Pose = crazy???

John,

I think this may eventually get to your statement. But, quite a bit of fuss was made earlier on this thread about the pose method violating the laws of physics and I think we are close to a conclusion on that point. When Jim has time to tell me if I am wrong or right about my interpretation of his #3 question we should be able to quickly bring this to a close.

I asked them to resolve this gravity issue with me and appreciate the efforts they are making so far.

Finally some good, straightforward discussions. It's good to see that there is a common understanding with ST, but since he claims not to be a full POSER (let alone certified coach), it would be most interesting to see whether his explanation jives with that off others (particularly JHuffman and Gatorade). Hopefully they aren't MIA.I think once we can reach conclusions about JimFiore's four questions, we can then move on and tackle the other POSE claims that seem to rub people the wrong way.Alternatively, I'd also be interested in a straightforward explanation by a certified expert as to what is different with POSE versus what most elites do (land forefoot, drive off and forward).

John Richard wrote:

I'll agree, but I still think this sub-discussion is missing the point which is that the Pose method is about perception and teaching the body. It is not about the analysis of the physics.

That may be a valid point, but I certainly have not got that feeling from either the POSE site or others who have posted on this thread. Some (both here and there) have been quite adament about NOT pushing and that gravity really does help pull you forward without saying it's really about perception and not reality.

(But then that's getting ahead of the discussion as it is currently developing.)

Thanks Asterix. I agree, this has been a good straightforward discussion and may continue to lead into other productive discussions in kind. I will be back later this evening.

ST wrote:

Can you respond to my attempt to clarify #3 ?

I did. 3rd post from bottom, previous page.

Arg! 6th not 3rd!

Look at my a,b,c post following yours and tell me if we are talking about the same thing.

" I still think this sub-discussion is missing the point which is that the Pose method is about perception and teaching the body. It is not about the analysis of the physics."

This is what I was unsuccesfuly trying to explain in this mega-thread. But I guess people turn to physics because they have the agenda to prove that Pose is just bullshit, and they start with a flaw, persuming that Pose claims that Pose running is a looseless system. At least I'm glad to see that the discussion between Jim Fiore and ST became a civilized one - contrary to previous self-admiration of Asterix telling for the n-th time the not-any more-funny joke about Nobel prize award. Good luck proving that running without muscle action is impossible - as if someone argues about it. I'm waiting to see what happens when the physics of the lean and falling forward will be analyzed. When you are done with Pose physics, maybe someone could analyze the physics of Yoga - e.g., walking on hot coals (draw comparison charts between coals temperature, skin thickness, etc.)? Or the chemistry of music - how certain sound waves induce the production of neurotransmiters in the brain, but what does it have to do with Mozart?

Meanwhile I can run on ice, and most push-offers can't.

"Alternatively, I'd also be interested in a straightforward explanation by a certified expert as to what is different with POSE versus what most elites do (land forefoot, drive off and forward)."

Explanation personally for you:

1. Elites run VARIOUS WAYS, so there is no way to say there is some "uniform elite techinque". Pose tries to collect all the separate good things elites do into one system and presents a METHOD TO TEACH IT.

2. Elites are elites not DUE to their technique, but in many cases IN SPITE OF their bad technique. An elite with the worst form will outrun you and me even running backwards. And concerning why elites don't study Pose if it could give them even the slightest advantage - it's obvious, if it's not - see my previous posts.

Sorry, I'm not a certified Pose expert. Just rambling...

I think a major point of the recent exercise was to try and pin down just what it is various people believe POSE to be saying.ST has done a nice job clarifying. Would you like to have a shot at answering the four simple questions previously posed by JimFiore? I believe all he asked for was a 'correct/incorrect' reply to each:"1) There is a push-off, and it is comprised of muscular energy and a return or recoil from stored energy in the muscles/tendons. The muscular energy refered to is not the same as the stored energy. These two sources acting together are what create forward motion.2) The afore-mentioned storage of energy is not perfect (you have not stated it explicitly, but your refernce to "spring" leads me to assume that the storage is due to the landing shock, i.e, the energy of the shock of the landing is stored in the muscles/tendons).3) In order to return the leg back to its starting position in the stride, the inefficiency indicated in item #2 above requires the application of additional energy (i.e., "muscular energy").4) The additional "muscular energy" noted in item #3 above is an "involuntary action"."Maybe we'd even be graced with the presence of JHuffman to take his shot at those questions.

