Pose Method of Training?

You are not missing anything. Like someone else said in another thread on another topic, I don't have a dog in this race, but I will offer my 2 cents.

To me, it is a bit of a misnomer to say that these athletes are utiliizing a certain "method". They are top level athletes who have won the genetic lottery and have worked very hard to get to the top. That is why they look that way, how we wish we looked.

They are not leaning forward. They are running upright and being pushed forward, giving the appearance of leaning forward. They land on the front of their foot, pull through, fully extend the leg behind while pushing off the ground with the foot. They don't do a hamstring pull, this is the reaction (remember equal and opposite reactions?) to the push off. They are running.

Good to see the influx of Pose people from their board after someone posted something.

No offense but those pictures don't show hamstring pull or a Pose method. Your eyes are letting you see what you want them too. As the above poster said, you cannot make widespread claims based on individual pictures.

I look at those pictures and I see exactly what was outlined in that Tellez article posted, not pose.

It's been said before and I'll say it again, the reason pose seems to prevent injury is because of the correct foot landing. It's my belief that if runners learned to run the normal way correctly (which includes a flat foot landing) then they would experience less injuries. The problem is that many runners who think they run "normal" land on their heel. This is not Correct running.

The problem lies in what will make you run fastest or most efficiently. I don't believe Pose is the way. Why? Because what is claimed is wrong. The claiming that you pull the hamstring and don' push off is wrong. I have my latest track clinic notes right here in front of me and the speaker on running form wrote " Stride Length= 1. Distance C. G. Travels between each foot contact 2. Best increased by applying force down and backward (not reaching)."

In the above linked article I'm reading:

"Lack of hip extension detracts from momentum and ultimately decreases speed because of inefficiency."

and

"THe vertical force comes at take-off when the mass is elevated by pushing downward (pushing off the heel back onto the ball of the foot)."

My conclusion......Pose can be good for injury prevention, but it is more inefficient for maximizing performance and in fact the injury prevention is no better than true correct running.

MNapologist wrote:

Here are some pretty good guys who use POSE (they just don't name the method). Most Africans use POSE.

Everybody in this race is using POSE (it happens to be the Olympic 5000 final).

What!?! I see no basis for this statement.

MNapologist wrote:

The Africans do NOT push hard off the ground. You can't push off the ground and get your leg under you as the runners in this pic have. It is a mechanical impossibility.

It is a mechanical impossibility? Why? Please elaborate / explain.

MNapologist wrote:

Sorry Barry P, but I have to tell you that you don't understand basic running biomechanics. The research is clear----when running, there is absolutely now muscle activity of the extensor muscles after the stance phase in running. This extensor paradox frustrates the proponents of traditional running technique. People don't push (even when running traditionally).

The research is clear? Could you point me to this research?

Yes, Pete, sounds like religion sales to me too. I call this and other similar nonsense sold to hopeful runners: Voodoo Running. It is sad that the ambitions of runners makes them victims.

Tom

Pose runners base their running ideas of their own "special" research

Recoil wrote:

What some people seem to be confused about is push-off versus recoil. Unless you are coming out of the starting blocks, you shouldn't be pushing. That's not to say that there is no forward propuslive force. Forward propulsive force should come through recoil and elastic energy (as posted in Tellez's article cited to "prove" that push-off is necessary).

Push is what leads to injuries like achilles tendonitis. Recoil is what leads to world records. Michael Johnson or Kenny B.---either pushes. Both, however, utilized their natural elasticity by placing themselves in the position to best utilized forward propulsion via recoil. It might look to ya'll like they are pushing, but they aren't.

Vertical propulsion via pushing is a huge waste of energy. It leads to a bouncy up and down running style. Vertical pushing = inefficiency. Forward propulsion via recoil = efficiency.

I think we may need a definition of what is a 'push-off.' How would you distinguish it through measurement from you 'recoil only' proposition?

Elites do extend the rear leg, that can easily be seen in photos. If force is applied as the leg extends, then that is mechanical work being done - i would call that a 'push'.

If the force is purely recoil, (stored elastic energy), where did this energy come from.

