Lets just end the heel strike debate right now.

gazoo wrote:Their foot initiates a back/downward motion just before touching the ground. This allows them to make their foot land underneath their body. With the knee bent, they cradle the body weight, with no jerky or jarring movements. Then they transfer to push off. They never really have to overcome a foot way out in front of their bodies - much more efficient.

Much smoother, much easier on the body, much more efficient.

Do you have link to a study that proves this?

turkey leg wrote:

'stop the insanity' and '47',

There is no forward motion without having friction on the ground and there is no friction on the ground without gravity. Right in the first hundred pages of any physics text book. Have a nice Christmas, morons.

Which page of which physics book.

Good luck with your physics MORON. There is friction everywhere, in the air, inside of machinery, gears, wheels, combustion engines, steam engines, turbine engines, wings of airplanes, and none of it is caused by gravity.

These Pose idiots are saying that gravity pulls you forward. It doesn't. Gravity pulls you in one direction .... downwards.

HHH you sure ask a lot of ridiculous questions. Start by reading this article:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/11/08/101108fa_fact_kahn?currentPage=4

Then, once you're done with that, here's the answer to the question regarding the scientific/educational credentials of the creator of Pose.

http://www.posetech.com/pose_method/DrNicholasRomanov.html

Ritzenhein later admitted that one of the most crushing aspects of his injury last fall was that it had happened under Salazar’s tutelage. “When I came to Alberto, I thought I was done being hurt,” Ritzenhein said. “But this is the longest cycle of injuries that I’ve ever had: probably by double, or even triple.”

B-O-N-E-H-E-A-D

Way back in this thread, I cited the closest thing I'd seen to systematic analysis on the topic. The biologist's conclusion was that there was no compelling evidence that forefoot strike is faster in distance running. Now Salazar has convinced himself that this issue was the key to his demise and the salvation for the future of american world competitveness, so everybody jumps. He looks at the fastest distance runner to date, and concludes that everyone must run like Bekele. But he cites no evidence other than he is the fastest, thus we must run like him. He has also been known to try many things that turned out to be red herrings.

So I ask again, is there any evidence that an elite runner has significantly changed their form and become faster? In the interest of science, maybe Ritzenhein will become our best data point on this topic. But there are so many things that make a great distance runner, that trying to lay any conclusion to the topic at hand based on this Ritzenhein experiment will be futile (assuming he does actually return to better results). This debate will continue ad nauseum.

Broken Record wrote:

People don't heel-strike because their shoes have made them lazy, they do it because that's the way their natural foot landing.

Yes. Its natural for people to use one large bone to absorb shock... NOT. You are inclined to think that 'because I do it, I can provide straw man arguments as to why something wrong is right'.

2+2 = 4. It does not mean 2+2=5 just because you've been thinking it has been for a long time.

Heel striking is the result of poor posture. Look, Arthur Lydiard repeated one simple mantra about running form - HIPS FORWARD, the rest will follow naturally. Arthur said the textbook example of this was Pekka Vasala.

Malmo sits back on his hips, but he had a great engine, which allowed him to WIN UGLY.

silly old fossil wrote:

Heel striking is the result of poor posture. Look, Arthur Lydiard repeated one simple mantra about running form - HIPS FORWARD, the rest will follow naturally. Arthur said the textbook example of this was Pekka Vasala.

Malmo sits back on his hips, but he had a great engine, which allowed him to WIN UGLY.

You didn't look at the video of him did you? He obviously doesn't sit back on his hips.

stop the insanity wrote:

turkey leg wrote:

'stop the insanity' and '47',

There is no forward motion without having friction on the ground and there is no friction on the ground without gravity. Right in the first hundred pages of any physics text book. Have a nice Christmas, morons.

Which page of which physics book.

Good luck with your physics MORON. There is friction everywhere, in the air, inside of machinery, gears, wheels, combustion engines, steam engines, turbine engines, wings of airplanes, and none of it is caused by gravity.