Maybe it would help if I had your answers to the above questions, because I'm quite sure you've made the point that you DON'T want to be running like elites. Even Geb would have to completely stop running and start from scratch to properly run POSE.

I would therefore assume that POSE does NOT want to find a method to teach how he runs.

That still leaves my question unanswered. Regardless of other differences in form or technique, most, if not all elites land on their forefoot and try to keep as short a ground contact time as possible.

This is similar to POSE. So once again, what is different between forefoot landing and short ground contact time and POSE that makes POSE so special? JHuffman or anyone else are also free to educate me on this one.

Now we're degrading back to the vague and undefined 'bad' or 'good' technique. What is 'bad'? What is 'good'? Who is to judge if an elite is running 'bad'? If POSE qualifies as 'good', then let's distill what that is. A good starting point would be those four simple questions.

[quorw]And concerning why elites don't study Pose if it could give them even the slightest advantage - it's obvious

[/quote]

Yes, I would agree that it is obvious. Key point being "*IF* it could give them even the slightest advantage".

2. Elites are elites not DUE to their technique, but in many cases IN SPITE OF their bad technique. An elite with the worst form will outrun you and me even running backwards.

Thought I'd throw this out there.

I spent a while looking at video from every olympics and WC 800 and 1500 race and every WR or top time race. I put many of them in slow motion to look at their form.

My conclusion... the vast majority of the time the top guys in the race were running with very good form. They may have had one or two minor things different, but they all did the major things right and correctly.

Take it for what it's worth, but I rarely ever remember seeing an elite with bad form. (this is for the relatively modern era. Of course in the 40s or so there were some.)

Gatorade wrote:

Meanwhile I can run on ice, and most push-offers can't.

Do they have track meets on ice where you are from?

sjm1368 wrote:

Take it for what it's worth, but I rarely ever remember seeing an elite with bad form.

Steve,

What is your opinion of Paula Radcliffe's form?

Gatorade,

Be patient with the process. We are discussing the gravity issue now. I want us to discuss the gravity falling forward concept next. I think this is where Pose claims to have better efficiencies.

As there are different people with different body structures, there are differences in running style to suit them. Pose is a style that may be well suited to a certain type of runner. And there are probably runners that cannot use his style. Without regard to any of Romanov's claims, pose may be the evolutionary perfection of a style used by many elite runners. That does not mean that these elites do it flawlessly, do it or can do it. Perfecting a technique and finding someone with a body that can do it are two different things.

I agree with Asterix, forefoot landing and short ground contact seems to be the common denominator amongst elites today.

I watched the '72, '76, '80 olympics on TV and acquired the tapes for the distance events. My interest resumed when Geb started breaking WRs. Over time the heel striking method in distance running became less prevalent and the african style started to become common. Moreover, I noticed that Geb's style was very similar to my friend the female olympian. I have watched Romanov's slow motion video critique of Geb's style. Geb's style is close to pose and so is my friends. But, at least in Romanov's video Geb's style is not perfect pose.

The first time I saw Geb break a world record I marveled at his ability to lean and land on his forefoot for so long in his races. It looked effortless. I thought if he could bring that technique to the longer distances he would have a shot at breaking all records from the 3k to the marathon. I also thought it would put a lot of strain on his achilles and calves if he started racing at the longer road distances on paved surfaces (20k to marathon) and, was curious to see if he could do it. And that is what happened. He developed Calve muscle and achilles problems.

Romanov has an interesting video in slow motion on Geb's style.

Asterix,

The FIRST place to start learning about the Pose Method technique and what it represents to an individuals running is to go to the literature that defines and explains it in detail. These avenues are "Pose Method of running, the book", Pose Tech website, Clinics hosted by either DR. Nicholas Romanov or another Pose Certified running coach. You will learn very little about the Pose Method by answering Jims 4 questions. However, best of luck with your discussion!