I do think using elasticity is important for efficient running, but it won't conserve 100% of energy. There will be other energy losses too (e.g. air resistance).

I think it would be difficult to separate recoil and any other muscle action - elastic properties of a muscle-tendon complex are much better when the muscle is active.

Recoil wrote:

Check out Haile (and his racemate) not extending the hip and not pushing off----

That in no shows that they don't go on to extend their hips in the following however many msec.

Having read stuff on his site, he describes it as the its the science behind the method - the physics of how it works.

If he were to say "it should feel like you're falling (but you're not", and "it should feel like you're not pushing (but really you are a little)" then i would be much less bothered by POSE.

I do find it quite cult-like - only when you've really bought into can you accept the explanations etc, because until you're a believer, the explanations just don't make sense.

A reasonable theory should make sense to people who have knowledge in the field, even if they don't agree with it - happens in science all the time.

Recoil wrote:

Here's the number one thing stopping most runner (including elites) from running properly----SHOES.

There is a perfectly inverse correlation between the "evolution" of shoes and American distance running performance.

You can't run like these guys with modern running shoes.

I agree with that!!

Webby??

Is that Dave of Leeds / Brum?

Alex: Here ya go.

Re: the push:

http://www.posetech.com/training/archives/000286.html

Re: hamstring vs. hip flexor:

http://www.posetech.com/training/archives/000280.html

antipose wrote:

It's been said before and I'll say it again, the reason pose seems to prevent injury is because of the correct foot landing. It's my belief that if runners learned to run the normal way correctly (which includes a flat foot landing) then they would experience less injuries. The problem is that many runners who think they run "normal" land on their heel. This is not Correct running.

bingo. Most recreational runners heelstrike and their turnover is too slow. Danny Dreyer preaches the same footstrike advice in Chi Running, and also repeats Daniels' recommendations on cadence. Shorter, quicker strides + midfoot landing = fewer injuries, and generally more relaxed & enjoyable running for *most* recreational runners. If some folks need to buy the whole POSE hog to get those benefits, well, to each his own...

Is there any evidence that this isn't quackery from a source that isn't a commercial website supported by sales of Pose propaganda? Just curious.

I know what you were trying to ask, and the answer is that the site is not "quackery" solely for commercial benefit. Of course, Dr. Romanov runs a business, but we can all agree that there's nothing wrong with that. But he is very dedicated to helping runners and not doing anything just for a profit. For example, Romanov posts tons of free articles, videos, etc. He answers questions for free. His coaching staff answers questions for free. I've met him, and in my opinion he has a genuine passion for helping runners.

I can understand a healthy debate about mechanics. The antagonism absolutely mystifies me. Prior to bashing, ask yourself, have I really don't my best to educate myself about this topic prior to spewing on the web. Have I read the book, have I studied the articles and videos on the site, have I attended a clinic, have I asked intelligent questions to really satisfy myself about what Romanov means by certain descriptions.

Dude, I just ordered the Pose coffee mug and t-shirt off the website.

Cool Beans!

Alright, don't overload me, but I have a question.

Weather you like or dislike the Pose method just set that aside for a second and explain something to me.

Do you think the Pose method is something that will make you signif. faster and help prevent injury? Why or why not?

I'm torn to be honest.

Thanks

I'll answer your question based on my knowledge of mechanics

Will it directly make you faster? No

Will it help prevent injuries? It can.

Quick explanation. It won't make you directly faster because it is NOT the most efficient way to run for a distance runner or for a sprinter. It's simply not. That has been shown in studies mentioned on this thread and by analysis of world class runners, especially sprinters. The best, non drugged, sprinters do not run like or employ the pose method.

Prevent injuries. It's not the most efficient, but it does limit impact forces. How? Mostly because of the forefoot or flat foot strike. This will help prevent many common injuries. However, the correct way to run also requires a forefoot or flat foot strike, NOT a heel strike. So If you run correctly you will help prevent injuries too. Also, the pose method has a quicker stride rate where there is little vertical oscilation. Again this may help prevent injuries somewhat, but it will hurt your overall speed and efficiency in a race.

That's my objective look at it from my knowledge of the mechanics of running.