How much faster could one person get by correcting their form?

We aren’t just talking about pros.

Ever hear a swim coach say: "Just swim your natural way" or a tennis coach say "Just swing however feels natural" or a cross country ski coach say "Ski however feels right to you". The answer to all of the above is NO. The reason is that form matters for generating power and efficiency.

In running, heel striking is a no-no because it means putting on the brakes every stride. But go out to a local 5K and you will see MOST of the runners heel striking and landing on a straight leg out in front of them. Many elites do have naturally good form and rose to the top very quickly because of it. Those with bad form but good aerobic ability or speed often fall by the wayside because their coaches did not recognize the need for form improvements.

Lydiard had people doing strides and drills back in the 50s to improve their form. He worked on Snell's arm carriage. For some, good form is an accident. For more people it is the result of consistent work to improve it. Form DOES matter because it means improving efficiency and power with equal effort.

Form is not just "natural." Physics is real and there are completely rational and provable reasons why if you do lots of volume training below mile pace you will "naturally" fail at any sprint event up to 800 meters. It's entirely different.

For just one example, what's your stride length? How far ahead your foot lands, except don't overstride? No, think about the physics - it's how fast the ground was moving under you times delta t between strides. Look at Michael Johnson - does he look like he takes big strides? But he's going real fast so his choppy movement is in fact big strides.

I am surprised so many less people realize that efficiency is more important than form . Difference between hobby jogger and Elites with bad running form is that elites have excellent efficiency thereby making them run fast with bad form . Having said that running form is crucial to enhance that running economy even much more . I feel sorry for people that thinks that there is no room for improvement. We humans will never be perfect no matter how perfect we think we are . People regard elite runners as Gods and compare them to the idea that you run what's best to you . Also running form is not a lone factor , you need to make your breathing, arm swing , knee drive , torso etc etc more efficient to get the overall effect . Running is a full blown out body activity , please don't compare it to golf folks .....

Bad Wigins wrote:

WAY faster. But you have to do it right, and that means listen to a sprint coach. If there are any reading this, they're laughing heartily at the previous poster.

If you're bouncing too high, you are setting a natural limit to your speed by restricting your cadence from ever getting high enough to run a good 800m or less.

don't need a sprint coach for this. just be conscientious about getting your cadence up. count your steps while you run. run on a metronome. doing this on slow runs WILL transfer to races. but it takes time and mental discipline.

Free_the_thigh wrote:

Are there any other sports where people argue form isn’t important?

Just because there is no one perfect form doesn’t mean there isn’t bad form.

Look at golf for example, lots of good ways to swing a club, not all the pros do it the same, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t bad ways to swing the club.

Ideal form will vary person to person, but bad form will always be bad form.

Uh yeah every sport actually. At the end of the day if you put the ball in the hole, you win. And there are plenty of pros who have "bad form" in their respective sports.

Harry Wales wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Running form is mostly based on genetics and there isn't much that can be done to correct it. Tweeking arm carriage isn't going to have much of an effect.

Dr James Li greatly improved Lagat's running form at WSU. There was a thread on here about it. I will produce it if I have to.

Showed vid of a lumbering Lagat 1996 & 1997.

And did his form make him faster?

Let's be real. Kipchoge could freaking skip like a schoolgirl through 26.2 miles and still beat 99% of good form runners out there.

On the flip side, the 9 minute bad form midpack hobbyjoggers would absolutely smoke a good form 100m sprinter in a marathon.

You want another truth? Nobody looks good running 9 minute miles. Not even the Kenyans on their cooldown. These hobbyjoggers look just fine when they are sprinting.

Schweizer ran the fastest 5k in the country last year. I could find a million women with so-called better form than her. She overstrides and heel strikes. If you watched her jog and did not know her, you would never think she could run faster than 17 minutes, yet she ran 14:45. You guys keep trying to improve the form of your 17 minute girls and I will continue to train mine to run faster.

dude.... wrote:

Harry Wales wrote:

Dr James Li greatly improved Lagat's running form at WSU. There was a thread on here about it. I will produce it if I have to.

Showed vid of a lumbering Lagat 1996 & 1997.

And did his form make him faster?

Let's be real. Kipchoge could freaking skip like a schoolgirl through 26.2 miles and still beat 99% of good form runners out there.

On the flip side, the 9 minute bad form midpack hobbyjoggers would absolutely smoke a good form 100m sprinter in a marathon.

You want another truth? Nobody looks good running 9 minute miles. Not even the Kenyans on their cooldown. These hobbyjoggers look just fine when they are sprinting.

More to the point, Kipchoge doesn't beat another elite by "skipping". No one gets to be the best with bad or indifferent form. Secondly, sprinters don't compete in marathons. What is good form in one event isn't the same as good form in another unrelated event. But ultimately, what is good form other than technical efficiency - which would advantage anyone relative to their ability?

