"Among 38 barefoot Daasanach tribe members from northern Kenya (19 men, 19 women), 72 percent landed on their rearfoot when running barefoot at a self-selected, comfortable pace."
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0052548
new = Jan 2013?
yeah this study is older, been posted here before. Also notably used slower speeds, and it's well known that faster speeds = higher likelihood of forefoot striking. Finally it used a tribe of Kenyans not known for running. Might as well have used people from Zimbabwe or any other tribal rural area. These people don't seem to realize that "Kenyan Runner" means 95% of the time "Kalenjin runner."
dsfadsfs wrote:
These people don't seem to realize that "Kenyan Runner" means 95% of the time "Kalenjin runner."
Seconded. This study is not a study of runners; the people in the group weren't kalenjin or runners
logic here wrote:Seconded. This study is not a study of runners; the people in the group weren't kalenjin or runners
Yep.
"The Daasanach in our study selected endurance running speeds that averaged about 3.3 m/s (8:08 per mile), while the Kalenjin runners in theirs [15] averaged speeds of about 5.1–5.9 m/s (4:33–5:16 per mile)"
This is one of the most stupid "studies" I ever saw.
First, Everybody knows that, in order to increase the speed, runners have to use their feet in elastic way, for having a form of reaction provoked by the elastic component of calf muscles. Did somebody ever see some sprinters running fast using a rear-foot strike ?
Second, using elastic energy can reduce the cost of running, and this is a big advantage also when we speak about long distances. Elastic fibers don't request the intervention of voluntary contraction, so don't cost energy, and athletes using the rear-foot strike are like a car without shock absorbers.
Third, giving the general "label" of KENYANS to a small Group of sedentary not running people, is something completely out of every scientific rule.
This is not a study, is the attempt from some idiot to have attention, speaking about something that absolutely doesn't know. At the same time, who give credit to this stupidity can have the diploma of complete ass.
Love it, thanks Renato. POD.
Renato Canova wrote:
This is one of the most stupid "studies" I ever saw.
First, Everybody knows that, in order to increase the speed, runners have to use their feet in elastic way, for having a form of reaction provoked by the elastic component of calf muscles. Did somebody ever see some sprinters running fast using a rear-foot strike ?
Second, using elastic energy can reduce the cost of running, and this is a big advantage also when we speak about long distances. Elastic fibers don't request the intervention of voluntary contraction, so don't cost energy, and athletes using the rear-foot strike are like a car without shock absorbers.
Third, giving the general "label" of KENYANS to a small Group of sedentary not running people, is something completely out of every scientific rule.
This is not a study, is the attempt from some idiot to have attention, speaking about something that absolutely doesn't know. At the same time, who give credit to this stupidity can have the diploma of complete ass.
Excellent response, Renato. The study is silly when you actually read it, versus just catching the headline.
glad to know that my heel strike form is the preferred method of non-elite Kenyans. Try and train like an elite and get hurt. Train like a mid-packer for speed, quality, form and stay healthy.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/iain-hunter/running-technique-footstrike_b_2050161.htmlRenato Canova wrote:
This is one of the most stupid "studies" I ever saw.
First, Everybody knows that, in order to increase the speed, runners have to use their feet in elastic way, for having a form of reaction provoked by the elastic component of calf muscles. Did somebody ever see some sprinters running fast using a rear-foot strike ?
Second, using elastic energy can reduce the cost of running, and this is a big advantage also when we speak about long distances. Elastic fibers don't request the intervention of voluntary contraction, so don't cost energy, and athletes using the rear-foot strike are like a car without shock absorbers.
Clearly "Runner's World" continues to post silly fluff articles like this because they know that any reference to a "study" about footstrike is going to get a ton of page views, particularly from beginning runners (their target audience), and they also have a vested interest in rationalizing shoes with huge heels because that's what most of their advertisers manufacture. Sure, a company like Brooks has the Pure series, but most of their revenue comes from selling shoes like the Adrenaline, which has a big heel offset, a medial post, tons of structure, etc.
