You can see Pete correct his form in the Skechers, but the difference
between the Newtons and barefoot is striking.
I'm not criticizing Pete, btw, as soon as I got my NB MT00s, I promptly
reverted to a heel-strike myself, after several years of exclusively
barefoot shoes and barefoot.
> You can see Pete correct his form in the Skechers, but the difference
> between the Newtons and barefoot is striking.
> I'm not criticizing Pete, btw, as soon as I got my NB MT00s, I promptly
> reverted to a heel-strike myself, after several years of exclusively
> barefoot shoes and barefoot.
The big difference between the Newtons and Skechers is the stiffness of the sole - Newtons are very stiff and inflexible, whereas I can actually flex the Skechers with my foot even though they have a lot of cushion. But yes, barefoot probably most stable and least torque to the foot on contact. Feel free to criticize, I'm far from perfect!
One comment I got was about me being a line runner with a near crossover gait. I'm not convinced that this is unusual or bad, thoughts?
> You can see Pete correct his form in the Skechers, but the difference > between the Newtons and barefoot is striking.
> I'm not criticizing Pete, btw, as soon as I got my NB MT00s, I promptly > reverted to a heel-strike myself, after several years of exclusively > barefoot shoes and barefoot.
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Oblinkin <oblinki...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The big difference between the Newtons and Skechers is the stiffness of
> the sole - Newtons are very stiff and inflexible, whereas I can actually
> flex the Skechers with my foot even though they have a lot of cushion. But
> yes, barefoot probably most stable and least torque to the foot on contact.
> Feel free to criticize, I'm far from perfect!
> One comment I got was about me being a line runner with a near crossover
> gait. I'm not convinced that this is unusual or bad, thoughts?
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Oblinkin <oblinki...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The big difference between the Newtons and Skechers is the stiffness of
> the sole - Newtons are very stiff and inflexible, whereas I can actually
> flex the Skechers with my foot even though they have a lot of cushion. But
> yes, barefoot probably most stable and least torque to the foot on contact.
> Feel free to criticize, I'm far from perfect!
> One comment I got was about me being a line runner with a near crossover
> gait. I'm not convinced that this is unusual or bad, thoughts?
> You can see Pete correct his form in the Skechers, but the difference
> between the Newtons and barefoot is striking.
> I'm not criticizing Pete, btw, as soon as I got my NB MT00s, I promptly
> reverted to a heel-strike myself, after several years of exclusively
> barefoot shoes and barefoot.
This is personally topical - I put on my old shoes this morning to take the trash down to the curb, and caught myself both pounding my heel while hustling with the recycling and catching it on the ground. One of the biggest steps towards adaptation for me has been going zero-drop all the time. The bulked up heels in my old shoes - whether they're trainers or casual - drives me nuts now.
> You can see Pete correct his form in the Skechers, but the difference > between the Newtons and barefoot is striking.
> I'm not criticizing Pete, btw, as soon as I got my NB MT00s, I promptly > reverted to a heel-strike myself, after several years of exclusively > barefoot shoes and barefoot.
I'm familiar with the Gait Guys feelings on this, they've used me in their critiques :) Problem is that other than a long-term battle with mild PF, I've largely been injury-free for the past 5 years, and the PF started long after I started running and I don't think it has anything to do with the line running since I've always run that way. I'm not so sure I buy that it's a big deal.
On Friday, October 26, 2012 8:08:23 AM UTC-4, Joe Wrigley wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Oblinkin <oblin...@gmail.com<javascript:> > > wrote:
>> The big difference between the Newtons and Skechers is the stiffness of >> the sole - Newtons are very stiff and inflexible, whereas I can actually >> flex the Skechers with my foot even though they have a lot of cushion. But >> yes, barefoot probably most stable and least torque to the foot on contact. >> Feel free to criticize, I'm far from perfect!
>> One comment I got was about me being a line runner with a near crossover >> gait. I'm not convinced that this is unusual or bad, thoughts?
> I'm familiar with the Gait Guys feelings on this, they've used me in their critiques :) Problem is that other than a long-term battle with mild PF, I've largely been injury-free for the past 5 years, and the PF started long after I started running and I don't think it has anything to do with the line running since I've always run that way. I'm not so sure I buy that it's a big deal.
+1. If you run efficiently enough to run a marathon (or longer) at pace, and you can train injury-free at the distances you want, I don't think that minor gait or footfall oddities (sometimes they can even be major) are relevant at all. It's the striving for an efficient footfall that will tell you whether your footfall is efficient (enough, for you).
> On Friday, October 26, 2012 8:08:23 AM UTC-4, Joe Wrigley wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Oblinkin <oblin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The big difference between the Newtons and Skechers is the stiffness of the sole - Newtons are very stiff and inflexible, whereas I can actually flex the Skechers with my foot even though they have a lot of cushion. But yes, barefoot probably most stable and least torque to the foot on contact. Feel free to criticize, I'm far from perfect!
