GRAVITY DOES NOT PULL YOU FORWARD!!!!!!!!!!

dunes runner wrote:

This is why a hippopotamus runs faster than a gazelle.

In fact a 180 pound sprinter is faster at the 10k than Kenenisa Bekele.

And a 350 pound football player is faster than Paul Terget at the marathon.

Do Not Agree wrote:

[quote]Do Not Agree wrote:

Before we were talking about raw speed. Now the only way you can make your point is by making the comparison over a longer distance.

Okay then that is why sprinters are faster than Yiannis Kouros over 24 hours and 6 days.

Ballpoint wrote:

Any of you ding dongs figure out that gravity is not gravity. Gravity is the centrifugal force produced from the spinning action of the planet on it's axis?

This is why we're all flying out into space.

steven hawkings wrote:

ok, here's the situation: i'm standing on the ground and i allow myself to fall down. the truth is that i will fall forward. try it yourself.

I just tried this. I was standing up and fell back in my chair. Now I'm behind where I was and I'm sitting down in the chair.

I guess it didn't work for me.

Question for Jim Fiore wrote:

I'm a bit rusty on my physics 101 I must admit. Could someone provide me the answers (step by step) to the following questions.

1) I have an object on a frictionless incline (30 degree slope) that rests 3 meters high. If I let the object go, what will be the horizontal speed of the object when it gets to the end of the incline?

2) Same object on a frictionless incline, same height (3 m), 45 degree angle.

I see no one has answered this yet so I will try it again.

The incline is frictionless but the ground is not.

Also, there is no curve with the ground so the object will want to keep going straight when it gets there but won't be able to because of the mass of the earth.

Thus the object will stop when it gets to the end of the incline and it's horizontal speed will be zero.

I use pose as a way to run with perfect running form.

Romanov did not tell me personally that gravity pulls me forward. It does not. I was taught that leaning forward allows my center of mass to fall. Due to my body pivoting at the point of contact with the ground, my fall is in an arc, not straight down. By changing support, I maintain this fall. The greater degree at which I lean, the faster I need to change support to prevent myself from falling on my face, and the faster I run. If I focus solely on lifting my feet under hips, I eliminate two factors: pushing off, which only makes it more difficult to lift my feet under my hips at the same rate at which I'm falling and, overstiding, which only stops my forward movement, a leading cause of injury.

Watch Romanov on ice, not pushing. Push Pause and then use the arrows to the right of the timeline bar to play frame by frame. Watch how there is no overstriding, his feet land directly under his hips.

http://posetech.com/video/vidplayer/play.php?id=22

Compare to:

http://runningtothetop.com/Mottram%20vs.%20Geb%2004%20London%205k.wmv

http://runningtothetop.com/Pre%20at%201971%20AAU

!.WMV

I use pose as a way to run with perfect running form.

Romanov did not tell me personally that gravity pulls me forward. It does not. I was taught that leaning forward allows my center of mass to fall. Due to my body pivoting at the point of contact with the ground, my fall is in an arc, not straight down. By changing support, I maintain this fall/momentum. The greater degree at which I lean, the faster I need to change support to prevent myself from falling on my face, and the faster I run. If I focus solely on lifting my feet under hips, I eliminate two factors: pushing off, which only makes it more difficult to lift my feet under my hips at the same rate at which I'm falling and, overstiding, which only stops my forward movement, a leading cause of injury.

Watch Romanov on ice, not pushing. Push Pause and then use the arrows to the right of the timeline bar to play frame by frame. Watch how there is no overstriding, his feet land directly under his hips.

http://posetech.com/video/vidplayer/play.php?id=22

Compare to:

http://runningtothetop.com/Mottram%20vs.%20Geb%2004%20London%205k.wmv

http://runningtothetop.com/Pre%20at%201971%20AAU

!.WMV

I use pose as a way to run with perfect running form.

Romanov did not tell me personally that gravity pulls me forward. It does not. I was taught that leaning forward allows my center of mass to fall. Due to my body pivoting at the point of contact with the ground, my fall is in an arc, not straight down. By changing support, I maintain this fall. The greater degree at which I lean, the faster I need to change support to prevent myself from falling on my face, and the faster I run. If I focus solely on lifting my feet under hips, I eliminate two factors: pushing off, which only makes it more difficult to lift my feet under my hips at the same rate at which I'm falling and, overstiding, which only stops my forward movement, a leading cause of injury.

