heel-striking vs. midfoot/toes

Watch and learn. The Ethiopians are clearly mid-foot striking. When you first try it you're calf's will explode but once used to it you'll wonder what the hell you were doing before.

If you run without shoes you'll find it almost impossible to hit the ground with your heel first, it'll hurt like a mother.

Joan Benoit was/is a heel striker.

I'm a heel striker, but I land on my heel, roll forward and toe off. Heel impacts ground directly under my knee/CofG and then I'm rolling. It is efficient and not overstriding. However when I sprint I'm up on my toes and heel never touches the ground. Toes impact ground under my CofG. I'm sure that at 1500m pace or thereabouts I'm landing more midfoot.

Also when running barefoot one almost always lands on midfoot but then again there are no shoes with elevated heels on one's feet. Shoes with thicker heels than forefoot cushioning make it harder to land midfoot but take the shoes off and it's hard to land heel first. Basic geometry. Put on spikes and you become a midfoot striker.

Try walking and not landing on your heel first. Ever see a midfoot walker?

Don't f**k with the way you run. Put in enough miles and workouts and your body will adapt to the most efficient method. Simple

adsadsd wrote:

Hicham was a heel striker.

El G was not a heel striker. It may appear as though he's heel striking in some pictures, because his foot would alwayes dorsiflexed before he hit the ground on his forefoot. This caused it to act sort of like a lever and made his stride very powerful. Alan Webb sort of does this and so do a lot of sprinters.

j torres

d ritzenhein

if you can see the soles of their shoes from the front angle- then they are surely heel strikers.

the human body was designed to run landing on the forefoot. there is no denying that. when you land on your heel, the only thing dispelling the shock of impact is the cushioning in the heel of the shoe. the rest of the shock travels up your fibula/tibia into your knees.

landing midfoot/forefoot dispells shock much better. its starts with the arch of the foot, which is a natural spring. the achilles tendon is another spring, and to an extent the calves are as well. the achilles and arch also provide energy return into the toe-off, making the stride overall more efficient.

the midfoot stride is a dynamic motion that provides excellent energy return and less shock. landing on the heel provides no energy return, and the runner must power through each stride if heel-striking.

heel-striking is caused by cushioned running shoes, and by runners not being taught about form early in their career. early humans ran exclusively on their forefoot, since they could not run on their heel without pain. large cushioned heels on shoes have allowed runners to get away with heel-striking with less consequences.

sportblock wrote:

none of those pictures show heel striking (contact with the heel and ground. I think you can find better photos of elites heel striking.

This one of Sihine is pretty close. I think it's pretty clear.

you think so?http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2123/1918579853_492f234281.jpg?v=0http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0d1M8M5d2t895/610x.jpg

yyyyyyeeeeaaaahhh righttttt wrote:

j torres

d ritzenhein

if you can see the soles of their shoes from the front angle- then they are surely heel strikers.

Here's one of Goumri:

http://www.letsrun.com/photos/2008/londonmarathon/imagepages/image6.php

That is not clear at all. If anything I would say it shows that he is a midfoot striker if you follow the trajectory of his foot. On another note, I am have a hard time visualizing how someone can hit with their heal first but have the point of first contact under their center of gravity.

nicely wrote:

This one of Sihine is pretty close. I think it's pretty clear.

http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/53340597/

if you run fast enough, you will not heel strike. it's that simple. you will never ever see a sprinter land on his heels. it's just not possible at top speed. it may be easier to heel strike at slower speeds, but i don't know if it's more efficient. i would be inclined to say it is not.

Not a single one of those photos has a person heel striking. Notice that all of the guys are still off the ground. By the time their foot hits the ground, their center of mass will have moved forward and they will all land mid-foot. I have seen each of those people run---in person, and I can tell you that like almost all fast runners, they would be characterized as mid-foot strikers.

