|
Mar 2018
12:27pm, 20 Mar 2018
25,699 posts
|
SPR
Technical, as soon as you start moving you have speed which (in simplistic terms) will determine how far you travel in the air before you land for a stride.
|
|
Mar 2018
12:30pm, 20 Mar 2018
334 posts
|
SSLHP (Shoes smell like horse piss)
My point is that runners may think stride length and range of motion are the same thing and that by 'striding out' will make them go faster, when the opposite is true.
|
|
Mar 2018
12:55pm, 20 Mar 2018
7,647 posts
|
simbil
Striding out will generally make you accelerate though won't it?
When on stance (and leaning forwards), you can throw your limbs forwards which increase hGRF which gives you acceleration.
Most notable is when 100m racers dive out of the blocks - this is exactly what you see.
Having too much range of motion at a constant pace is a different thing and it means you have too low a cadence i.e. at any given pace, a runner can chose to have long slow steps or shorter faster ones.
|
|
Mar 2018
1:13pm, 20 Mar 2018
28,477 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
I suspect we're all violently saying the same thing (which is what happened in this thread back in 2008/9 when there were casualties - dead bodies all over the place, collateral damage, innocents caught in the cross fire etc.  *skull*  )
Best thing is to relate it back to real world running. If you sprint at the end of a 5K you probably stride out and increase your cadence at same time. But you couldn't sustain it. If you increase one, for any longer duration, you'll reduce the other. So is it better to keep shorter stride length and higher cadence of vice versa. I think the answer is yes, for injury prevention. Imho. No science, just reading the writings, plus my experience of a group of 1. Me.
To get faster, is it better to increase stride length or cadence? Answer (for me), doesn't matter! Increase in speed is a fairly tiny percentage. Train more, train carefully, avoid injury, sustain the training, reap the gains. When I ran my marathon PB, had I increased cadence or stride length? Don't know, don't care! I had trained effectively and got quicker.
What I do care about is training safely. I deliberately tried to cultivate an ability to run with a reasonably high cadence (near 90) and I did this by starting with shorter stride length. Over time my stride length either increased or I was able to do the longer stride length with a higher cadence and sustain it.
But for 80% of my running, it was low speed, so high cadence meant a nice, short stride, pitter patter, endurance runner's shuffle. And I avoided injury for 18 months during 3000 miles of training and PBs across all the distances.
THe usual caveat - it worked for me. But I'm no coach. No idea if it should work for all. Just made sense to me.
So back to Chrisull's question - if he runs like a bag of spanners, but pretty quickly and lots of miles and no injuries, should he care about form?!  G
|
|
Mar 2018
1:38pm, 20 Mar 2018
7,649 posts
|
simbil
Ah, the good old days of shouty rhetoric, piles of bodies and bemused lurkers
For Chrisull and anyone else getting what they want out of their running - if it ain't broke, don't fix it - surely applies?
|
|
Mar 2018
1:47pm, 20 Mar 2018
12,422 posts
|
Chrisull
Lol at HappyG's rephrasing of my question.
It isn't to say I don't care about form, I do care about form - I do have a particular issue that I can't fix, a little bit of hyper mobility in knees which means I flick out unintentionally, but I suppose it's like a lose tarpaulin on a car roof flapping about, it follows the path of least resistance.
I do try and look straight ahead, not over stride, keep a highish (for me) cadence - which is 170s. What I saw was canute implying that if you build up, you develop a running form for yourself that works. And what I read from others is that if you don't focus on form, you will regret it at a later point (or maybe not regret, but reach true potential). I tend to side with canute, if my reading of what he was saying was correct.
|
|
Mar 2018
2:22pm, 20 Mar 2018
25,700 posts
|
SPR
Happy - Re the real world example, no I don't stride out when sprinting at the end of a 5k, that's not why my stride length increases.
Hi Simbil. Just need MJB, Cabletow, Jhuff, JonP to return now 😉.
I don't think sprinters deliberately throw limbs out to land further in front of body, anything that goes out in front comes back before landing.
|
|
Mar 2018
2:43pm, 20 Mar 2018
28,482 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
You're right SPR, wrong wording from me. Not "stride out" but yes, longer stride. When I spring at end of a 5K, even with OK form, leaning forward foot landing under weight etc. because I am driving harder, I am covering more ground with each stride. Stride is longer, not by "striding out" but by "pushing harder".
Now, there's that pushing word. Is it during a strong acceleration phase that you are noticeably pushing backwards? A sprinter starting against blocks, any of us accelerating to overtake someone or to sprint a finish etc.?
What about uphill, downhill, is that different. Chrisu (and I'm speaking for him, again!) only runs uphill or downhill, because in Cornwall, there is no flat. Right? G
|
|
Mar 2018
3:41pm, 20 Mar 2018
335 posts
|
SSLHP (Shoes smell like horse piss)
HappyG. Oh dear...you had to mention the 'pushing' word, didn't you? ! LOL
I'm absolutely no expert, just a very interested enthusiast. But I read a lot on the subject, from different points of view too, and take on board opinions of people like Canute etc. So, like all of us at some point we arrive at our own opinion. Mine happens to align with Pose. I'll admit, it took me some time to 'get it', especially the idea that we don't push.
With that in mind I'll say this:
It's not lean, it's rotation (around the support foot from just behind vertical to up to 22.5 degrees forward of it) watch any side view slow-mo video of a runner and you'll see it.
What feels like a lean (if it's not from the waist) is actually you just noticing the angle at the end of rotation -terminal stance.
What feels like pushing harder to move forward faster is actually you resisting your body being squashed between gravity and the ground. The faster you go the greater the force.
Your speed comes from how much and how quickly you rotate -the further away your balance, the faster you move. -back to my sweeping brush analogy, where you stand it on its end with brush at top. Let go and watch it rotate (all by itself!) and notice the increased speed as the angle increases. Or as our old mate Leonardo De Vincci put it "Motion is created by the destruction of balance, that is, of equality of weight for nothing can move by itself which does not leave its state of balance and that thing moves most rapidly which is furthest from its balance."
Whichever way you choose to look at it, it always comes back to gravity! Remember, without gravity, such things as GRF, push, balance, falling, body weight, friction, landing become meaningless. Whether it's Pose, Chi, Evolution Running, My own way etc, we'll all having to work with gravity...we can try to work with it or do stuff that works against it.
Imagine this: you have a dial on your wrist and as you're running along you can turn it to gradually reduce the force of gravity. As you turn it, what would happen to your running? You'll weigh less but you'll still have those powerful leg muscles for your 'push-off'. Surely if running is about pushing then that will make you run much faster-yes? no?
|
|
Mar 2018
3:50pm, 20 Mar 2018
25,701 posts
|
SPR
Anti Gravity treadmills pretty much do just that...
|
