Scientists: Don't let your coach change your arm swing - "Most people will settle into the swing that is the most efficient

Absolutely not!

479 27:28.0 Patrick Ivuti KEN 30.06.78 1 Barakaldo 08.07.2000

480 27:28.07 John Ngugi KEN 10.05.62 2 Bruxelles 25.08.1989

480 27:28.07 Joseph Kimani KEN 21.09.72 2 Knoxville 06.04.1995

482 27:28.08 Tadesse Tola ETH 31.10.87 2 El Djezair 19.07.2007

483 27:28.10 Nguse Tesfaldet ERI 10.11.86 2 Wageningen 30.05.2012

484 27:28.11 Atsedu Tsegay ETH 17.12.91 5 Sollentuna 27.06.2013

485 27:28.12 Marilson dos Santos BRA 06.08.77 4rA Neerpelt 02.06.2007

486 27:28.13A Mathew Kisorio KEN 16.05.89 3 Nairobi 26.06.2010

487 27:28.19 Tim Nelson USA 27.02.84 5rA Palo Alto 01.05.2011

488 27:28.22 Matt Tegenkamp USA 19.01.82 6rA Palo Alto 01.05.2011

489 27:28.27 Jeremiah Karemi Thuku KEN 07.07.94 2rA Abashiri 06.07.2014

490 27:28.31 Juan Carlos de la Ossa ESP 25.11.76 1 Vigo 12.07.2008

491 27:28.35 Charles Kamathi KEN 18.05.78 3r3 Kobe 24.04.2005

491 27:28.35 Peter Murioki KEN 83 9 Bruxelles 25.08.2006

493 27:28.36 Ondoro Osoro KEN 03.12.67 5 Bruxelles 19.08.1994

494 27:28.38 Mark Bett KEN 22.12.76 1rA Villeneuve d'Ascq 11.07.1998

494 27:28.38 Josphat Muchiri Ndambiri KEN 12.02.85 3r1 Kobe 22.04.2007

496 27:28.42 Gideon Ngatuny KEN 10.10.86 1 Kasamatsu 30.09.2006

497 27:28.48 Samuel Chelanga KEN 23.02.85 1 Berkeley 24.04.2009

498 27:28.50 Kenneth Kipkemoi KEN 02.08.84 7 Moskva 10.08.2013

499 27:28.60 Julius Gitahi KEN 29.04.78 1 Konosu 05.10.1996

500 27:28.64 Stephen Sambu KEN 07.07.88 7rA Palo Alto 01.05.2011

501 27:28.67 Henry Rono KEN 12.02.52 4 Oslo 26.06.1982

501 27:28.67 Salah Hissou MAR 16.01.72 3 Athínai 06.08.1997

503 27:28.69 John Kariuki KEN 10.11.86 4r3 Kobe 24.04.2005

504 27:28.71 Emmanuel Bett KEN 30.03.83 9 Eugene 31.05.2013

505 27:28.80 Mark Nenow USA 16.11.57 2 Oslo 05.07.1986

506 27:28.82 Abera Ertiban ETH 13.03.88 5rA Neerpelt 02.06.2007

506 27:28.82 Juan Luis Barrios MEX 24.06.83 3 Wageningen 30.05.2012

508 27:28.86 Mohamed Farah GBR 23.03.83 1rA Marseille 05.06.2010

509 27:28.87 Thomas Osano KEN 04.06.70 3 Oslo 06.07.1991

While we're at it:

A: Let's never tinker with cadence or stride lenght, most runners will automatically fall inte the most efficient for them.

B: Let's never try to improve lung capacity, most runners will suck in the amount of air that is most efficient for them.

C: Let's never, never, ever train uphill running, most runners will automatically settle for the gradient that is most efficient for them.

LetsRun.com wrote:

Good read:

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/07/23/how-our-arms-help-us-run/?module=BlogPost-Title&version=Blog%20Main&contentCollection=Phys%20Ed&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs&region=Body

“Most people will settle into the arm swing that is the most efficient for them.”

Did you even read the article?! The study was natural arm motion vs holding arms behind your back.

The only conclusion you can get from this is that if your athletes are trying to run with their hands in an unnatural position behind their back, over their heads, etc., then you should make sure they don't do that.

Sprinting requires a higher proportion of power from the armswing (try running marathon pace v. 100m sprint with arms behind back if you doubt),

To the extent that the event is anaerobic, proper armswing is more important, which is why you more often see idiosyncratic form in the marathon (the WR-holder for the marathon for ten years from 1988 Belayneh Dinsamo looked like he was constantly swatting a horsefly with one hand) among elites v. the very similar use of the arms in sprints.

Peter Andersson wrote:

While we're at it:

A: Let's never tinker with cadence or stride lenght, most runners will automatically fall inte the most efficient for them.

B: Let's never try to improve lung capacity, most runners will suck in the amount of air that is most efficient for them.

C: Let's never, never, ever train uphill running, most runners will automatically settle for the gradient that is most efficient for them.

A. True

B. Who trains lung capacity?

C. False.

How funny!

Train fitness first, then form.

Peter Andersson wrote:

While we're at it:

A: Let's never tinker with cadence or stride lenght, most runners will automatically fall inte the most efficient for them.

B: Let's never try to improve lung capacity, most runners will suck in the amount of air that is most efficient for them.

C: Let's never, never, ever train uphill running, most runners will automatically settle for the gradient that is most efficient for them.

