GRAVITY DOES NOT PULL YOU FORWARD!!!!!!!!!!

Jhuffman wrote:

however I repeat again my old form was not as good as the POSE METHOD technique. Does this make since? are you follow what I am tring to say?

No, it doesn't make sense and I am not following what you are trying to say. The previous poster referenced specific studies and analysis performed by by trained experts (and complying with the laws of physics).

You've simply repeated your assertions that your method is 'better' without any substantiation.

As a poster many pages ago stated, skeptics will be greatly swayed when they see a Geb, Bekele or Tergat adopt this superior running method.

Dr. Pose sells certifications??? What a joke. That is the hallmark of self-promotion

hmmmm,

When displaying optimal Pose form one will still be using stored elastic energy of the calves/achilles, the difference is that the only active muscle recruitment is coming from the hamstring upon ball of the foot impact. And I disagree with you, no matter which speed I run whether it be 7 minute pace or 5 minute pace I am only actively lifting my hamstring. Yes, there are other forces at work that allow one to run Pose technique(gravity,ground reaction force,inertia,muscle elasticity,etc..). Just as Dr. Romanov explains, stride length increases because there is a higher pull from the hamstring, thus a farther forward fall. If one tries to force a longer than necessary stride length they only risk getting ahead of their GCM. Have you ever watch a video of El G, or Bernard Lagat? Notice that they have more simialarities to Pose Method of running technique than differences. Do you agree or disagree?

Absolutely they have more in common with the POSE than not.

Of course, the main aspect being that in both cases, gravity is working solely downward.

Nevertheless, maybe Dr. Romanov can find a way to plant chips in the hips of runners, so that whenever one takes a POSE METHOD ((c), TM, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED) stride, they'll have a tiny amount deducted from their checking accounts and deposited in his account in the Cayman Islands.

Asterix wrote:

Jhuffman wrote:

however I repeat again my old form was not as good as the POSE METHOD technique. Does this make since? are you follow what I am tring to say?

No, it doesn't make sense and I am not following what you are trying to say. The previous poster referenced specific studies and analysis performed by by trained experts (and complying with the laws of physics).

You've simply repeated your assertions that your method is 'better' without any substantiation.

As a poster many pages ago stated, skeptics will be greatly swayed when they see a Geb, Bekele or Tergat adopt this superior running method.

Your logic makes little since to me. I personally don't won't to mimic the forms of Geb, Bekele or Tergat and even if you could I don't see them going around teaching it, do you? I bet if you asked each of them whether they thought they had the perfect form I bet you they would NOT say yes. I am sure they believe they have put in lots of hard work and effort to achieve their accomplishments in running, but just like you and I they are still under the influence of internal/external forces. I want to run with the greatest possible efficiency that I can based on the forces that are under my control, which is my ability to put my body into the position necessary to counteract all the forces opposing me when I run. Then and only then will I have the best form possible. If you choose to wait for scientific proof to base your decisions on great, good luck and while your waiting I will continue helping others become more efficient runners. Good day!

MARI,

As always it is a pleasure to read your posts. Anyways, do you even run? If so how much? What are your personal bests?

"I said Good Day, sir!"

Really funny when Jon Stewart uses this line.

Also funny when you say "I personally don't won't to mimic the forms of Geb, Bekele or Tergat ..."

I do.

Good day.

I don't advocate mimicking anyone elses form, whether they be a world record holder or a middle aged college professor.

But if this Pose method of running is so absolutely good, then why would they not be interested in trying it for themselves? At their level, even the slightest improvement in efficiency would mean the difference between a podium finish and a congratulatory handshake. If the best in the world are tempted to use illegal drugs in search of success, then why not try this legal running form method?

Now that is just ignorant. Running is not some faith-based initiative. It is the result of physical forces applied to the ground and the movement of our bodies, ie something that can be scientifically analyzed.

The posetech website specifically states "The Pose Method considers Gravity as a major source for the forward propulsion of the running athlete. So all his or her efforts should be aimed at assisting it."

This thread has several times clearly explained that gravity can do no NET work in terms of assisting your running. Anything you gain by having gravity pull your center of mass downward must be countered by lifting it back up.

A frame-by-frame study of almost all elite athletes will indicate that their center of gravity moves very little in the vertical direction throughout their stride (even the head-bobbing Radcliffe). What this means is that gravity is NOT a major source for the forward propulsion of the running athlete and these are very efficient runners.

If you are willing to jump wholeheartedly into this Pose methodology without bothering to take an analytical look at the fundamentals, then that is your right. Just don't be surprised when others counter your claims of running Nirvana.

Henry,

Okay so you refuse to make any improvements to your form unless you can get BEKELE,GEB,and TERGAT to approve it and show you this technique? Does that seem even slightly, like an unrealistic goal?

Asterix,

I am sorry that your current perspective of reality blinds you from a more efficient running style. I still however encourage you to try Pose Method running technique and see how you can actually have gravity assist you while running even if it goes against your current understanding of gravity. Good luck!

Jhuffman wrote:

see how you can actually have gravity assist you while running even if it goes against your current understanding of gravity. Good luck!

My current understanding of gravity? What about the current understanding of gravity of virtually anyone who has ever passed a high school level physics course?

Has this thread not been explicitly clear how gravity acts directly downwards? How no net change in the vertical direction of the center of mass means that gravity has done no NET work or assistance?

