Running Form--Please Confirm or Deny This

#1 and #3 are certainly true. But #2 may not be. If you are suggesting that touch down is completely flat, I would have to say no. However, the foot is flat at one point during the stance phase, just not at the moment of touch down.

Heel or forefoot?

Thank you, by the way. I never thought I was nuts, but you are the first person to show some agreement.

bump

forcing the issue wrote:

bump

just so you know, your descriptions of running form are vague and it is not clear at all what you mean with your descriptions of 1 & 3. .

BUT....as far as landing flat on your foot, sure, someone might do it (everyone runs a little differently), but most land on the outside of their feet and roll in, so they are flat at mid-stance.

Why?

I don't understand #3. It almost seems like you are describing marching.

Number two is wrong.

it is not heel to toe either.

Correct running form (i think pretty much no matter what distance) should land first on the ball of the foot, then go all the way down so your heel and your toe touch.

Ideally your foot should extend and land in front of you but by the time you have put weight on it it should be completely below your body. The foot should land on the mid-foot or ball and then leg should kick up to butt in order to get maximum recovery. I know everyone runs differently but say for a mile race, this is the most economically efficent.

watch kb in slowmo

when you say your leg should kick up to the butt in order for maximum recovery, is it more of a butt kick (as you would in plyos) or do you extend the leg out behind you and as you are bringing it forward it passes right below the butt?

your foot should NOT extend out in front of you or paw at the ground.

Buster Wannabe wrote:

Number two is wrong.

it is not heel to toe either.

Correct running form (i think pretty much no matter what distance) should land first on the ball of the foot, then go all the way down so your heel and your toe touch.

He's right. Correct, natural running form (going back to the cavemen) was done on the forefoot/ball of the foot.

Try doing some barefoot laps on the inside of a track and you'll know how you're SUPPOSED to run.

khink02 wrote:

when you say your leg should kick up to the butt in order for maximum recovery, is it more of a butt kick (as you would in plyos) or do you extend the leg out behind you and as you are bringing it forward it passes right below the butt?

No it's not like butt kicks. Your second description is closer.

Leg recovery is a function of hip/leg extension. Most of the time when you see a real low leg swing (at fast speeds) it's because they are cutting off hip extension.

Guys, I'm seeing a lot of BS here stated as facts. Please do not chime in unless you know what you're talking about.

ya, running form (especially among distance runners) is one of the most misunderstood things.

Lots of crap on this thread.

The smartest thing you could do is buy at least two books on form. You won't find the answer here on Letsrun. Go to Amazon and get at least two. Some books I can think of off the top of my head, Explosive Running, Programmed to Run, Pose Method and Chi Running. I am sure there are more.

There will be lots of similarities and contradictions in these books. You need to decide what feels best for you which may be a mixed bag from the books or one author may win out for your personal taste.

from a traditional biomechanics and sprint coach perspective the books explosive running, chi running, and pose running are no good. I haven't read the other one.

Here is the correct form. Please take your time in analyzing this. Take note that many of the most elite in the world follow this protocol for running.

1.) Right

2.) Left

3.) Repeat

Bad connection, you seem to be offering serious opinions. Which I appreciate. But can you present any credentials? I don't technically agree with you about Pose. Everything I've seen has pointed to Pose being an alternative, legitimate form, in spite the cult that surrounds it.

And to the rest of you, I'm not actually seeking a solution. I FOUND the solution on my own, and am presenting it to you in my hands.

Coach K wrote:

#1 and #3 are certainly true. But #2 may not be. If you are suggesting that touch down is completely flat, I would have to say no. However, the foot is flat at one point during the stance phase, just not at the moment of touch down.

When your foot contacts the ground the forefoot or midfoot strikes first, but it should feel like you are landing flat-footed, because of quick ground contact