Inflexibility may enhance running economy

Thats good, because im inflexible as hell and i hate stretching. Makes some sense too

As long as you are flexible enough to attain your optimum stride length you are OK. People who are very tight and short striding generally lack the power to stride out, not the flexibility. It makes sense that those who practice flexibilty to the point of floppiness spend most of their energy trying to keep everything together while they run.

Us old guys must be real efficient because its been years since I've seen flexibility.

This could be a spurious correlation. The study doesn't seem to control for mileage (at least they don't mention it in the abstracted link). It could be that the least flexible runners were doing much higher mileage and their better efficiency is actually due to the training effect of this high mileage. I know that high mileage makes me more inflexible but also more efficient.

Bump good thread!

Evident it's more like lack of strength not so much as lack of flexibility which is reason injuries happen?

Hmmm, wonder if I should try something different, just read the post on this thread referring to short striding inflexible runners.

Ah yes, once again it's the "Lets-Justify-our-own-Laziness-by-Pretending-Stretching-is-Bad-For-You" thread.

Stretching can be bad and good depending on a variety of reasons. If you have a muscle tear or a sf then of course stretching is going to exacerbate the injury or at the very least have no benefit. If you have some knotting then some easy stretching can be beneficial. If you overstretch you can cause a tear or strain. It also depends on what you're stretching. I find stretching my back works wonders but stretching out my hamstrings too much makes matters worse. There's a fine line on the what, when, where and how and everyone is different. It's up to the individual to find what works best and that's not an easy thing to do. I find for me less is better but some is good.

Great post. And to prove your point, I can't run a step unless I stretch my hamstrings. Well, I could probably run a bit, but the results wouldn't be pretty. I've gone to both extremes (total body stretch before and after each run to zero stretching) and have found that the middle ground is the best, at least for me. Some days I'll barely stretch, and other days I'll spend a good half hour working everything out.

Just goes to show that everyone is different.

Yoga for runners?

great I can continue to not stretch like i always havent...

hallo wrote:

"Lets-Justify-our-own-Laziness-by-Stretching-Instead-of-Running".

This subject is actually my thesis research work. I'll keep the letsrun'ers posted on how it goes. But I agree, stiffening the muscule-tendon unit would seem to make sense.

please consider the interplay between the length-tension relationship and ROM. while stiffer muscles would facilitate better force generation, muscles severely lacking plasticity would have a lesser ROM. since ROM, is a component (along with stride frequency) in how fast we cover a distance, the research referred to in this post should be considered with a grain of salt and in relationship to the big picture...

ummm wrote that hallo wrote:

"Lets-Justify-our-own-Laziness-by-Stretching-Instead-of-Running".

except that hallo never wrote that

You seem to be unfamiliar with the concept of a "quote". When you quote someone, you repeat what THEY said/or wrote. When you change it, you are no longer quoting.

See how that works?

Nobody ever said stretch-instead-of run, dimwit.

Stretching a waste of time, unless you have a specific issue to work out.

The "need for flexibility" gets harped on by the same self-indulgent types who waste money on massage and foamy bath gels.

Just run, baby.

You can quote me on that.

"Just run, baby."

- Mad Sk1llz

I don't know, that just doesn't sounds very credible.

Interesting, I once saw a physical therapist and we got into this same discussion he said "I've never seen a serious runner who was too flexible, on the otherhand I have seen many who could use a lot of work"

Whether or not inflexibility could "enhance running economy by increasing storage and return of elastic energy and minimizing the need for muscle-stabilizing activity," as Craib et al report, might be open to debate, but it is true that muscles which are strong eccentrically are able to withstand high mechanical loading and can quickly contract concentrically for forward propulsion.

Quick shuffle strides are generally associated with higher running economy than loping strides are. Naturally inflexible runners like Jeff Wells, who could barely touch his fingers to his knees, may be restricted and "slotted in" to a fast and robotic movement which is more economical, while bouncier runners like Doug Padilla, who had a max VO2 of 83 ml/kg/min but had absolutely horrendous economy, may find that a greater range of motion in certain areas imparts a "limp noodle" effect to their legs, increasing time spent in the plant phase and forcing additional stabilizing muscles to be recruited for the effort. The correlation between inflexibility and economy is there, but it's not known whether or not there's causation.

I'd go for functional flexibility, enough where you don't feel tight and restricted or on the verge of injury when you're running. Excessive flexibility or inflexibility are probably both counterproductive.

Besides, would anyone really suggest working on inflexibility?

My Biology teacher would always say that phrase "Correlation does not equal causation" or something like that. I'd be like, products to rid your hair of lice give people leukemia and Did you know Olive Oil cures and prevents {input disease/ailment} and you know, I forgot my point, so, in conclusion, Jessica Alba is smokin hot.