If POSE is so great, why did Michael Johnson get so many injuries?

Wondering,

All of the QUOTE fastest runners have many good form qualities, otherwise they would not possess the ability to run fast times. The more biomechanically efficient qualities you possess the better ability you will have to maintain faster speeds with longer duration. The key is determining what consists of " a good biomechanical movement". This is why the Pose Method was developed by DR. Nicholas Romanov. The Pose Method is a system for teahing human movement, by determining the key positions, and working with the laws of nature instead of against them. Since the major flaw in most individuals is that they believe it is better to push themselves upward and rotate their hips to give them forward propulsion. When in reality this movement will great greater vertical occillation, a more forward footstrike at impact, and slower cadence. From the Pose Method point of view it would be easier to let your body fall forward in the pose position quickly lifting your foot to your hip, letting momentum and gravity take over and using only enough muscular effort to keep up with the falling body.

I would evaluate Paula Radcliffs form the same way I would my own. I would video him/her and pinpoint the correct positions or lack there of based on the Pose Method standard of running. Since you don't know what the Pose Method standard is you will have to learn it. Go to the website, purchase book/dvd, meet with a certified coach, attend a Pose clinic, this is how you can learn. Good luck!

Jhuffman wrote:

From the Pose Method point of view it would be easier to let your body fall forward in the pose position quickly lifting your foot to your hip, letting momentum and gravity take over and using only enough muscular effort to keep up with the falling body.

Still with the gravity? Why do you continue to flaunt your complete misunderstanding of Newtonian forces?

Pose may have some benefit for some people, but if its proponents are unable to understand what they are trying to explain, then people should be very leery of trying to follow your instructions.

Since you don't know what the Pose Method standard is you will have to learn it. Go to the website, purchase book/dvd, meet with a certified coach, attend a Pose clinic, this is how you can learn. Good luck!

How many books/DVDs/clinics did Geb, Bekele, Tergat or any of the other Olympic and World Championship competitors purchase? Were their coaches Pose certified?

Suprised wrote:

Can reworking a runners form help lower race times?

As I said in my initial post on this thread I can't find an individual, a coach, or a program (POSE, CHI-Running, etc.) that can say I changed my (or my atletes running form and had a large decrease in my race times.

I am an individual who can say I changed my form and went from a ~6:10 pace for a 10K to ~5:30 pace. I used the Pose Method to do this. It took me 6 months to a year to change the times. No other change was made with regards to training. I started at age 34.

I looked at Explosive Running, Chi-Running, and Pose Method and found the Pose Method to be the most effective. The large difference between myself and what most Pose Method advocates preach is I make sure to pull before ground contact to ensure negative foot speed and to help get my foot under the CGM (preventing overstride).

I hope this answers your original question.

I did wrote:

The large difference between myself ... is I make sure to pull before ground contact to ensure negative foot speed and to help get my foot under the CGM (preventing overstride).

I hope this answers your original question.

Thanks for your response, just what I was looking for. A couple of follow up questions:

1) By "pull before ground contact" do you mean that you are pulling your landing foot up even before it lands? If not, what are you refering to?

2) Did your change in form lead to an increase in cadence?

Thanks!

Suprised wrote:

I did wrote:

The large difference between myself ... is I make sure to pull before ground contact to ensure negative foot speed and to help get my foot under the CGM (preventing overstride).

I hope this answers your original question.

Thanks for your response, just what I was looking for. A couple of follow up questions:

1) By "pull before ground contact" do you mean that you are pulling your landing foot up even before it lands? If not, what are you refering to?

2) Did your change in form lead to an increase in cadence?

Thanks!

1) Yes, pulling before it lands. I doubt the foot is actually traveling up by the time it hits the ground, but I know it is at least traveling backward. Otherwise, I start feeling shin splints. This is very noticable on the dreadmill (which I don't use anymore). I pretty much think pull before the foot hits the ground and aim for the target under the hips.

2) Yes, sort of.. I did it at the same time. It took a while and I used an audio track in an MP3 player that plays files of 60, 62, and 64 BPM (three steps per beat). This really helped. A slower cadence doesn't really feel right when running like this (I have tried for yucks). Hard to explain why.

It sounds like you were just thinking "light and fast" like one would doing Mach drills or something. Whatever works for you. It is too bad that track coaches often don't get paid for their skills, and those who charge are condemned as quacks. Of course for collegiate and post-collegiate runners who train in the club system, we are spoiled by our coaching, but for middle-aged road runners with jobs and money--let them pay, why not?

Jhuffman wrote:

All of the QUOTE fastest runners have many good form qualities, otherwise they would not possess the ability to run fast times.

Sorry Huffdude, but you lose all credibility when you use illogical conclusions like that.

When Kip Keino saw Romanov's book, The Pose Method of Running, he shook his head. "There is no correct running form, so you can't learn it," said the 1500m gold medallist from the 1968 Olympics in Mexico City, who is now the head of Kenya's National Olympic Committee. "Form is God-given. If you systematise it, you destroy it."

no, you're wrong wrote:

Give it up wrote:

Captial letters? I suppose that's the spelling in the USA is it?

I believe it is spelled "capital" in all English speaking countries. You may wish to invest in a dictionary.

I was pointing out your mistake you retard (assuming you are the the mentally challenged person who spelt it 'captial' in the first place and doesn't understand the word 'learnt'). If not i apologise

Idiots? wrote:

Sorry Huffdude, but you lose all credibility when you use illogical conclusions like that.