You are most likely the dumbest poster in the history of LRC.

Congratulations!

Ok, I'll accept the data that says that running in an extreme unnatural arm position only increases energy usage by 3%.

First: 3% is a fairly important quantity and clearly worth trying to improve.

Second: I wonder at what pace ranges this is true for? Is it across all paces?

Third: Arm carriage is a reflection and maybe also somewhat determinative of other form issues that may have a bearing not only on efficiency, but also injury. Also, as mentioned in 2) above, it also probably has a greater impact the greater the running speed.

Great opportunity to post this, considering the topic. See below:

All:

Thank you for reviewing this post. If you are a current or previous endurance coach/triathlon coach or an experienced runner, please take the time to complete this university-approved research questionnaire. There are 2 pages (just hit the arrows on the bottom to move to page 2) and the second page lists 5 short videos relating the questionnaire. Your identity and responses are 100% anonymous and only used to contribute to the academic literature on the topic.

I think you will find this interesting and the results will hopefully prove useful for the distance running community.

If you feel you made mistake in responding to the questionnaire a first time, feel free to respond again using a different link than the one you used before.

See link below for the questionnaire:

https://mtsupsychology.az1.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_9NNO3zA6xZecMOp

Thank you for your time, questions, and comments.

Rodger Kram wrote:

With regard to competitive runners, I think that it would be interesting to repeat our study at 6:00 pace in some high caliber runners.

But, there is no evidence that at faster speeds arm swing comprises a larger or smaller % of the total energy required.

If you think that arm swing does comprise a greater %, what do you think comprises a smaller fraction at faster speeds?

I am by no means an expert on running economy. That said, as running speed increases, arm swing does seem to have a greater affect on economy. This is from anecdotal evidence as well as casual observation, but comparing jogging to elite running speeds is a massive difference in what is asked of the body. This is apparent in sprinters, whose arm swing has far greater range of motion than even middle distance runners.

I would suggest a study that looks at the entire spectrum of arm swing cost from sprinters all the way to marathoners, and every distance in between. Only then could a definitive conclusion be made on how arm swing truly effects overall economy in running at various speeds.

Did it hurt? You've never broken 20 for 5K and that's the end of discussion.

Known Unknown wrote:

How funny!

The problem with all this high school science is that running economy isn't a good measure of running ability on an individual level. As long as exercise "scientists" claim this or that on the basis of VO2 max or proportional VO2 use at lower speeds (running economy) their results can safely be ignored. Belief in this crap is what produced the abysmal results in American running in the '90s.

Speed is all that matters. Does form influence speed? In sprints, definitely yes. In long distance running? Nobody knows, but you find world record holders with all kinds of forms.

% of VO2 max = BS wrote:

The problem with all this high school science is that running economy isn't a good measure of running ability on an individual level. As long as exercise "scientists" claim this or that on the basis of VO2 max or proportional VO2 use at lower speeds (running economy) their results can safely be ignored. Belief in this crap is what produced the abysmal results in American running in the '90s.

Speed is all that matters. Does form influence speed? In sprints, definitely yes. In long distance running? Nobody knows, but you find world record holders with all kinds of forms.

Based on this latest evidence, I have reconsidered my proclamation from up thread. I must now conclude that YOU are the dumbest poster in the history of LRC.

Congratulations!

Stratford wrote:

Given how slow you seem to be you would have no room to talk. If you're not a jogger, post up those times, old chap!

How slow do I seem to be?

What is it about my posting style that gives away how fast I can run?

I'm just interested. I'd like to know how I could improve how fast I seem.

You sling arrows at high, out of reach targets like joggers.

trollism wrote:

How slow do I seem to be?

What is it about my posting style that gives away how fast I can run?

I'm just interested. I'd like to know how I could improve how fast I seem.

Peter Andersson wrote:

While we're at it:

A: Let's never tinker with cadence or stride lenght, most runners will automatically fall inte the most efficient for them.

B: Let's never try to improve lung capacity, most runners will suck in the amount of air that is most efficient for them.

C: Let's never, never, ever train uphill running, most runners will automatically settle for the gradient that is most efficient for them.

D: Never make shoe recommendations to runners. Runners will automatically find the shoes that are most efficient for them.

% of VO2 max = BS wrote:

The problem with all this high school science is that running economy isn't a good measure of running ability on an individual level. As long as exercise "scientists" claim this or that on the basis of VO2 max or proportional VO2 use at lower speeds (running economy) their results can safely be ignored. Belief in this crap is what produced the abysmal results in American running in the '90s.

Speed is all that matters. Does form influence speed? In sprints, definitely yes. In long distance running? Nobody knows, but you find world record holders with all kinds of forms.

I believe economy and VO2max typically have an inverse relationship. They need to be looked at together.

WR holders with all kinds of form? Maybe if you include WR holders of the distant past whose times were much slower than the current WRs, or if you also include doped up women's performances. For the most part, at 100m - 10,000m the very best at those distances run remarkably similar.

D. Komen and Bolt are practically identical, for instance.

Definitely agree with the last part...if a runner has undesirable form (not enough arm swing, splayed legs, bobbing head, etc) taking small steps to fix the problems is a good idea. If one can persevere through the phase of feeling awkward after changing, they will eventually become more efficient; holding onto the idea that form should never be altered no matter what is silly. Gotta be careful with injuries of course when working to change form though.