Dix has broken foot

W/o being an expert and knowing the the details, I doubt Dix's injury will keep him out for an entire year. If the fracture is related to training, the injury is probably to one of the metatarsal bones. With proper treatment, a bone fracture can fuse in about 4-6 weeks, about another 4-6 weeks to bear weight, strenthen the ligaments, tendons and suporting muscles and begin light exercise. Even if it is the mother of all breaks, with proper treatment/rehab, Dix should be back training in mid-April. He definietly want be 100% by the trails and may not reach his goal fitness until late in the year.

Surgery

Cast 6 weeks (late feb)

Walking with crutches 4 weeks (mid March)

Walking w/o crutches 2 weeks (Late March)

Light exercise 4 (early Apr)

Resume training to rebuild fitness (mid-Apr)

Full training and competiton (late May)

My analysis is based on the NFL; we have all seen football players break a foot early in the season and make it back for playoffs.

you do the math wrote:

Distance guys often don't understand that a elite 100meters inflicts something similiar to the total pounding of a 4 minute mile but it happens in just10 seconds.

Try harder. A 10 second 100m is no where near the total pounding of a 4 min mile.

However, the MAXIMAL force is considerably higher and its this maximal force that causes injuries, fractures, and muscle tears.

Its easier for sprinters to get stress fractures and muscle tears because they are reaching a maximal level of output day in day out and bones require bare minimum 10 days of rest to heal and sprinters carry more mass.

Also, a 10 sec 100m doesn't wear most out, so several can be performed a week. Try running 3 4 min miles a week.

Very different. Simply put its easier to get hurt in sprinting.

A math person wrote:

Also, a 10 sec 100m doesn't wear most out, so several can be performed a week. Try running 3 4 min miles a week.

I was with ya until here. Isn't this a bit fitness dependent? A 4:00 or a 10.0 probably wouldn't wear out EITHER El G or Bolt (respectively).

Sprint "training" is different from sprint "competing".

There is WAY more pounding in training than in competition.

WAY more. It's not even about maximal output, as that is relatively rare during training--it's due to the intrinsic nature of the motions, and to fatigue.

When a sprinter gets fatigued in training (can happen very quickly), their critical timing is affected--and when timing is off ever so slightly, "pounding" results, especially small fractures, things like shin splints, fasciitis, etc..

Recovery between major efforts while training, or keeping the level of effort below that which induces fatigue-related timing-related injuries, is critical when doing certain drills.

And it doesn't take long to get injured in this way, either.

Doing a single bad 50m pass of bounds can be enough to take you out for a while.

Sprintgeezer wrote:

When a sprinter gets fatigued in training (can happen very quickly), their critical timing is affected--and when timing is off ever so slightly, "pounding" results, especially small fractures, things like shin splints, fasciitis, etc...

Correct me if I'm wrong but fasciitis doesn't form from "small fractures"

I didn't mean to suggest that fasciitis was resulted to "small fractures", but included it as a different injury category.

Sorry for the confusion.

Ryan Baily is other guy with foot fracture.

I have known people to be out upwards of a year with metatarsal fractures. It really depends on the blood supply to the bone.

"Dix has always seemed to me to "hammer" his starts--rather than staying low and driving long, he seems to hammer his feet into the track, rather vertically, which may account for his not-great start--that is, he doesn't seem to "feel" the ground at the start, to "paw" the ground, he seems to hammer "at" the ground instead."

I don't write the following to criticize the sprintgeezer, but it's important to understand because, unless we are educated about other events in track and how they've changed to produce greater results through technical advancements, we come off sounding like the announcers that for years thought that Carl Lewis had a 'bad' start. This was a misconception. His guru coach, Tom Tellez, was involved in the throws before taking up sprinting, so he was the first elite-level sprint coach to consider the start from strictly an energy and power perspective.

This evolved into what we know today:

The most sound principles of force application utilized by the best sprint coaches in the world today actually cue against pawing at the ground and against intentionally trying to stay low. This causes the foot to land directly under, or worse, in front of the sprinter during acceleration and poor upper-body posture inhibiting the greatest amount of force.

What educated coaches now emphasize is for the athlete to actually push as long, and as hard, as possible into the ground so that the maximum hip extension is achieved at each ground contact. When the athletes up and out of the blocks, the foot lands behind the torso. If this is done properly, the athlete will actually be completely erect in posture but the bodies angle in relation to the ground will be acute, giving the perception of 'staying low' but actually there is no forced restricting of posture. With constant and long application against the ground during acceleration ('the start') a smooth change from an acute angle to a vertical position ready for maximum velocity in the middle of the race can occur.