Jhuffman wrote:

The FIRST place to start learning about the Pose Method technique and what it represents to an individuals running is to go to the literature that defines and explains it in detail. These avenues are "Pose Method of running, the book", Pose Tech website, Clinics hosted by either DR. Nicholas Romanov or another Pose Certified running coach. You will learn very little about the Pose Method by answering Jims 4 questions. However, best of luck with your discussion!

You are obviously missing the whole intent here.

We've had a very lengthy thread (and several predicessors) that argue about the merits or concepts of POSE but it seems there is a disconnect with people's understanding of what POSE is. Once we establish a legitimate explanation, we can then worry about whether that explanation complies with the laws of physics.

Since the POSE website is a rather inanimate collection of electrons and not the one engaged in this forum, it is the people professing POSE and representing it (ie certified coaches) whose interpretations we are trying to clarify.

We'll get to the website content in a bit, but first we need to establish our starting point, which is what YOU understand POSE to be since it appears based on your past posts that it is not what others claim it to be.

So, without saying anything about 'look at the website' but rather drawing on your own knowledge and understanding, can you answer with a simple correct/incorrect the four questions JimFiore posted? I would have thought a certified coach should be able to handle that.

If you can't without referencing the POSE site, then just say so and we'll continue on with those who are able to enunciate and explain their understandings.

Asterix,

"This is similar to POSE. So once again, what is different between forefoot landing and short ground contact time and POSE that makes POSE so special? JHuffman or anyone else are also free to educate me on this one."

The key difference in the Pose Method technique is to land on the medial ball of the foot with as minimal tension on the calf muscle as possible. One is only tring to mantian a position with the foot in regards to body weight. The first and most basic drill in the learning process is to balance ones body weight on the ball of the foot. This is called the Pose stance. Landing on the forefoot is meaningless if the foot is in front of ones General Center of Mass, from the Pose Method point of view. So this is a precise position not just a random positon on the forefoot and a direct position under the body is needed for efficiency. I hope that helps your understanding!

Asterix,

I have known from the beginning what your intent is. To be as nice as possible I think you are a very rude individual. Thus, what little time I have on the internet I will avoid spending it discussing things with you. So, please feel free to continue without me.

Jhuffman wrote:

The key difference in the Pose Method technique is to land on the medial ball of the foot with as minimal tension on the calf muscle as possible.

Thanks! That wasn't so hard, was it?

Is this the only difference with POSE, the key difference, or just one of many differences?

Any chance you'd like to have a go at JimFiore's questions?

I have known from the beginning what your intent is. To be as nice as possible I think you are a very rude individual. Thus, what little time I have on the internet I will avoid spending it discussing things with you. So, please feel free to continue without me.

I believe I've always been clear about my intent: to address misleading or physically impossible descriptions and mindsets. I'm sorry that offends you.

However, for someone who claims to want to avoid discussions such as this about POSE, you certainly have chimed in numerous times with rather pointless posts:

"You are talking to a brick wall with good old Jimmy, and Asterix. They are to knowledeable for us "POSE" followers :):)Best of luck with your running fellows!!" (7/30/2006 4:42AM)

"Jimmy/Asterix,

You guy's would make a great COMEDY duo. You guy's should take your act on the road." (8/1/2006 4:13AM)

"Actually my RELIGION happens to be Christianity. Despite your accusations neither I nor Dr. Romanov disagree's with Sir Isaac Newton. It is hard to have a discussion with you when you continue to lie. Why do you continue to do this?" (8/2/2006 8:25AM) - no cites where I lied were ever provided.

"This article is very clear of the relationship between push off and pull in regards to the POSE METHOD position on running. Again neither I or anyone associated with Pose Method as said that there is no pushoff, but you don't seem to be listening to me." (8/2/2006 9:09AM) - several POSE cites contradicting this were provided to no response.

We can have a look at other POSE threads if you'd like, but that would be deviating from the progress we've been making the last couple of pages.