Is toe running (i.e. on the balls of the foot with no heel-striking at all) inherently bad for longer-distance running? Does it make the runner more prone to certain injuries?
I don't do it, but see one of the girls on our track team and also our soccer team run like that, and wondered if it predisposes them to injury?
the foot is extremely 'dexterous' and is suited to land in a variety of ways depending on conditions... running on the balls of your feet is optimal in some circumstances and less than optimal in others
I run on the balls of my feet, for me it just comes naturally. when you do that it usually makes your have a higher knee lift. But myself and I know other that run like this when you get into bad conditions weather with heavy mudd it wears you out a lot faster but when things are dry or fast courses you will usually run really fast and in track you cant run really fast and make your move a lot quicker b/c you are already on your toes.
You can't do it for long. As the calf begins to get fatigued you'll naturally begin to land mid-foot and settle down on the heel at mid-stride, which IMHO is the most efficient footstrike. This is, however, not heel-strike.
I think purple has it right...it's impossible to go out and run 10 miles without your heel touching the ground, but your heel doesn't have to touch first.
impossible? i run every step of every run on my toes. my first season in high school my coach noted that i always ran on my toes and over the last decade I've logged at least 3000 miles for each year. on my toes.
I guess nothing is impossible, but I just have a hard time believing that your heel never makes contact with the ground on any of your runs. Even watching elites cranking at sub 4 minute pace on the track, you still see their heels touching the surface with every step.
i won't say el g's heel didn't touch the ground at all but it was my impression that he primarily ran on the balls of his feet
abdi seems to me to run on his heels more than most elites
had a guy on our college team who ran on his toes - never touching heel - ever, and we ran big miles. And he was one of the first to run sub 9:00 in HS as a Jr. (should date me). He eventually ran a 2:17 marathon. I intentionally ran behaind on several occasions to see if he did hit heel - never did - checked his shoes too. Never had foot probs that I was aware of. counter-intuitive
Seems there was post about this some years ago - and somebody posted that they knew of another runner in similar situation. It is definitely the exception but not the impossible.
Standard I always followed was - whatever is is comfortable and natural, and doesn't cause injuries.
That just sounds so weird, to never touch your heel to the ground.
Think about how the foot works, it bends and kind of thrusts you forward using the muscles all along the bottom.
If you only used your toes, it seems like it would be like running on stilts or something.
I understand for sprinting like a 100, but it just seems weird for actually running. I understand that it happens, but it just seems so inefficient.
My 11 year old daughter runs on her toes for an entire 5K, I've personally trailed her to see what the fuss was about. She can't run in a standard running shoe, only a Nike Free or a spiked track or cross country shoe that has a minimal heel.
It makes her really fast - 5:20 PR for a mile, and 18:05 PR for a 5k. Of course she doesn't weigh anything, so it's not like me thundering along on the asphalt, wishing a Nike Air had another half inch of height in the heel to keep me from bottoming my heel out after the first 400m.
I wish I had started earlier, because it seems its how you learn these things when you're young that counts.
Your 11 year old daughter has a 5km pr of 18:05, thats pretty dam quick but is that not a bit excessive for an 11 year old?
if you think it's effecient for sprinting then at what point do you think it would lose it's efficiency for distance running?
ask geb
forget me nows wrote:
if you think it's effecient for sprinting then at what point do you think it would lose it's efficiency for distance running?
I have no idea, I am not learned in the physiology of the foot. I am just saying that it seems that way. I know some of the best runners in the world run on their toes, it is obviously not inefficient.
I run on the balls of my feet, im pretty quick but injury prone, so perhaps not as quick as i could be. So am attempting a less aggressive foot strike so I dont get injured so often and can train harder and run quicker.
11 Years old wrote:
Your 11 year old daughter has a 5km pr of 18:05, thats pretty dam quick but is that not a bit excessive for an 11 year old?
She wanted to run, and so we checked with the pediatrician - he said a half hour of running would be fine, up to an hour if on grass or a padded track, no more than two or three times a week.