Pose = crazy???

"The simplest shoes give your legs and feet a chance to function properly - in the way the body evolved to function, that loads the structures in the body in a way that suits the anatomy."

HAHAH no - anatomy comes in many different forms, just like there are different body types there are different running types - NATURALLY. Why does everyone think we all need to be the same? Stop trying to conform to someone elses version of "proper form" and find what works for YOU. If you have injury problems you should probably see a good running doctor, not try some unproven (and in fact proven to the contrary) new method.

I know, along with Asterix's FAST technique, I'm also going to start a new service:

"sir

TRY the DRINK method of drinking your coffee in the morning: Scientifically proven to reduce drinking injuries, and you save 11% vertical load on your bicep when using the DRINK method. Dr. Javanoff has been working on this new way to drink for over 25 years, and has taught millions how to drink their coffee more efficiently. I have been working on the DRINK method for 5 years and have recently become certified to teach the methods of DRINK. Visit drinktech.com and you find plenty of informtaion on ways to improve you drinking performance."

Alex S,

Are you the same alex-s from the UK runners world forum? If so I would really like to hear your response to gaterade’s numbered points as to why he believes Geb is running close to “perfect” pose. Most of what he writes is a repeat of a recent critique of a Geb video that was on the Posetech website. When I saw this I felt intuitively that what was being asserted was not quite right, but I’d like to hear the imput from someone with a bit more technical knowledge the me.

Tx runner girl,

Getting back to your original question: Yes, I have attended a pose clinic and after two years of experimenting with this technique I would have to say that there is some good and some bad. It could prove to be a deeply frustrating experience. Minimalist shoes, forefoot striking, not over-striding, high cadence, all that seems to work for me but the problem was that all of the pseudoscience and misleading information complicated the whole issue and actually led to injury. Many of the views espoused by the “big honchos” on the pose forum actually defy common sense - pulling your foot up under your hips by using only your hamstrings, denying the existence of a push and the belief in gratuitous forces etc, etc. Eventually I had to simply take what worked for me and ignore the rest. For example, I have found that not concentrating on pushing and allowing it to happen as a reflex works, but I wouldn’t deny that it’s happening as pose does. I could go into this in detail, but I'm sure all this stuff has covered many times.

I don’t know what your running history is, but if you’re already a good runner and you don’t get injured, personally I wouldn’t bother with it. However, if you’re not a forefoot striker already I think that forefoot striking does have a lot to offer, but there are easier ways to get there than pose. Keep it simple.

terryh wrote:

but there are easier ways to get there than pose.

Care to share, please?

ugglagglo wrote:

"The simplest shoes give your legs and feet a chance to function properly - in the way the body evolved to function, that loads the structures in the body in a way that suits the anatomy."

HAHAH no - anatomy comes in many different forms, just like there are different body types there are different running types - NATURALLY. Why does everyone think we all need to be the same? Stop trying to conform to someone elses version of "proper form" and find what works for YOU. If you have injury problems you should probably see a good running doctor, not try some unproven (and in fact proven to the contrary) new method.

Just to clarify that i am for minimalism but NOT for POSE.

Humans are far far more similar than different. I think my point stands.

Terryh,

Yes its me. I'll look at that in some detail when i have time (in the middle of moving house right now).

JY

You have no idea which study I participated in. I believe that the one I participated in can be found at the below link.

I used 2% as an arbitrary figure. Regardless, I do believe that better form, whether it be through Pose or plyometrics or some other method can improve performance. If you choose not to believe that it is fine with me. I regularly work on my form to be a more efficient runner.

SouthDakotan wrote:

terryh wrote:

but there are easier ways to get there than pose.

Care to share, please?

South Dakotan’

I in many ways I wouldn’t. Txrunnergirl asked a serious question and I think there are far better runners on this forum who have made the transition who can offer better advice than me. For all I know she might already be a forefoot striker.

