Fun runners go hard or go home wrote:
If your a competitve runner you should follow the best i.e. El G et al and land on your forefoot.
El G does not land on his forefoot. He is actually a pronounced heel striker. A better example of a forefoot sriker would be bernard legat.
El G is a forefoot/midfoot stiker. I've got frame by frame pictures of him from the last olympics in both the 15 and 5k, plus world's before that. He's got exceptional form.
Anyways, the pictures are sitting right in front of me and he's clearly landing midfoot, not on the heel.
I haven't analyzed El G's form, but there is no such thing as a "midfoot" strike. The closest thing you have have to that is landing with your foot perfectly flat, in which case it would be "whole-foot" strike
Well let's accept that there is nothing wrong with landing forefoot first while racing. My question really is whether those forefoot landers maintain that form (albeit maybe not quite as far up on the forefoot) in their easier training runs. I wish that we could get Geb, Lagat, et al. to describe their perception (how it feels to them) when running.
The answer is simple, most runners elite or recreational don't think about how and where they are placing the body weight. As a culture we don't feel there is a way to teach perceptions in running because that would lead to needing a model to follow. As you can tell from the responses to this post most people can agree on very little in regards to how to run. That is why it is important that you think things through for yourself to see what makes the most sense from observational as well as from a scientific point of view. The only reason why I began to change my view of running was because I worked at a specialty running store for 4 years while training and racing. Throughout this time I witnessed so many individuals come in month after month wearing the best shoes available and continue to have chronic injuries. I knew there must be a better alternative than what shoes provide. To make a long story short I studied and thought through the biomechanical research and came across the Pose Method of running. After reading and understanding the depth and detail of this model I quickly realized why it was and is so valuable for any runner.
Jeremy: When you land, is your heel off the ground at all (to the eye) or do you land flat footed (to the eye) but with the weight on the ball of foot (your perception)? How to you make sure that you are not too far up on your forefoot like a sprinter? Thanks.
Jhuffman wrote:
To make a long story short I studied and thought through the biomechanical research and came across the Pose Method of running.
POSE is not based on biomechanical research. It's based on sheer inference and inevitably relies on a handful of assumptions regarding the nature of human locamotion. I'm not saying that Pose is necessarily wrong, but it's definitely not "scientific".
The sad fact is that NOBODY HAS EVER DETERMINED what the correct way to run is. Nobody can qualify the claim that forefoot strike is superior to heel strike- that's an inference at best and an assumption at worst.
I don't get to watch myself that often, however when I have past windows or mirrors can tell that I am not landing on the heels. With a good video slow motion you can tell that there is no weight bearing on the heel. The two main ways that I know for sure is perception and the wear pattern of my shoes. When you wear the Puma H'streets or run barefoot you can tell if you are landing on your heels. I practice several key drills, balancing on the ball of my foot, lifting my foot to my hip with my hamstring while fall forward either against the wall or just on the street. Once you learn how to lift and drop the leg properly it is easy to repetitively run and land on the balls of the feet. There are lots of basic and advanced drills in the www.posetech.com website if you want to research exactly what I follow.
Jeremy: I keep my weight on the BOF. My concern is that I'm too aggressively on more forefoot, which may be stressing my lower leg and feet more than necessary.
There should be no aggressiveness. Your position must be precise and quick. I run with a cadence of 200fpm at paces up to 10 minute per mile. As I go faster my cadence reaches as high as 250fpm. So, if your foot is on bearing weight for a short time you will hardly feel it. The reason for the stress is that you are leaving your foot on the ground to long, consequently bearing more force to the lower leg muscle. That is why it is necessary to learn to pull on time at impact.
200 fpm even at slow paces! Wow. I'm at 180, and I thought that was decent. I get to 200+ when I run fast, but it feels like I'd have to expend a lot more energy to get to 200 at slower paces.
You are running with to much effort. As you have notice just because you run with a high cadence does not mean that it will be relaxed. The reason why it is easy for me to maintain such a high cadence is that I am simply lifting the foot with my hamstring and letting gravity do the rest, at impact my body breifly stabilizes my body weight and then I lift again. In order to minimize effort you have to learn the proper technique.
derivedof wrote:
I haven't analyzed El G's form, but there is no such thing as a "midfoot" strike. The closest thing you have have to that is landing with your foot perfectly flat, in which case it would be "whole-foot" strike
I would agree with that unless the midfoot strikers all have flat feet. Or maybe they call that pad on the outside of the forefoot the midfoot?
Here are my feet: