Lets just end the heel strike debate right now.

You feel better now?

How about this: if you haven't had any injury problems you probably shouldn't worry about your stride?

Full moon or lunar eclipse?

Actually, I'm curious now. What are you Malmo, heel or mid?

Both.

http://www.youtube.com/user/Vafareunculo#p/c/823732165E0A1C6C/34/Ax7DQ_wwH7U

A Skeptic wrote:

http://www.sportsscientists.com/2008/04/running-technique-footstrike.html

You can make a study say anything you want these days. How about the fact that you watch the elite runners and see they don't heel strike.

You never hear about any elite runner complaining that they didn't put enough cushion in the heel of his distance spike. Maybe because his foot does the work and he isn't putting the brakes on every step.

An elite runner just posted that he did both.

The conclusion is that it barely f###ing matters, and we're not sure which is the best for any individual.

Good thing we don't heelstrike when we walk, otherwise that big ol' bone wouldn't be able to absorb the shock.

gfdgd wrote:

Good thing we don't heelstrike when we walk, otherwise that big ol' bone wouldn't be able to absorb the shock.

I can think of a few people I'd like to heelstrike upside the head!

If you blatantly heelstrike, you're basically driving with the emergency brake on. Just keep your foot relaxed and land underneath your hips, thats really all that matters. Your foot will naturally land in a "flat footed" type landing

It's not how you run, it's how fast you run. If you want points for style try figure skating.

malmo wrote:

Both.

http://www.youtube.com/user/Vafareunculo#p/c/823732165E0A1C6C/34/Ax7DQ_wwH7U

Thanks for the link. Through it found some monster pedal steel work by an Italian (Ghidelli) and some killer Speedy West from an appearance on Lawrence Welk and with Jimmy Bryant.

Oh, I also enjoyed the running.

shoe guy wrote:

If you blatantly heelstrike, you're basically driving with the emergency brake on. Just keep your foot relaxed and land underneath your hips, thats really all that matters. Your foot will naturally land in a "flat footed" type landing

Win

A Skeptic wrote:

How about this: if you haven't had any injury problems you probably shouldn't worry about your stride?

If the goal is to simply run injury free, and an individual has been running injury free for years with their current stride, then their might not be a reason to work on their stride.

Some runners have other goals:

Getting faster = Probably a good idea to work on stride

More efficiency (same distance/times with less energy) = probably a good idea to work on stride

Attaining mastery in the skill of running = probably a good idea to work on stride

So yes, if all you care about is running injury free, and what you are doing is working for you, then by all means don't think about your stride, throw on the ipod and cruise around the blog. If you are actually looking to IMPROVE your running, improving your mechanics is certainly a clever approach to incorporate.

We can learn from other sports:

Do you think Tom Brady stopped working on his throwing mechanics?

Do you think Lebron James stopped working on his jump shot?

Do you think Derek Jeter stopped working on his hitting?

And these guys are just examples...just about every athlete in every other sport works on the mechanics of their position. Yet runners are still stuck in a paradigm where "you can't change your mechanics. you are born with genetics that determine your mechanics to the exact angles, foot strike, and motions of all moving parts" despite every bit of scientific evidence suggesting that YOU CAN CHANGE YOUR MECHANICS.

Of course it needs to be done VERY SKILLFULLY to have a positive effect. If it is done haphazardly, as it most often is, it will surely have a negative effect.

The people who refuse to work on their mechanics, and furthermore those who begrudge people who DO work on their mechanics tend to be lazy, uninformed, stubborn people who are scared to actually LISTEN TO THEIR BODY. These folks tend to use running to escape their body, rather than explore it.

gazoo wrote:

I've read around 238 of these threads. How about this. Your heel, i.e. your calcaneus is not meant to absorb shock. Its one large bone. No single person can possibly think that landing on a single large bone can absorb shock unless they are stupid.

Heelstrikers are not stupid, they are just unaware of a bad habit. People who feel the need to justify heel striking are idiots. You learned a bad habit. Get over it. You refuse change still you are not as good as you could be.

Elite runners do not heelstrike, end of story. Stop being lazy

and get better form.

Driving with square wheels isn't efficient. Sure it'll get you there, but not without a lot more gas, busted springs and a cracked frame.

True and false.

Yes the heel doesn't absorb much shock, but the 'heelstrike' motion does absorb shock as it rolls inwards and forwards.

And some elite runners do this a lot, some don't.

That forefoot striking is better!!! It's just right and Forefoot striking is more efficent. END OF STORY

Python wrote:

The conclusion is that it barely f###ing matters, and we're not sure which is the best for any individual.

>>Implying physics works differently for different individuals.

This isn't a matter of biology, it's a matter of mechanics.