What I will say is that in my case I did not find the drills to be helpful at all and in fact the ones that involved bands actually resulted in injury. After much frustration and a long rest from running as a result of a string of injuries, I ditched what I consider to be the more outlandish ideas in pose (I have already stated some of these above) and just took it back to basics - Pose Fall Pull and landing close to my centre of balance. I then ran barefoot for two months starting with ridiculously small mileages. Actually the jury is out on the fall as far as I’m concerned, because although I believe in practice it seems to make my form more smooth and integrated I don’t buy the whole gravity thing. Whatever, energy you save in falling you then have to expend in resurrecting the height you have lost. I have already explained my thoughts on the pull and the so-called pose is a position everybody passes through during running. This works for me, but it might not work for you, or for that matter txrunnergirl – hence my reluctance to answer your question.

I’m sure that the way I run now is not pose, but quite frankly I couldn’t care less. I haven’t had any injuries and at last I’m enjoying my running again.

I don’t really want to get into a long exchange of posts on this subject as I have heard it all before many times over. I did post a very long and impassioned posting on the Runners World UK forum some time ago about all my experiences with pose some time ago and I’m not going to do that again. If you’re interested you could find it, but if I were you, I wouldn’t bother. Life’s too short!

Glad things worked out for you in your hs sporting life.

Too bad you had to be exposed to such heartless, hypercritical pricks from what it sounded like!

I was like alot of people telling their story: heal striker, frequent AT, knee, muscle pulls/tears, hamstrings. I don't know about the Pose method. I'm a chiropractor and I thought back to my biomechanics classes and the function of the foot. It is incredibly well set up to absorb shock. I looked at photos of Jim Ryun, Seb Coe, watched Bekele, Geb, Kenyans and saw all had forefoot strike. I decided to go for it. I started first for a few minutes on my tread. I was at 160 strides per min. I took my shoes off and noticed I HAD to forefoot strike or else it hurt. My strides jumped to 175/minute. I concluded that that would mean less time in the air, therefore less vertical motion, therefore less impact. I took this outside after building up to 25 minutes on the tread. I made the mistake of doing a hilly trail 6-miler, forefoot land also on the downhill. My calves were sore for 3 weeks and I had spasms in my foot muscles. I stuck with it, backed off and built up. That was last year and no injuries. This year, no injuries and I'm putting in more miles. Most of it hilly trails. No AT. Also, I NEVER LET MY HEAL HIT ON AN UPHILL CLIMB and try my best to forefoot/midfoot on the bottom. I'm 195 lbs. Looking back, this is how I ran when I was a 70lb kid. I could run 10 miles in my rockport dress shoes. It wouldn't matter because I forefoot land and my foot absorbs the shock. I'm faster than I was before, too. Consider switching.

dav-man wrote:

spokompton wrote:

Puff your chest up and out, lean slightly forward, raise your hands to your heart, and land on your forefoot underneath your center of gravity.

Oops. Now I'm confused. I used to be in motion control shoes (Mizuno Legend). Then I decided to work on my form and got into Free 5.0s and started on a treadmill so I wouldn't be stomping on hard asphalt. It worked out great, and my running has never been better. I just make sure to stretch my calves and feet a lot.

But I thought you're supposed to land midfoot, which is what I trained myself to do.

Is it forefoot or midfoot?

Dav-man,

IMO I think it's personal preference, as long as you are not smashing your heal into the ground. As others have mentioned, many of the greatest of all time seem to land closer to their forefoot.

Running barefoot, or with H-Streets, your body will naturally find the optimum point of contact on your foot. All you as a runner need to think about is placing the foot underneath your center of gravity.

I don't know why for many people in runnung community the word "pose" looks like a red rag for a corrida bull. Pose is a postition that EVERY running person passes in one of the phases of his running motion ( even the big lady in the photo posted by Asterix). This position is: support on the ball of his support foot, ball, hips and shoulders in one vertical line (like balancing a pencil on the end of your finger). In order to make another step one must unbalance this balance by leaning forward in order to unload the support foot. So the quicker you get into the next "pose" - the quicker you can make another step. The teaching of pose method is about how to change from pose to pose with no UNNECESSARY movements. The ideal feeling should be floating with no braking action.