While gravity may be just a 'theory', it does include some laws, namely Newton's third law of motion. Unless you are running downhill or in such a manner that your center of gravity is getting closer and closer to the ground, then it is definitely applicable to running and hence why the great runners do not allow their center of mass to move much at all in the vertical direction. That is something I can buy into.

Given the fact that your personal bests are far superior in the middle distances, proper running technique is the least of your problems.

You are simply undertrained aerobically and have found this POSE method as a way to get you to the next level without ever having to do real hard work to get you there.

Tell all of us what your volume of mileage was like preceding and during the racing seasons in which you obtained your PRs.

Like I said before, your middle distance times are national class, which indicates that you have a lot of natural speed (and probably very efficient form). Your 10k time however is a clear sign that you lack the aerobic capacity to maintain your form over longer distances.

Look, I agree that Romanov makes some good points (such as: try to land right under one's body, not ahead of it, and that a slight lean forward could be beneficial for forward momentum, at least better than leaning backwards), I just think he overemphasizes many points in order to make his "system" seem more original than it really is.

I know. I only suggested otherwise because one poster acted like virtually only the hamstrings come into play for forwards movement when running "pose".

1) I disagree that the "only active muscle recruitment is coming from the hamstring upon ball of the foot impact." As I mentioned in my demonstration, if simply pull my feet of the ground, I will not move forward much at all. Dr Romanov talks of "falling forward." What is the best way to get that forward falling motion ? I think it is pushing the body forward by leaving the foot on the ground as long as possible (not pulling it up immediately) and pushing against the ground with your foot by using the hip extenors.

2) I agree that forcing a longer stride than one can handle is be counterproductive. If one is not strong enough, or flexible enough to create a big hip extension angle, they simply won't be able to do so efficiently. And YES, of course trying to increase stride length by landing in front of one's body will act like a break, and be inefficient. This is not the way to increase stride length.

3) I agree that many top runners have strides that have similarities to some of the "pose" method "techniques." I just disagree with some of the explanations that Romanov gives on why his technique works (some of the gravity concepts, that idea that one should just pull one's feet off the ground as quickly as possible with no "pushing" to create forward motion, and that worrying about stride length is a waste of time).

Lets some up the proper way to run:

create forward momentum of your body as powerfully and efficiently as possible with leg 1 (using concentric action/power of quad, ankles/calf, hip extensors/ham/glute) and then, also as powerfully and efficiently as possible (gravity assists bring foot to ground, but this is NOT a passive process), place foot of leg 2 under one's body in order to continue momentum with as little decceleration as possible . Repeat step 1 with leg 2 .....(ie, use as little energy as possible to continue the momentum you achieved with first leg).

I just don't think Romanov has shed that much new light on this concept. I think he has contributed to running by getting us all to think about what running is in its most basic parts, and how to best achieve forward momentum effiently, but I, and others, just don't agree with some of his explanations/concepts, or at least don't find them that original/interesting.

Mr. Douche bag,

I appreciate your concern for my aerobic capacity. When I feel like a need some advice in this area, I will be sure to let you know. Thanks!

If you would have asked me 5 months ago whether I believed in the "forward falling motion of running", I would have agreed with you. However, I repeat I like everyone that follows the principles of Pose Method technique, now looks at the roll of gravity with a different perspective. Until, you experience the ease from which you can run using this technique I don't think you are going to change your perspective. Nonetheless, I hope you will continue to explore the possibilities for your on sake. Good luck!

Is there a reason you will post your best times and not the average weekly mileage logged to obtain them?

I truly am curious about this technique and its long term effects on one's running. Since you are the most outspoken POSE proponent, why not let yourself be the guinea pig?

It is imperitive we know what your training schedule looked like then compared to now. The only difference in the two schedules should be the recent addition of POSE form techniques. Therefore, over time, as we all watch your PRs drop, we can be absolutely certain that POSE is the answer.

Mr. Douche bag,

If you want to track my progress that would will be fine. As far as being a guinea pig I will pass. I am currently, personal training/coaching/and being a dad, so there are a lot of changes since I accomplished my personal bests. I recommend you try the technique for yourself and then you can be your own guinea pig, and you can come on and post your results. As for as my future competions I will be racing a 10k in March and if all my training goes as planned I will be looking forward to a Personal Best. Good Day!

bump

Question: If gravity has no positive influence on running speed then.... Why was running on the moon so slow for the astronauts? Another question: If gravity cannot be translated into horizontial force, then what makes a roller coaster travel forward?

Gravity does add to running speed. Otherwise there would be no need for the foot to land in front of the center of gravity of the runner's body. Otherwise no need for any forward lean while running. Look at the 2 best runners, technique wise (Seb Coe and Gebr...). They lean slightly.

(1) The COG (center of gravity) is 2 or more inches higher at the moment the big toe leaves the ground, at "takeoff".

(2) The quads, knee tendons, qastrocnemious, soleous, achilles tendon & foot muscles and tendons ALL store the energy generated as a result of the mass of the body falling the before mentioned 2+ inches. After the COG passes over the foot, then this energy is gradually "returned" like a rubber band. This adds to the energy added by the pushing action of the leg/foot/butt and even back muscles...

Even real physics STUDENTS can be wrong... As you were on the plane/treadmill riddle... (The wheels are not, really part of the force providing system of the plane. Therefore the engines will drag the plane at it's normal speed and the plan does take off).