What this creates is an allusion of a slow start because each contact is done a large range of motion. But starting from 0mph, a large range takes time to be achieved. Momentum must be created.

When the athlete pushes hard into the ground rather than paws out in front, they utilize a greater percentage of muscle fibers with that large range, as well, allowing them to be less fatigued then the Fred-Flinstone starters that accelerate too quickly due to a shortened range of motion. A larger percentage of muscle fibers at the beginning allows there to be less overall fatigue in the last 20m, giving the allusion of Carl Lewis having a 'kick' at the end of the 100m. He was simply slowing down less than everyone else because he was patiently using the full capacity of his limbs from the beginning.

Certainly you could slice apart some of this with the argument of drugs, but basic physics and physiology support these ideas.

How this relates to Walter Dix is that he creates a significant amount of force, applied for long periods, at the beginning of his race. This allows him to be more capable of maintaining a higher percentage of his speed at the end of a 100m and 200m race, but also, especially as he matures and slowly adds bulk over time, his feet are going to be in danger because they are under increasing amounts of force.

So I say all of this not to totally correct the idea that he's risking the health of his feet, but that the physics of the 100m require him to risk this eventuality to make the most of his acceleration phase. It's the necessary evil and any 'pawing' or 'staying low' may save his feet but cost him the race.

"Dix has always seemed to me to "hammer" his starts--rather than staying low and driving long, he seems to hammer his feet into the track, rather vertically, which may account for his not-great start--that is, he doesn't seem to "feel" the ground at the start, to "paw" the ground, he seems to hammer "at" the ground instead."

I don't write the following to criticize the sprintgeezer, but it's important to understand because, unless we are educated about other events in track and how they've changed to produce greater results through technical advancements, we come off sounding like the announcers that for years thought that Carl Lewis had a 'bad' start. This was a misconception. His guru coach, Tom Tellez, was involved in the throws before taking up sprinting, so he was the first elite-level sprint coach to consider the start from strictly an energy and power perspective.

This evolved into what we know:

The most sound principles of force application utilized by the best sprint coaches in the world today actually cue against both pawing at the ground and against intentionally trying to stay low. These two things cause the foot to land directly under, or worse, in front of the sprinter during acceleration rather than behind, reducing the ability to fully extend the all-powerful hip to the ground. Also, poor upper-body posture ('staying low') inhibits the greatest amount of force to be applied because the ankle, knee, hip, and shoulders must be in a straight line for the big muscles (ie, the butt) to apply force for the longest amount of time. Staying low almost always creates a break at the hip that prevents this from happening. Try to jump as high as you can into the air without fully extending your legs and upper body into a vertical, straight line. You can't do it. You'll be off balance. A sprinter must be balanced and under control while producing wild amounts of force. Joint alignment is absolutely imperative.

What educated coaches now emphasize is for the athlete to actually push as long, and as hard, as possible into the ground so that the maximum hip extension is achieved at each ground contact. This aggressive, hard pushing is probably what 'sprintgeezer' is referring to when he said Walter Dix 'hammers' the track. Absolutely. Apply force!

When the athlete comes up and out of the blocks, the foot lands behind the torso even if they have full hip extension. Remember that Michael Jackson video, 'Smooth Criminal,' where he leans over preposterously far without falling? This is essentially what sprinters do to their bodies in acceleration accept that the powerful, full extension of their hip allows them to avoid falling on their face. If they stuck their foot towards the ground to keep them falling ('pawing at the ground') this would be a cue for the hamstrings, essentially, to break momentum rather than the glutes / hips to create force.

If the extension is done properly, the athlete will actually be completely erect in posture but the bodies angle in relation to the ground will be acute (a la Michael Jackson's lean), giving the perception of 'staying low' but actually there will be no forced restricting of posture. The integrity of the line between ankle and shoulder will be preserved. No pawing / reaching out in front and no collapsing at the waist to 'stay low.'

With constant and long application against the ground during acceleration ('the start') a smooth change from an acute angle to a vertical position for maximum velocity in the middle of the race is possible.

What this creates is an allusion of a slow start because each contact is done with a large range of motion. Starting from zero mph, a large range takes time to be achieved. Momentum must be created aggressively but optimally. If it feels slow to a sprinter, it's usually right.

When the athlete pushes hard into the ground rather than paws out in front, they utilize a greater percentage of muscle fibers because a greater range of motion does exactly that - recruits more muscle fibers.