Now, regarding the question; " will pose make you run faster?" - the answer is: " Directly - no". It can make one run faster due to less injuries, means you will be able to train more consistetly, with no interruptions to heal injuries. And a good running technique will never be a substitute to hard and smart training - and it never claims to be. A guy with more strength and endurance will outrun a guy with perfect form 10 times out of 10. But all being equal the guy with a perfect form wins.

Regarding "why elite runners don't study pose?" - the answer is simple: learning a new technique means focusing on it, you can't run the old way and the new way at the same time, means one should quit running, focus on drills and then on short runs - and elite can't afford it, cuz he must win races NOW - and he CAN do it. And that's why triathlon comunity is much more open to pose - triathlets mostly are not runners, and running often is the weakest link in their performance, so devoting time to learn pose they have nothing to lose.

I see many people are irritated that DR Romanov has made a bussiness out of this teaching. Does that fact that a guy has his intellectual property for sale diminish the value of such property? Those of you who are conned into wearing all kinds of high tech motion control crap ( thinking the shoe will do something that a human foot can't do) are also victims of shoe company propaganda.

And concerning the argument that there is no "correct" running technique and everyone choses what's best for him - it's pure bullshit. Cuz then everyone should swim his own way, and high- or long jump his own way, or throw disc his own way. A person can't run a natural way if from his childhood he spends most of his day in front of the TV with his bulky motion conrols on his feet. The ones who run the natural way are barefoot African children - and surprisingly their "natural way" is very much like pose.

I am a neutral midfoot striker, but I have a fallen arch on my right foot which is the same leg I had a tibial stress fracture and stress reactions on. Since then I have two sets of completely different orthotics from two different doctors. I'm not so sure either has worked that great. I was just running on the dreadmill the other night when I could feel my shin ache a little, but then (thanks to there being a mirror on the wall in front of me) I started to pay close attention to my stride, posture, footstrike, etc. and made some adjustments. I tipped my hips slightly forward, leaned forward a bit, and focused on staying balanced. This was actually before I even read about the Pose method on the website. I was just naturally making adjustments, but I'm thinking if I learned Pose correctly it would help. One thing I am still confused about is the "pull." Could someone explain that? Also, what position is the trail foot supposed to be in?

TX Girl:

Stand in running pose: on the balls of the support foot, the knee of the support foot slightly bent, the ankle of the other foot under your hips. Now lean a bit forward to unbalance, don't bend at the waist, but try as if to reach forward with your solar plexus. You will feel the urge to make the step forward with the foot that is in the air, Instead of doing this pull the support foot from the ground right under your hip, trying to use your hamstrings ( and not hip flexors), and the hanging foot will drop on the ground by itself. This is what the pull is all about: you mentally focus not on making the step forward, but on pulling the support foot off the ground. Be sure to use hamstrings, and not hip flexors: using hip fexors you will be pulling forward ( which will lead to overstriding), and using hamstrings you want to pull right upwards. Focusing on pulling up the support foot will make the other foot drop to the ground by itself, and it will drop right under the gravity center, which will enable to make the ground contact as short as posiible ( you can visualise it as running on hot coals). Looking at you running from the side view one should see your feet moving in CIRCLES and not in ELLIPSES forward - backward. That's why the feeling should be lifting the foot UP but not FORWARD. Don't think about landing - only about puling: thinking about landing leads to overstriding.

TxRunnergirl,

Gatorade, gave a good description of the pull. The trail leg or the one being pulled from the ground should be under the "hip" of your body as soon as possible into the Pose stance ready for forward progress quickly.