Watch Romanov on ice, not pushing. Push Pause and then use the arrows to the right of the timeline bar to play frame by frame. Watch how there is no overstriding, his feet land directly under his hips.

http://posetech.com/video/vidplayer/play.php?id=22

Compare to:

http://runningtothetop.com/Mottram%20vs.%20Geb%2004%20London%205k.wmv

http://runningtothetop.com/Pre%20at%201971%20AAU

!.WMV

testing

Bump

To test this for yourself, go out and run in place, not pushing, only lifting. Now, Lean backwards. Then, lean forward. Remain only lifting. Did you move? Why?

The concept is similiar to balancing a pen on the palm of your hand. let the pen start falling in one direction. If you move your hand in that same direction, the pen maintains its fall. In running, you maintain a sustained falling and changing support with your feet landing directly under your hips is equivalent to the hand remaining directly under the center of mass of the falling pen. People with poor running form often fall at a great degree, but stop themselves as well with heel striking and overstriding.

You can also go aqua jogging. Only lift. The extra resistance from the water will not allow your support leg to fall completely. The faster your turn-over, the less your support leg will fall. You will be able to feel if you are actively pushing. Only focus on resistance of water on the heel of your lifting leg. Lean forward and you will go forward. Stop moving your legs, and your face will fall into the water. Lean back and you will go back. Stay straight up and down and lift your legs and you will stay still (note, a aqua jogging belt will cause you to go forward still, so you have to lean back some). You may argue that even when 'only lifting' you are still pushing some, just not as much, just as people argue with Romanov running on ice. Video tape yourself with just a 'slight' push, and your leg will not be lifting under your hips fast enough, the equivalent of the hand not moving under the falling pen fast enough. But, unlike the pen, you don't fall on your face, you overstride to compensate and stop your falling = injury. When in the water, you will see that you can control speed with your leaning, without pushing.

You can argue the theory of it until you are blue in the face, but I have a large group of people I train with who look great, are injury free and practice every day to get closer to perfection. They had trouble understanding at first, but now that they are running with this method everyday, they know it is the truth behind running with proper biomechanics. Only lift, how much simpler can it be? All running induced injuries, overstriding, heel striking, poor posture, arm cross over, slow turn over... is due to not pulling your leg up fast enough under your hips. Perpetual pulling.

I'd like to thank you for posting some very useful information. I know I'm pulling when I run thus I suffer from constant sore hamstrings. I for one plan on trying Dr. Romanov's technique.

Your hamstrings may be too sore due to you lifting your foot behind the hips, not under the hips.

Another point: The reason for the focus on the lean is because this is what dictates speed. Combined with stride frequency, stride length becomes a side factor. Many people focus on stride length, when it should never be the focus, only maintaining a consistent lean and high stride frequency, which will passively dictate stride length. Watch the video of Geb vs. Mottram from a few posts ago. At the end, Mottram\'s lean is far less than Geb\'s. If Mottram would have maintained his lean and stride frequency, he could have challenged Geb at the end of the race. It\'s that simple...

The difficult part is maintaining the stride freqency. The greater degree of falling forward, the more difficult it is to lift the feet under the hips. Read the article on Michael Johnson\'s training from a month or so ago, he makes it clear that his stride frequency training was the key to his success.

Another note is that a lot of runners focus on their feet and lower legs when running. They focus on finding support with over striding and pushing off for power. This is to their demise. The lower leg should be forgotten about. Pretend you have been amputated at the knees and you can only use your upper legs like hydraulic pumps. Be sure to use primarily your gluts and hamstrings, as your hip flexors can not handle too much work. ***Decrease the angle behind the knee, not the angle in front of the hip flexor.*** These upper leg muscles are powerful. Most runners focus on the weaker lower legs muscles and are therefore limited when it comes to muscle endurance. If your calves, achilles, plantar facscia, feet or shings are sore, the best thing you can do for them is to forget about them and focus solely on perpetually lifting with your upper leg-\'hydraulics\', remembering which angle to decrease and to keep feet under hipss. You can put your hands at your side and touch your feet to you hands as a drill, also using a mirror to make sure your feet are not behind your hips.