This allows the sprinter to be less fatigued muscularly and neuromuscularly than the Fred-Flinstone starters that accelerate too quickly due to a shortened range of motion. These types of 'fast' starters reach their maximum velocity too far from the finish line so their deceleration, unavoidable for all 100m athletes, actually lasts too long to be successful. It starts from farther away from the finish line putting them at a huge disadvantage where the finish line is actually placed. A fast start looks impressive but if done improperly, makes for a bad finish.

A larger percentage of muscle fibers at the beginning allows there to be less overall fatigue in the last 20m, giving the allusion of Carl Lewis having a 'kick' at the end of the 100m. He was simply slowing down less than everyone else because he was patiently using the full capacity of his limbs from the beginning.

Certainly you could slice apart some of this with the argument of drugs allowing him to do such things, but basic physics and physiology support these ideas. A long, hard push on each ground contact in the acceleration phase and an erect posture but at an acute that slowly becomes perpendicular is the straight-up ticket. 100%.

How this relates to Walter Dix is that he creates a significant amount of force, applied for long periods, at the beginning of his race. This allows him to be more capable of maintaining a higher percentage of his speed at the end of a 100m and 200m race, but also, especially as he matures and slowly adds bulk over time, his feet are going to be in danger because they are under increasing amounts of force. Greater force leads to greater speed, but his bones don't get significantly stronger to handle his changing force capacity. It's a delicate line to be at the top of the world in a physical pursuit.

So I say all of this not to totally correct the idea that he's risking the health of his feet, but that the physics of the 100m require him to risk this eventuality to make the most of his acceleration phase. It's the necessary evil and any 'pawing' or 'staying low' may save his feet but will absolutely cost him the race.

Sorry about the double posting.

I didn't think my first version when through.

In the end, I hope he's healthy and can represent the US with speed, class, and clean hand-offs this summer. We're better with him racing.

Are you saying we will not be Patton Gay Dix at the Olympic Trials?

Beaver Retriever wrote:

Are you saying we will not be Patton Gay Dix at the Olympic Trials?

My 4th graders do better than that.

A math person wrote:

Also, a 10 sec 100m doesn't wear most out, so several can be performed a week. Try running 3 4 min miles a week.

Huh?

You try running three 10.0 100s per week, and let us know how that goes.

Most long distance runners haven't truly *sprinted* in months if not years, and have no idea what they're talking about when it comes to recovery from sprint training and especially racing.

A *truly maximal* effort in the 100 (something most long distance runners know nothing about - myself included) is certainly not something that can happen three times per week - not for long, anyway.

Criticize away! That's why we're here, right?

Thanks for the thoughtful post...let's look at this suggestion:

"What educated coaches now emphasize is for the athlete to actually push as long, and as hard, as possible into the ground so that the maximum hip extension is achieved at each ground contact. When the athletes up and out of the blocks, the foot lands behind the torso."

There are lots of "educated" sprint coaches around, and not all of them emphasize the same thing--many have very disparate ideas.

However, some do now emphasize long and hard pushing, but not necessarily to the point of full hip extension. I myself have written many times on this board that long and hard pushing is preferred, for instance in this thread and others:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4284124

"Remember that you are only accelerating for that period during which you are receiving reaction force from the ground. Do not try to minimize contact time--minimize lack of contact time near the start. Slide your feet along and near the ground like Powell and even Bolt do. Stay low. As your forward speed increases your foot speed will need to increase, and you will gradually need to have more swing to the leg to generate the required foot speed."

My point was that Dix doesn't seem to be particularly smooth at the start. It seems as though his neurology is geared very specifically to very quick cycling, with an extremely low period of time during which positive force application occurs (as opposed to that used in a recovery motion). If true, it would contribute to his excellence in the latter part of the 100, and in the 200.

He doesn't seem to be able to sustain the required contact time during early acceleration, and hence doesn't accelerate nearly as well as others in the first 20m of the 100m.

To be fair, it seems as though his start has improved--to me, it looked slightly better at 2011 WC's than it has in the past, with a bit more smoothness.

He still looks to be hammering "at" the ground, rather than having a good feel "for" the ground, however, and that makes for a huge reaction force from the ground, over a very little interval of time, in his body--muscles, connective tissue, and bones. The guy has huge leg strength, and hammering his feet at the ground with those legs, during the acceleration phase, is a recipe for injury. I don't agree with your suggestion that he applies force "for long periods" at the beginning of his races.

All one needs to do is to look at this old video of Dix to get an idea of what I mean:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiSsTxmy89A

It is a front view of Dix and Holliday in an old 100m from 2007.