You mean you weren't already thrown by the idea that gravity can act in any direction other than straight down?

why do i bother? wrote:

I was pointing out your mistake you retard (assuming you are the the mentally challenged person who spelt it 'captial' in the first place and doesn't understand the word 'learnt'). If not i apologise

spelled

capital

learned

apologize

Asterix wrote:

Idiots? wrote:

Sorry Huffdude, but you lose all credibility when you use illogical conclusions like that.

You mean you weren't already thrown by the idea that gravity can act in any direction other than straight down?

Haha, good point. His spitting in the face of all that Newton worked so hard for kinda hurts his credibility too . . .

Then again, I've got a new theory about running through water at the bottom of the ocean. Since soundwaves travel through water faster than through air, and since sound waves can be thought of to behave as particles too, and because humans are made of particles, humans can run through water faster than air! Try it, you'll see!

I expect you all to pay me for my services, please.

Asterix,

You are still caught up on what gravity is doing. Let me try to clarify for you once more. Gravity pulls everything down towards the ground. There is no confusion on my part about this. What I have consistently stated is that our bodies fall in a forward direction as Gravity pulls us down. I can't make it any more clear than this. In all serious are you still confused?

Idiots? wrote:

Then again, I've got a new theory about running through water at the bottom of the ocean. Since soundwaves travel through water faster than through air, and since sound waves can be thought of to behave as particles too, and because humans are made of particles, humans can run through water faster than air! Try it, you'll see!

Unlike electromagnetic waves (light, radio transmissions), sound waves are propogated through the jostling of adjacent particles or vibrations, so your system doesn't really represent accurate physics as well.

I think it is important to note in this thread that Michael Johnson does not run POSE. MJ in fact is a big proponent of the system I developed and market (through clinics, books and DVDs) called 'FAST'.

Unlike POSE, people who run FAST win races and Olympic medals. Just read:

""We feel that strength is synonymous with speed-if youre strong, then you can run fast.""

"Michael Johnson has to run fast to win."

Cheques and money orders now being accepted for the FAST running system.

Disclaimer: I can't guarantee you won't get injured running FAST, but if you want to succeed, it's the only way.

Mr. idoit,

Please explain how it is illogical?

Jhuffman wrote:

You are still caught up on what gravity is doing. Let me try to clarify for you once more. Gravity pulls everything down towards the ground. There is no confusion on my part about this. What I have consistently stated is that our bodies fall in a forward direction as Gravity pulls us down. I can't make it any more clear than this. In all serious are you still confused?

No, I am not confused. I understood high school physics.

Gravity pulls in a downwards direction.

Any force can only do work in the direction of its vector.

When I (and most others) run, our center of mass does not get progressively closer to the ground. Hence, gravity does no net work.

If you finish your run face down on the ground (or at a lower altitude than when you started), I will concede gravity provided some net assistance along the way.

But if at the end of your run, you are standing on your feet back where you started, you have put far more energy into combatting gravity than it provided to you.

That is an indisputable reality of Newtonian physics.

If you continue to go on about gravity "pulling forward" or "falling forward" as being some kind of enhancement to running, then you are demonstrating you do not understand the subject and should not be trying to explain it to others under the guise of being some kind of 'certified' coach.

I don't prescribe drugs no matter how many pharmacy degrees are on my wall from the 'Hollywood Upstairs Medical College' and you shouldn't be telling people gravity pulls you forward until you've grasped some very basic physic principals.

Would you be interested in purchasing a 'run FAST' DVD or book?

huffman, ive heard you are pretty fast, but i was wondering, are you american and did you go to college. you have an incredibly weird style of speaking, not to mention all sorts of terrible grammar. i would work on your writing style a little bit, if perhaps you talked like a normal person people wouldnt be so standoffish to your ideas.

greatwhite wrote:

It sounds like you were just thinking "light and fast" like one would doing Mach drills or something. Whatever works for you. It is too bad that track coaches often don't get paid for their skills, and those who charge are condemned as quacks. Of course for collegiate and post-collegiate runners who train in the club system, we are spoiled by our coaching, but for middle-aged road runners with jobs and money--let them pay, why not?

Uh... I don't know what a Mach drill is... and I did, to the best of my ability, follow the rules of the Pose Method. The Pose stance being the most important. I bought the DVD and found some of the drills very useful, such as the lunge drill. I don't think "light and fast", I think pull, pose stance, and fall (where fall is more like "feel the lean"). I spent a whopping $50 on the DVD. Since I didn't belong to a club, I probably spent less than those that do.

I searched high and low for running technique. I did not see anywhere that spoke of body position, leaning, and pulling all in the same package with drills to support it. Judging from the videos I have seen of various races, many runners (if not most) overstride according to the Pose Method. Despite that, they run far faster than I. However, it seems like the ones that win have the basic Pose Stance and don't overstride, in general.

As far as whether anybody cares to learn it or support it, such as the people on this list. I couldn't care less. I kinda hope the people on this list keep bagging on it.

In summery, I did use the Pose Method to run faster. It gives me lots of tools to help my technique. These tools help me in a way I doubt any coach could. There is a clear distinction between perception and reality. I know what to perceive, what to check, and what to ignore. A coach can’t teach talent. Much of the talent in running lies in a person’s awareness of what they are doing and the ability to control the body based on this awareness, IMHO.

Asterix wrote:

Unlike electromagnetic waves (light, radio transmissions), sound waves are propogated through the jostling of adjacent particles or vibrations, so your system doesn't really represent accurate physics as well.

Exactly. The entire point of my post was to horribly misconstrue the concepts of basic physics on order parody JHuff's approach to POSE. Surely you understood that:).