Herb Elliot: I know the picture that the person who thought he was a heelstriker saw. It was at the very end of the race, and was lunging at the tape.

http://members.iinet.net.au/~peterg1/run/18_th_elliott_1.jpg

however, he did not heel strike...http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7311129901851313869

And just because it looks like someone heel strikes based on a single picture, doesn't mean they do. This picture, besides being badass, makes it look like Morceli is heelstriking:

http://members.iinet.net.au/~peterg1/run/bravo2.JPG

I'm pretty sure he doesn't heel strike.

GranpaChook wrote:

If you run without shoes you'll find it almost impossible to hit the ground with your heel first, it'll hurt like a mother.

Hurt like a mother? Maybe if you slam your heels into the ground. When I jog barefoot, I land on my heels. However, I brush the ground with my heels first. When I start running faster, I start to shift toward my forefeet.

With minimalists/forefoot striking advocates there is no middle ground. You either have "proper form" and land up on your toes regardless of pace or you're unenlightened and pound the shit out of your heels. How about people who land on their forefeet but transition back to their heels? Or people who are very light heel "strikers"?

That is not the picture I was speaking of. The picture

I referred to is in his book, "The Golden Mile".

I have not been able to locate in on the net and I think

I was mistaken in stating that that is where I first saw

it.

At easy/recovery pace, I heel strike, but as I get down in pace I move onto my toes (I start going mid foot around 6:30 pace [Half marathon], and move onto the forefoot for anything under 6:00, [10k and down])

Running 8:00/mile pace on your toes is retarded. Running 5:00/mile pace on your heels is retarded.

GranpaChook wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLg4j4gMzqA

When you first try it you're calf's will explode...

Did you graduate from high school?

808 wrote:

How about people who land on their forefeet but transition back to their heels? Or people who are very light heel "strikers"?

That's what most midfoot/forefoot strikers do, they land on the outside of the midfoot, pronate, then the heel touches down for a brief second, followed the heel lifting and toeing off at the end of the stride. For most people, only when sprinting all out does the heel not touch at all. There was a book of athletics that showed snapshots of different athletes doing their thing in "slow motion". Seb Coe, Steve Ovett and Steve Cram all touched heels down during midstance. Cram barely did because the picture was him at sub 55 pace. I think What matters is what hits the ground first, just because your heel hits the ground after your midfoot doesn't mean you are a heel striker.

Do the mechanics cause the speed or does the speed cause the mechanics? I little bit of both, I would think.

different perspective wrote:

Not a single one of those photos has a person heel striking. Notice that all of the guys are still off the ground. By the time their foot hits the ground, their center of mass will have moved forward and they will all land mid-foot. I have seen each of those people run---in person, and I can tell you that like almost all fast runners, they would be characterized as mid-foot strikers.

Maybe you didn't see my last post, or sportblock's post after my first. They contain pictures of elite marathoners with only their heel touching the ground. No mistake. No argument. Heel strike. My point isn't that one is faster or more efficient. My point is that you can not deal out bullshit absolute statements like "they all will land mid-foot," or, "show me an elite that..." and be correct. Blindly recommending one person's form at one speed for everyone else is stupid.

By the way, you are wrong. Let's try a few more, since you're being picky.

Abdi on the track:

Abdi & Meb on the track(unless you want to gripe about the 1/16th of an inch under Meb's heel as not counting):

Culpepper on the roads:

I also agree with 808 that people seem to think that you're either bounding lightly on your toes or stomping on your heels. You can, efficiently, strike lightly on your heels, depending on how fast you're running.

Look, there are outliers with everything.

Just because some guys do it, doesn't prove that it's not true.

Meb and Abdi heel strike.

That doesn't mean that everyone should.

Most elite athletes run pretty well. Not all do.

Overall, I'd say that IN GENERAL, heel striking is not the most efficient way to run. BUT if you've been running like that for years and years, then it probably is more efficient than if you switched to proper running. Why? Because you've got like 15 years of neural programming on how to properly fire all those muscles and to what degree while heel striking. If you changed, you'd wipe out 15 years of neural programming.

THAT is why short term, form changing studies are useless and stupid.