sospiri wrote:
The faster runner is running for less time. You didn't factor that into your equation. Wind resistance will be fractionally higher. Impact to the joints is not higher. Better economy comes from better use of eccentric contractions - more spring in the stride. This is the real key to running faster and using less energy to race faster.
If this is too much for you to comprehend, then you are always going to be cynical about the subject?
In what way is ANYTHING I say "cynical"? I don't know how that word applies to anything I say AT ALL.
Wow, there are SO many things wrong with the running economy argument...
For one, running economy deals with consumption of OXYGEN, not "energy"...
For another, running economy is (by hypothesis) largely technique, and I said you cannot run faster with less energy unless you improve your technique. And even so, that doesn't imply "running faster requires less energy."
For another, there isn't much evidence that running economy really is a "thing," or that we're measuring it properly. There is a big disparity in VO2max values and running economy values among elite runners, and an inverse relationship between the two, suggesting they are not independent variables. Therefore, you can't just imagine "combining the highest known running economy with the highest known VO2max," as the article suggests.