These Pose idiots are saying that gravity pulls you forward. It doesn't. Gravity pulls you in one direction .... downwards.

Okay, I'll walk you through it. Gravity is the vertical normal force that with the coefficient of friction, determine the horizontal frictional force. No gravity, no normal force, and no frictional force to grip the ground with. I guess it's sort of a complex idea for some people.

Tell me what physics book you have and I'll tell you the page number.

this doesn't make gravity "the force that pulls you forward" at all and it a pretty irrelevant thing to bring to the discussion

turkey leg wrote:

Okay, I'll walk you through it. Gravity is the vertical normal force that with the coefficient of friction, determine the horizontal frictional force. No gravity, no normal force, and no frictional force to grip the ground with. I guess it's sort of a complex idea for some people.

Tell me what physics book you have and I'll tell you the page number.

We get the concept of friction. Your facile argument has been established. Gravity doesn't cause forward motion ...EVER. Forward motion is caused by the force of the legs IN A FORWARD DIRECTION. Runners don't "fall forward" which is the foundation of Pose Phantasy Physics.

You're the one with the made up physics book. You're the one who claimed "Right in the first hundred pages of any physics text book." The burden of proof is on you, not me. Please name the book and the page on that says that gravity pulls you forward? It doesn't have to be in the first hundred pages, if that's what's holding you back.

Gravity does pull you along. Explain to me why leaning forward helps you when running?

wilfredo wrote:

this doesn't make gravity "the force that pulls you forward" at all and it a pretty irrelevant thing to bring to the discussion

The force that pulls you forward is a result of gravity. Just as the wind is the force that allows a sailboat to sail into the wind.

It really is very relevant to understanding how a runner propels oneself.

shoe guy wrote:

HHH you sure ask a lot of ridiculous questions. Start by reading this article:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/11/08/101108fa_fact_kahn?currentPage=4

Then, once you're done with that, here's the answer to the question regarding the scientific/educational credentials of the creator of Pose.

http://www.posetech.com/pose_method/DrNicholasRomanov.html

Wow, that's a great article on Ritz and how he has been injured ever since he and Salazar started tinkering with his form. Nice.

In regards to Romanav and the Pose method, are there any world class distance runners using the Pose method?

gazoo wrote:

Broken Record wrote:

People don't heel-strike because their shoes have made them lazy, they do it because that's the way their natural foot landing.

Yes. Its natural for people to use one large bone to absorb shock... NOT. You are inclined to think that 'because I do it, I can provide straw man arguments as to why something wrong is right'.

2+2 = 4. It does not mean 2+2=5 just because you've been thinking it has been for a long time.

So, do you have some evidence to prove that it is not natural for people to run the way that feels most natural to them? In other words, if it feels best for me to heel strike, can you prove that I shouldn't be?

silly old fossil wrote:

Heel striking is the result of poor posture. Look, Arthur Lydiard repeated one simple mantra about running form - HIPS FORWARD, the rest will follow naturally. Arthur said the textbook example of this was Pekka Vasala.

Malmo sits back on his hips, but he had a great engine, which allowed him to WIN UGLY.

Did you know Arthur? I'm not sure he would agree with your comment about heel striking being a result of poor posture. Your comments about Malmo's running form are also out to lunch.

turkey leg wrote:

wilfredo wrote:

this doesn't make gravity "the force that pulls you forward" at all and it a pretty irrelevant thing to bring to the discussion

The force that pulls you forward is a result of gravity. Just as the wind is the force that allows a sailboat to sail into the wind.

It really is very relevant to understanding how a runner propels oneself.

no. it is nothing like wind pushing a sailboat. it is like gravity keeping a sailboat from floating into space. if you are on ice, gravity is not going to help you run. yes gravity allows there to be a frictional force, but this has nothing to do with heel strike or really anything. it's like saying you breathe air and you need to breathe to run, therefore air is the force that propels you forward

That's only the case if you're not a competitive runner. Heel striking isn't bad if one is simply jogging.

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.

about 238? haha