how so many folks think that they know about good and bad form. But there are 2 kinds of ignorance:
1) The kind that MOST of us have, including me (runner and track fan for >40 years) - i.e., not knowing sh** about biomechanics. What is supposed to be where, when? No clue. This is probably hard to fix, as you'd have to LEARN about biomechanics, and depending on your sources and mental make-up, it might be hard to understand.
2) The OTHER kind of ignorance is far less defensible: It's the "good form is pretty" (or at least not ugly) view. Now, those who practice it would deny that they're being that simplistic. But in most cases (without the knowledge of #1 above), they almost certainly are. They'd say that Grant Fischer has good form. And the slow freshman XC runner all over the place does not. Fair enough. EXCEPT for the fact that at that SAME XC race, if large enough, you'll see MUCH faster runners who do NOT look anything like Grant Fisher - and sometimes roughly as bad as the aforementioned slow frosh. And you can spend ALL DAY on YouTube watching world class runners who don't look nearly as pretty as Grant Fisher. Indeed, way worse. Hell, JUST start with John Ngugi. And then Salazar. And Zatopek. And Tananguchi (sp?). And dozens or hundreds of others, depending on how much time you want to waste.
With all due respect, it seems like such a lazy form of ignorance.
Nice straw man. I never said good form was pretty. I said elites, in general, share certain characteristics about how they run that non-elites, in general, do not share. Always outliers on either side of the spectrum but that’s not who we’re talking about.
I also don’t think Grant Fisher’s form is that pretty. Arm carriage is a bit weird/robotic looking. He has superb hip mechanics though. Jakob’s form is much prettier.
The desire and ability to compartmentalize pain! Plain and simple.
Seriously, you think that is what separates elites from mid-packers?!? 🤦♀️
Confirmed with what I’ve heard Jack Daniels say, the simple answer is genetics, all else (training, environment, motivation, diet, etc.) being equal. There are a multitude of physical factors, whether in the musculoskeletal system (limb length/weight, muscle length tie-in, etc., or internally (organs, blood, etc.) expressed through the DNA, that can be optimized for running.
Just look at two thoroughbred horses. Sometimes it is quite apparent just by physical appearance that one is a winner, while another is only for show.
Biomechanics are the main difference, however you could spend all day copying elite runners and get no results. Biomechanics are more about what is going on internally than externally. A well tensioned fascia, coordinated muscle co-contraction and timed release of elastic energy provide good form without needing to think about it.