As Terryh indicated, some of the instructions in POSE, (particularly the inhibitory instructions 'don't push' and 'only use the hamstrings') have the potential to cause problems (in my opinion as someone who researches motor control). I think it is possible that you could inhibit a lot of the stabilising activation of many muscle groups and cause injuries. The human body is not put together how one might design a machine - i.e. with one muscle for one clearly defined action. Natural movement is organised by action not by muscle group. The complimentary muscle activations in running are very complex - i'm sure a full account has never been made in the literature as the details would be horribly difficult to tease out. Anyway, really focusing on isolating a muscle group is not the way to find the body's natural movement.Dr. R wrote someone on his site that he believes that it is pushing that causes things like PF and AT. I'd say that it is pushing incorrectly. His approach is to avoid the push to avoid these injuries. My approach would be to learn to push correctly.

Try that treadmill running with the mirror in bare feet. You might also want to do some one leg support strength / balance exercises, and eventually some plyometrics.

I think that a technique improvement should directly (though not immediately) improve both the feel and speed of your running.

For starters, I'd like to point out that this is one of the most rational posts I've ever seen by a POSE proponent.

Gatorade wrote:

I don't know why for many people in runnung community the word "pose" looks like a red rag for a corrida bull.

Like I alluded to in my opener, most POSE propoganda is not of the greatest quality. They claim things that are fundamentally physically impossible, like gravity pulling you forward. Simply defending it by saying it is 'poor choice of words' isn't going to fly when they make no effort to correct themselves or the website.

They claim POSERs don't 'push', again, something easily disproved by understanding of physical motion and a persuing of their own videos.

They claim world class athletes run POSE when they clearly do not.

They also push the ideology that it is the one and only true way to run and everyone who is not a believer just needs to buy a video, attend a seminar or talk to Dr Romanov (otherwise known as forking out cash).

All these things are a giant red flashing warning light to anyone with any common sense.

That you haven't followed this formula is to your credit.

As you pointed out the fundamental 'Pose' is a position that every runner passes. Obviously it doesn't therefore require paying money.

As critical as I've been of the promotional methodology, I basically subscribe to the view that JimFiore expressed a while ago in a previous POSE deconstruction thread: elements of POSE can be beneficial to SOME runners and possibly reduce injuries.

However, the whole package, the false or misleading promotional information, descriptions and cult-like adherent to the prophet Romanov and 'the one true way' (send your cheque or money order now) do not present those benefits in a very flattering light.

If, as you suggest, barefoot African children run much like POSE, then surely at least some of them would be willing to endorse the commercial operation when they become fast and famous on the world circuit. That there has been a singular lack of any such world class endorsement is further telling.

"They claim things that are fundamentally physically impossible, like gravity pulling you forward"

One can never measure ALL the forces that are included to propell a runner forward. The essence of pose teaching is about "perception". If you claim that it's impossible not to push at all - then TRYING not to push will reduce the pushing by , let's say, 90%. About impossibility of graviy pulling you forward - balance a pencil on the table, and then unbalance it - it will fall FORWARD. And ideally the lost height will be regained due to muscle elasticity ( which doesn't cost energy).

"As you pointed out the fundamental 'Pose' is a position that every runner passes. Obviously it doesn't therefore require paying money."

Yeah, but what happens between one pose and the next one is what matters. How quick and smooth is your transition from one pose to another determines how long you stay on support. The longer you stay on support - the more impact is on your joints and ligaments, and the more energy you spend to move from A to B. Pushing off leads to landing in front ( cuz you have to include hip flexors after the push-off to drive the rear leg forward to catch with the body, and since the foot is lighter, it's speed is bigger, means the foot flies forward and lands in front of the gravity center, then the foot stays on the ground for a ong time until the body catches with it to get into the next pose). If you try nort to push but simply jerk the foot up to your hip with your hamstrings, the foot will drop right under you - and bingo! - you are in pose again. THE ESSENCE OF POSE TEACHING IS THAT WHEN YOUR LANDING FOOT TOUCHES THE GROUND, YOU SHOULD BE ALREADY IN POSE- AND YOU CAN'T DO IT IF YOU EMPHASIZE A POWERFUL PUSH-OFF. So you must pay the cost of several beers for the book and the DVD to understand it.