FF to around :30, and you can see that Dix's early turnover BLOWS AWAY that of Holliday, who is known for quick turnover. Dix is actually minimizing contact time more than just about anybody I've ever seen, and his first 20m were only as good as that of the worst guy in the race.

That video is going on 5 years old, but Dix's start hasn't changed dramatically...and 5 years of that type of beating, depending on what he's doing in training, is going to take its toll. That type of form is much easier on his body at speed than during acceleration.

The word "pawing" is used for a number of reasons, to describe a number of ideas, the first and foremost being that you want to emphasize force down the track, in the direction of travel, by focussing on the rearward motion of the foot. Another idea it tries to convey is that of smoothness, of feel for the ground, of force application at the optimum time and for the optimum duration, and the smooth transition to recovery.

What the word "pawing" does not refer to is the suggestion that one should significantly "overstride", or place their foot significantly "in front" of the center of mass.

IMHO, the bulk of the dangerous forces in the foot are not generated directly through muscular action--they are generated when the foot contacts the ground and a reaction force is experienced. The reaction force can probably have extremely high instantaneous values, even though they don't last for long--but they don't have to, to cause injury. That is why TIMING is everything in sprint training, to avoid injury.

Think of it this way: punch a brick wall. Your hand and arm won't get hurt through the act of accelerating your fist toward the wall...but the almost instantaneous deceleration as your hand hits the wall must result in tremendous reaction forces (F=ma again, F=mdeltav/t, reduce t dramatically, and F increases dramatically).

IF Dix has a foot injury, my guess is that it is the result of him hammering the ground during early acceleration, not having a sufficiently long contact time, and as a result having difficulty with the coordination timing required to minimize ground reaction forces in his body.

I think I understand more your meaning now. I hadn't studied Dix's progression much in terms of starting. I was more alarmed by the cue of pawing which I had understood as coaches asking the athletes to grab at the ground. From what I understand, you think of that cue differently than I assumed.

I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say:

"want to emphasize force down the track, in the direction of travel, by focusing on the rearward motion of the foot"

Are you talking about the motion of the foot after contact or before?

It appears you know much more than me. Now I am just curious.

On another note, or maybe another factor to consider:

His posture in that 100m at the end does seem rotated forward quite a bit. I always thought he was hunched a bit. Maybe, as you compare to people Gay and Bolt, he doesn't actually push long enough (the short hammering you described), so he ends up broken at the waste. Instead of safely applying force, he 'breaks the chain' at his waist resulting in unsafe contact at the ground.

The word "pawing" is a good example of how difficult it can be to describe well a complex physiologic phenomenon.

"Pawing" can be fairly described as "grabbing", but not in the usual sense of the word unless you have opposable thumbs on your feet.

The word "grabbing", like "pawing", is used to convey to sprinters the idea that they should NOT be "hitting" the ground.

It is both about timing coordination--smoothness of motion, contacting the ground at the right time, making sure that rearward foot speed is essentially maximum at the time of contact--with the result that the reaction forces from the ground are all optimized in beneficial directions--upwards just enough to compensate for the loss in elevation of the center of mass due to gravity acting during the stride, and forwards as much as possible to give you speed toward the finish line.

When "pawing" or "grabbing" rather than "hitting" is successful, the motion will feel much smoother to the sprinter when the sprinter is at high speed--because it actually IS smoother. Although each sprinter's biomechanics are unique, and each sprinter may have a different optimal foot placement at high speed, the variability is actually very small, relative to the center of mass. They can LOOK very different, but that effect is created by the differences in body mass distribution, and body posture while sprinting.

The tiny variability is due to the muscular differences among individuals. No 2 people are the same, but we are all pretty darn close. The tiny variability can effectively be ignored when at high sprinting speed.

During acceleration, however, "optimal" foot placement for any given sprinter can vary more--some people really can, and do, "pull" more than others during early acceleration.

How is his foot now?

Funny how some anonymous posters know more about Walter Dix' health than Walter does. He THINKS he's feeling fine and apparently racing in April.

waltdix02 Walter Dix

FEELIN GOOD, FEELIN GREAT.........

14 hours ago

donkardonkey Don Kardonkey

@

@waltdix02 feeling as good as Bob? youtube.com/watch?v=7ErQUY…

13 hours ago

in reply to ↑

@waltdix02

Walter Dix

@donkardonkey lol....close to it

Just because some moron (Brutal?) on sprintzone said he had a broken foot doesn't make it so.