Forums >General Running>So what would your evaluation of this running technique be?
However if you learn the zero impact thudding, I see no problem.
What constitutes flying? I've seen men fly off a cliff, but that may be closer to gliding and thudding.
What constitutes flying?
I've seen men fly off a cliff, but that may be closer to gliding and thudding.
There is an art, it says, or rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.
"When a person trains once, nothing happens. When a person forces himself to do a thing a hundred or a thousand times, then he certainly has developed in more ways than physical. Is it raining? That doesn't matter. Am I tired? That doesn't matter, either. Then willpower will be no problem." Emil Zatopek
Biomimeticist
They are just as irrelevant in that comparing running technique of completely different physiological anatomies is missing the bigger picture unless you plan to perform some major surgery on your victims. It's kind of like saying if we can flap our arms as fast as a hummingbird we'll be able to hover in place. There is more to why/how the hummingbird hovers than form/flapping speed. Hey- but I bet you would have zero impact if you could do that
They are just as irrelevant in that comparing running technique of completely different physiological anatomies is missing the bigger picture unless you plan to perform some major surgery on your victims.
It's kind of like saying if we can flap our arms as fast as a hummingbird we'll be able to hover in place. There is more to why/how the hummingbird hovers than form/flapping speed. Hey- but I bet you would have zero impact if you could do that
Except that I can wrap you in a heart rate monitor, let you run as you choose at any comfortable speed on a treadmill and take you off.
In two hours, I can teach you how to run in animal mimicry and put you back on the treadmill at identical speed and incline level, and you'll average a 20% decrease in heart rate for the same speed output...
Experts said the world is flat
Experts said that man would never fly
Experts said we'd never go to the moon
Name me one of those "experts"...
History never remembers the name of experts; just the innovators who had the guts to challenge and prove the "experts" wrong
Good Bad & The Monkey
I'm in. Where is your classroom?
I'm running somewhere tomorrow. It's going to be beautiful. I can't wait.
Poor baby
Except that I can wrap you in a heart rate monitor, let you run as you choose at any comfortable speed on a treadmill and take you off. In two hours, I can teach you how to run in animal mimicry and put you back on the treadmill at identical speed and incline level, and you'll average a 20% decrease in heart rate for the same speed output...
I teach in Portland Oregon,
Or you can learn the basics by following the masking tape exercise in this article.
http://www.military.com/military-fitness/running/evolution-of-learning-how-to-run-distance
Write me privately if you wish with questions.
Oh. That is too far away.
At this point, the thread as drifted as usual to Robert trying to sell his services.
but the run home will be much easier.
Not at all,
The masking tape exercise is the basics, if it makes sense, then extrapolating it into running is easy.
I'm not writing to sell anything...
The article written defines what it means when you're training a 300lb lineman to run with less than bodyweight impact on a treadmill deck. http://www.beavertonvalleytimes.com/news/story.php?story_id=132753720164380900
The article written defines what it means when you're training a 300lb lineman to run with less than bodyweight impact on a treadmill deck.
http://www.beavertonvalleytimes.com/news/story.php?story_id=132753720164380900
Man, if I had a dollar for every time I've cited the Beaverton Valley Times in my research...
"Because in the end, you won't remember the time you spent working in the office or mowing your lawn. Climb that goddamn mountain."
Jack Kerouac
I prefer to take it in perspective that the improvements in running skills are quite easy to recognize, even by newspaper writers. That professional athletes who earn their living playing sports recognize the benefits and that individuals who use the techiniques and teach fitness are willing to go on record that what they've learned from me has application in preventing sports injuries and allow me to teach it at the schools they run.
It was an article about people who are using what they've learned, and consider it an improvement. So was Stew's article. And if the ability to improve was that easy, the only question is why you won't try it for yourself.
Articles do not matter, and your assertations and claims also do not matter. It's conceivable that for every person that might have improved in running attributable to some interaction with you, 20 others actually get slower due to restrictive dynamics introduced by such drills. As a runner I am strictly interested in getting faster and you have never shown yourself to be trustworthy.
Some thoughts on this ...
1. No terrain is perfectly flat out in nature .. so even when our ancestors would have run, they would have had to use their arm swing to continue to balance and stay upright, much like a tight rope walker with a balance rod or arms outstretched.
2. In line with the above, our 2 legs are not nearly identical and that minute differences get amplified in faster and longer activity, so again you needs hands to chip in.
3. This 70% body weight thing is a half truth in my opinion - its of course possible to exert only 0.7x of your body weight when you are having some upward motion but this is momentary and as the motion completes and gravity brings you down to earth, you will need to exert your full body weight somewhere and at a definite point in time. Whether it is through one leg or both, you will end up exerting atleast your body weight if not more (especially if it is in the downward cycle of an undulating motion).
4. What our ancestors did is not necessarily the best thing always. Darwin would be offended.
I dont sweat. I ooze liquid awesome.
Some thoughts on this ... 1. No terrain is perfectly flat out in nature .. so even when our ancestors would have run, they would have had to use their arm swing to continue to balance and stay upright, much like a tight rope walker with a balance rod or arms outstretched. 2. In line with the above, our 2 legs are not nearly identical and that minute differences get amplified in faster and longer activity, so again you needs hands to chip in. 3. This 70% body weight thing is a half truth in my opinion - its of course possible to exert only 0.7x of your body weight when you are having some upward motion but this is momentary and as the motion completes and gravity brings you down to earth, you will need to exert your full body weight somewhere and at a definite point in time. Whether it is through one leg or both, you will end up exerting atleast your body weight if not more (especially if it is in the downward cycle of an undulating motion). 4. What our ancestors did is not necessarily the best thing always. Darwin would be offended.
Hey Turbo you bring up very valid points and I appreciate a discussion to the science of running.
1: Its not up to the runner to pick the terrain, its up to the runner to adapt to the terrain. I'm not saying that arm swing isn't a significant component to reach peak speeds. The definition of efficient running is at what speed you need to swing your arms to maintain balance.
2: Its not about identical size, but identical motion. Also factored in is side dominance and the strength differential. If you think your strongest leg determines your top speed, then the question stands; how does your weaker leg keep up? If you want to utilize your strongest leg to determine top speed, then you have to teach your weaker leg how to be more efficient in movement to keep up.
That's the biology behind why an inline foot fall is more efficient and why horses, T-Rex, ostriches, and early humans utilized it to reach peak speed.
3: Mother Nature has two classes of athletes; predator and prey. Humans in the grand scheme of thing are prey. Prey move to remain stable and upright, while predators run and move with optimum maneuverability. Your perspective to bodyweight impact forces are based upon our history of being prey. I teach Predator movement skills, and with that, the biomechanic advantages are just what I've posted. Less than bodyweight impact forces are easy to achieve.
4: Mother Nature's survival Olympics has been perfecting running and movement skill for millions of years. If it doesn't work, it doesn't survive. That the DNA of T-Rex is 98% of what we call an Ostrich, isn't a fluke, its perfection to survive and adapt to the environment.