"If, as you suggest, barefoot African children run much like POSE, then surely at least some of them would be willing to endorse the commercial operation when they become fast and famous on the world circuit. That there has been a singular lack of any such world class endorsement is further telling."

African children don't know nothing about pose or Romanov, and they don't care, many of them can't even read, and when they in future show good results, they don't even care why ( and these good results are by no means ONLY due to good running form). I already said that a good running form will never be a substitute for physical qualities - lots of world class elites have a lousy form, still they are able to beat everyone.

There is one big difference between pose proponents and opponents: proponents are the ones who have tried it, devoted quite a lot of time to it, and it works for them. Opponents are the ones who either are against it cuz they don't agree with it intellectually, haven't even tried it - or the ones who have tried it for a week and decided that " it doesn't work".

This is a discussion I conducted in march on the subject of push-off in Pose. I think there IS push off in Pose and they (romanovs) agree!

Errors in Running: Push Off

The extensor’s paradox highlights a very important point in running mechanics: there is no thigh (extensor muscles of the leg) activity after landing, therefore, there is no Push Off in Running. Dr. Romanov explains with examples why this is so.

I quote “there is no thigh (extensor muscles of the leg) activity after landing, therefore, there is no Push Off in Running.”

But: there IS thigh activity after landing, as numerous research articles tell. There IS push off as you ‘admit’ in other comments. I don’t see why you should hide that fact.

Posted by paul on 03/05 at 06:32 PM

Hi Paul,

I think you are misunderstanding what I am “admitting” to. I’ll try to make a clear distinction for you. If you look at the extensor muscle study, it clearly shows that the thighs are idle after the midstance of the landing. What this means: the thighs are not used for propulsion in order to “drive” the body forward. The push-off measured in studies is nothing more than ground reaction force. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Think of it this way, unless you are lifting one leg off the ground at a time, you will have to apply some kind of extra pressure in order to pull your leg from the ground. In running, after midstance your thighs go idle and the elastic component takes over. Remember that there is no benefit to actively pushing off when you do not have your body-weight to work with, which is only at midstance; at any point throughout the support phase after the body weight is off of support there is no pushing force you could create that you could derive any benefit from. This means that even if the athlete was artificially creating thigh muscle activity because he was taught to do so, there could be no benefit from doing so, just muscle expenditure.

If you look at it from a larger scope, when the elastic component takes over, the only thing left to do is to pull your leg from the ground as soon as possible so that not to slow your momentum. When you jump in the air, or simply pull your feet under your body as quickly as possible you need to raise your GCM (general center of mass) in order to pull your feet under your body. In running, since your muscles are already contracting and expanding, the elastic component of your thighs along with other elastic elements helps in creating this slight raise in GCM, enough for you to be able to pull your leg back under your body. When you pull your leg off the ground, it creates a larger force on the ground in order to momentarily break free from gravity. If you are meassuring how much force is applied to the ground after midstance, the figures would read that the runner applies extra force during the latter part of the support phase in order to “propel” the body forward. That is simply an inaccurate interpretation of the data.

My final point is that, yes there are studies that show there is thigh activity after midstance, our position on this is that there is no benefit to gain from actively using thigh muscles to “push-off.” Finally, if measuring ground reaction force you could conclude that the runner is infact pushing off in order to “propel” himself forward; we however feel that that is a false interpretaion.

Posted by Pose vLog on 03/06 at 01:13 PM

Thanks for your elaborate answer, it makes discussion possible and makes things clearer for me.

(you say: …think of it this way, unless you are lifting one leg off the ground at a time, you will have to apply some kind of extra pressure in order to pull your leg from the ground)

my comment: this extra pressure is applied ‘at’ midstance which makes for a short effort, I call this ‘pushoff’ but maybe you call it ‘withstanding the ground reaction force’. It also seems that your definition of ‘pull’ is: ‘apply pressure to the ground in order to pull, then pull’. So, according to me AT midstance there is a (very short moment of) pushoff (or pressure to pull leg from ground).