Armstronglivs wrote:

ultimately, what is good form other than technical efficiency - which would advantage anyone relative to their ability?

Yes. Elastic energy return. It's free energy in addition to the energy supplied from metabolism.

Getting more of it is the difference between good training and bad training.

dude.... wrote:

Free_the_thigh wrote:

Are there any other sports where people argue form isn’t important?

Just because there is no one perfect form doesn’t mean there isn’t bad form.

Look at golf for example, lots of good ways to swing a club, not all the pros do it the same, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t bad ways to swing the club.

Ideal form will vary person to person, but bad form will always be bad form.

Uh yeah every sport actually. At the end of the day if you put the ball in the hole, you win. And there are plenty of pros who have "bad form" in their respective sports.

.....

Nobody suggests form isn’t important in golf.

And to the person above, golf is also a full body activity. A golf swing doesn’t just involve your arms..

Comparing running to golf or basketball is not accurate. Running is natural. Running propels the body. Golf and basketball require the body to propel a ball. Tempo runs and steady state runs teach a runner to run relatively fast while remaining relatively comfortable. The best runners are focusing on fitness, not on form.

Predictor wrote:

https://images.app.goo.gl/b93UZqKyPAzgoMXp8

Schweizer ran the fastest 5k in the country last year. I could find a million women with so-called better form than her. She overstrides and heel strikes. If you watched her jog and did not know her, you would never think she could run faster than 17 minutes, yet she ran 14:45. You guys keep trying to improve the form of your 17 minute girls and I will continue to train mine to run faster.

But how much faster could she run with better form? I don't think anyone would argue that form is everything, but good form - efficiency - offers advantage over poorer form in the same athlete.

Predictor wrote:

Comparing running to golf or basketball is not accurate. Running is natural. Running propels the body. Golf and basketball require the body to propel a ball. Tempo runs and steady state runs teach a runner to run relatively fast while remaining relatively comfortable. The best runners are focusing on fitness, not on form.

The best runners have good form.

Running "seems" natural, but it is learned like anything else. Watch the efforts toddlers have to go to to learn how to walk and then run; the same might apply to stroke victims who have to re-learn the motions required to walk or run. Although the motions of swinging a bat or racquet or throwing a ball seem less "natural" because these skills require obvious technique and learning - and are usually taken up later than when we learn to walk or run - for a professional they can be as natural as anything else they do. Good technique - form - matters in anything that relates to skill. And running is a skill in the best.

I hate to say 'it depends'...but it depends.

Define 'bad form'? I don't think Paula Radcliffe would have been a bit faster with 'better form'.

I don't think Steve Cram would have been any faster with 'better form'.

That said, there are some people at more amateur levels with atrocious form. Recently on a run I passed a woman who was running like Frankenstein (if Frankenstein were a runner). Stiff legged and stiff armed, it boggled the mind how this was even possible! Her form could be improved easily...and better results should ensue.

Reading these responses it is amazing how many people are adamant that form cannot be changed for the better. Some are even angry at the suggestion that form work might help. It is just about improving efficiency and how your power propels you. Quick cadence, pointed toes, landing over your feet, minimal twisting are all needed to be fast. Some are naturally good at it, most are not. Practicing will make it better. Yes, practicing by running big miles is part of it. But doing drills and strides is also part of it. Most professional coaches have their athletes doing drills, strides, and strengthening work. Why? Because it helps efficiency and power.

dude.... wrote:

Harry Wales wrote:

Dr James Li greatly improved Lagat's running form at WSU. There was a thread on here about it. I will produce it if I have to.

Showed vid of a lumbering Lagat 1996 & 1997.

And did his form make him faster?

Let's be real. Kipchoge could freaking skip like a schoolgirl through 26.2 miles and still beat 99% of good form runners out there.

On the flip side, the 9 minute bad form midpack hobbyjoggers would absolutely smoke a good form 100m sprinter in a marathon.

You want another truth? Nobody looks good running 9 minute miles. Not even the Kenyans on their cooldown. These hobbyjoggers look just fine when they are sprinting.

Well, the 2000 Bernard Lagat was way faster than the 1996 Bernard Lagat; and I don't think it was just training.

1997 here:

2000 here:

U decide.

That’s so incorrect it’s laughable

Your running form is mostly dictated by your body shape, the relative length of your bones and the relative power and flexibility of your muscle groups. If you run long enough, your body will naturally find the most efficient way to run, given your body shape.

The running form can be changing your body composition i.e. the strength and/or flexibility of your muscles; it may or may not improve your times. I clearly remember watching Paula Radcliffe running in a marathon without knowing who she was and thinking it was the most horrible running form I had ever seen.