With this knowledge, training can be much more specific. It becomes more than just putting in the volume and improving your anaerobic threshold. (note that I personally put much value on volume and AT running) You can do these runs with focus on perfection, maintaining a consistent lean, holding high turn-over and lifting up under the hips quickly. With this, the athlete can race with much more insight and strategy. Once again, watch the Geb vs Mottram video and realize Mottram decreased his lean while Geb increased his lean, losing the race.

perfectform wrote:

Watch the video of Geb vs. Mottram from a few posts ago. At the end, Mottram's lean is far less than Geb's. If Mottram would have maintained his lean and stride frequency, he could have challenged Geb at the end of the race. It's that simple...

It's that simple? This statement demonstrates that you know next to nothing about running. Geb was a WORLD RECORD HOLDER. Do you think he got there by simply leaning forward? Geb was simply a better runner than Mottram at the time. It had nothing to do with leaning. It didn't even have anything to do with raw speed. He just had more left in the tank than Mottram did, and that's why he won. It's ridiculous to assume that Geb won because he leaned better than Mottram.

This entire theory is a bunch of quack science. Of course you're supposed to land with your foot directly under your body. The experts have been telling us this for years, so you're not revolutionizing anything, Dr. Romanov. All you've done is attach that message to a bunch of crap about gravity pulling you forward, which the science minded posters on this board have demonstrated is not possible because any energy your body receives from the gravitational potential has to be given back when you push your center of mass back up to your original position.

You are nothing more than a bad infomercial. Unfortunately there are enough stupid people in this world that your approach will convince enough of them for you to make a buck. So kudos for taking advantage of stupid people. They probably deserve it.

JimFiore hit it right on. It's about momentum (p=mv), and that is why one stays in motion after they "let off the gas" so to speak.

Gravity and normal force deal with the vertical (or semi-vertical rotated) components of physical motion.

End of subject.

Your previous message was deleted for a reason. Calm down.

This is not a new, revolutionary way to run. It is a better way of teaching proper running technique.

Your comment about Geb winning does not prove anything. Yes, he was the WR holder, but this is not a reason for him winning. Yes, he is a better runner than Mottram. But why? Just saying, "because" is not an answer. He has better running form, better muscle endurace for maintaining his form and a high AT which improves his muscle's ability to work at the end of the race. But, the physical reason for him moving faster than Mottram at the end of the race was due to him falling at a greater rate and maintaining his efficient turn over. Physiology is a result of movement, not the other way around.

The question is, if it is so obvious that the foot needs to land under the hips, why are so many people injurred each year due to heel striking and overstiding?

I can't convince you that the earth is round and I have no desire of doing so. I hope some objective thinkers were helped by the notes I've contributed to this thread. My main concern is my running and I have the benefit of helping my team run with perfect form, which, when combined with aerobic development and the improvement of our anaerobic threshold, yields a complete runner.

Read and do your best to comprehend:

Romanov did not tell me personally that gravity pulls me forward. It does not. I was taught that leaning forward allows my center of mass to fall. Due to my body pivoting at the point of contact with the ground, my fall is in an arc, not straight down. By changing support, I maintain this fall. The greater degree at which I lean, the faster I need to change support to prevent myself from falling on my face, and the faster I run. If I focus solely on lifting my feet under hips, I eliminate two factors: pushing off, which only makes it more difficult to lift my feet under my hips at the same rate at which I'm falling and, overstiding, which only stops my forward movement, a leading cause of injury.

Thank you Perfectform. I know I have a form problem and I think Dr. Romanov's way is the answer. You continue to be very informative.

perfectform wrote:

I was taught that leaning forward allows my center of mass to fall. Due to my body pivoting at the point of contact with the ground, my fall is in an arc, not straight down. By changing support, I maintain this fall.

You still seem to be completely missing the required input of significant force and energy to raise your center of mass back up to its starting height.

It is simply not physically possible to be have your center of mass endlessly falling forward, otherwise you would be slithering on the ground before the end of the block.

Perpetually changing support allows for a sustained fall. The change of support maintains a constant height for your center of mass, taking away the need to 'raise your center of mass back to its starting point.' The analogy of the falling pen and the hand moving under the pen's center of mass sustaining the pen's fall stands clear and true. Lifting the foot under the hips, which then allows it to fall under your center of mass is equivalent to the hand moving under the pen. The energy input of moving the hand is equivalent to the energy input of lifting your feet. As one poster asked: If gravity doesn't play a part in forward movement, why don't you lean back or stand straight up in down when running?

The previous poster who commented that we already know to land under our hips is missing a key point: If you give an active effort in acheiving landing under you hips, you will not run in appearance like the elites you have referred to. You will get injured.