I agree that after midstance the thighs go idle. I assume with elastic component you refer to elastic energy stored in tendons etc.

(you say: if you look at it from a larger scope, when the elastic component takes over, the only thing left to do is to pull your leg from the ground as soon as possible so that not to slow your momentum)

my comment: yes the momentum is very important, as you hit the ground with the other leg your pulled leg is already at/in front of the GCM and you are in what you call the Pose. You don’t have to wait for this leg and can immediately ‘in my terms’ bounce-move forward, in your terms ‘fall’ (but fall has some connotations that introduce technique errors in some people not very well in to running technique).

(you say: In running, since your muscles are already contracting and expanding, the elastic component of your thighs along with other elastic elements helps in creating this slight raise in GCM, enough for you to be able to pull your leg back under your body)

my comment: according to research there can be about 50% ‘elastic’ energy given back to you as you bounce. But the remainder is muscle activity: the muscles contract to withstand the pressure of landing and help move the GCM up and forward.

(you say: when you pull your leg off the ground, it creates a larger force on the ground in order to momentarily break free from gravity. If you are meassuring how much force is applied to the ground after midstance, the figures would read that the runner applies extra force during the latter part of the support phase in order to “propel” the body forward. That is simply an inaccurate interpretation of the data)

my comment: so can I say that this extra force after midstance is partly there because the runner doesn’t pull quickly enough after midstance? Or should the runner apply more force at midstance so he can quicker pull. (the command ‘pull’ then leads subconsciously to the command ‘push harder’).

Regards

Paul

Posted by paul on 03/07 at 04:41 PM

Thanks for the Reply Paul. Your interpretations are correct. It is absolutely true that Dr. Romanov and his instructions tend to me mis interpreted sometimes. I would agree that some of the way he describe things should be looked at and developed to be more of a complete answer so that not to confuse those individuals who have read many research studies on the subject. However, the mainstream market of runners probably wont care about half of the scientific data we can bring them. The bottom line for most runners is, does it work? Yes.

On a final note, if you have some suggestions as to what you believe is not clear in Pose explanation, do point it out to us, and we will be sure to include it on our website and our upcoming books. Thanks for your sincere interest. (you can email me @

support@posetech.com

)

Posted by Pose vLog on 03/08 at 06:33 PM

Regards

Paul

I assume you just made up that 90% figure as I have a hard time grasping how someone could 'push' 90% less and still perform anything approaching running.

"Ideally" - maybe in a perfect world, just like the frictionless surfaces used in introduction to physics problems. But the world ain't perfect and there is no way that any lost height can be regained purely by elastic energy stored in the muscles as the body 'falls forward'.

Even the POSE logo of the sequence of running motions shows that there is a definite increase in the center of mass once the runner has 'pushed off' of the ground, indicating that there is a significant 'push', far more than just energy-less muscle elasticity.

That is just not true. Again, back to the elite runners like Geb. He is most definitely pushing off very strongly and yet is not continually braking by landing out in front. Bekele is similar with a very powerful stride but also a very quick and snappy popping of his feet off the ground.

It is quite possible to do it with a powerful push-off (see most world class athletes). I'm quite sure they didn't pony up for a book and DVD.

Many of the big names who have been around for a while can read quite well (Geb, Tergat) and have shown not only good intelligence, but a willingness to commercially endorse products they believe are beneficial to them. Have they (or others) seen no benefit from POSE to convince them that accepting some sponsorship money in exchange for its promotion?

Despite the suggested derogatory insinuation, disagreeing with it intellectually is a very valid reason, especially when those disagreements are clearly pointed out to proponents (who refuse or are unable to refute them).

Going on about elites who run POSE but don't, gravity pulling forward and not pushing shows a fundamental dishonesty in the promotion and in the commercial world, is a big red flag to those who have some knowledge and understanding.