> One comment I got was about me being a line runner with a near crossover gait. I'm not convinced that this is unusual or bad, thoughts?
Hey Dr. Pete: they've found some fossilized foot prints of primitive man
running: how did they do it?
For me, I've found that running with less of a cross-over gait has forced
my weaker leg to bear more of the load, thus making it stronger. It also
helped A LOT with chafing. That said, I had specific issues that it helped
me resolve, on my goal to run a marathon. Pete's already run some
marathons, and doesn't seem to have these same issues... So would it
improve his speed, perhaps? I don't know.
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Oblinkin <oblinki...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This from Peter Cavanagh in The Running Shoe Book in 1980 - one of the
> running biomechanics guys from the 70's-80's that I respect the most:
> "...most people place their left and right feet almost along a straight
> line when running at typical distance running speeds"
> Any video of experienced barefooters running from behind?
> Maybe it's time to film a race from behind, need to start working on my
> disguise :)
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Oblinkin <oblinki...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Haile looks to have a pretty pronounced crossover gait, someone should
> have informed him: http://youtu.be/EAW87NsiGuI
> On Friday, October 26, 2012 9:10:57 AM UTC-4, Oblinkin wrote:
>> This from Peter Cavanagh in The Running Shoe Book in 1980 - one of the
>> running biomechanics guys from the 70's-80's that I respect the most:
>> "...most people place their left and right feet almost along a straight
>> line when running at typical distance running speeds"
>> Any video of experienced barefooters running from behind?
>> Maybe it's time to film a race from behind, need to start working on my
>> disguise :)
On Friday, October 26, 2012 10:23:28 AM UTC-4, Tuck wrote:
> Hey Dr. Pete: they've found some fossilized foot prints of primitive man > running: how did they do it?
> For me, I've found that running with less of a cross-over gait has forced > my weaker leg to bear more of the load, thus making it stronger. It also > helped A LOT with chafing. That said, I had specific issues that it helped > me resolve, on my goal to run a marathon. Pete's already run some > marathons, and doesn't seem to have these same issues... So would it > improve his speed, perhaps? I don't know.
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Oblinkin <oblin...@gmail.com<javascript:> > > wrote:
>> This from Peter Cavanagh in The Running Shoe Book in 1980 - one of the >> running biomechanics guys from the 70's-80's that I respect the most:
>> "...most people place their left and right feet almost along a straight >> line when running at typical distance running speeds"
>> Any video of experienced barefooters running from behind?
>> Maybe it's time to film a race from behind, need to start working on my >> disguise :)
> On Friday, October 26, 2012 10:23:28 AM UTC-4, Tuck wrote:
> Hey Dr. Pete: they've found some fossilized foot prints of primitive man running: how did they do it?
> For me, I've found that running with less of a cross-over gait has forced my weaker leg to bear more of the load, thus making it stronger. It also helped A LOT with chafing. That said, I had specific issues that it helped me resolve, on my goal to run a marathon. Pete's already run some marathons, and doesn't seem to have these same issues... So would it improve his speed, perhaps? I don't know.
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Oblinkin <oblin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This from Peter Cavanagh in The Running Shoe Book in 1980 - one of the running biomechanics guys from the 70's-80's that I respect the most:
> "...most people place their left and right feet almost along a straight line when running at typical distance running speeds"
> Any video of experienced barefooters running from behind?
> Maybe it's time to film a race from behind, need to start working on my disguise :)
I was looking for fossil prints earlier, couldn't find any (on-line, not outside). Need to dig some more (online, not outside).
From a physics standpoint, wouldn't a more lateral foot plant result in a greater lever arm for the gravitational vector passing through the COM, thus requiring more effort from the glute medius to stabilize the hip?
I also agree about pronation - much more likely with a more medial landing, but is that bad?
On Friday, October 26, 2012 10:23:28 AM UTC-4, Tuck wrote:
> Hey Dr. Pete: they've found some fossilized foot prints of primitive man > running: how did they do it?
> For me, I've found that running with less of a cross-over gait has forced > my weaker leg to bear more of the load, thus making it stronger. It also > helped A LOT with chafing. That said, I had specific issues that it helped > me resolve, on my goal to run a marathon. Pete's already run some > marathons, and doesn't seem to have these same issues... So would it > improve his speed, perhaps? I don't know.
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Oblinkin <oblin...@gmail.com<javascript:> > > wrote:
>> This from Peter Cavanagh in The Running Shoe Book in 1980 - one of the >> running biomechanics guys from the 70's-80's that I respect the most:
>> "...most people place their left and right feet almost along a straight >> line when running at typical distance running speeds"
>> Any video of experienced barefooters running from behind?
>> Maybe it's time to film a race from behind, need to start working on my >> disguise :)
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 10:57 AM, Oblinkin <oblinki...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Heck, if it can improve my chafe issues, maybe it's worth modifying :)
> On Friday, October 26, 2012 10:23:28 AM UTC-4, Tuck wrote:
>> Hey Dr. Pete: they've found some fossilized foot prints of primitive man
>> running: how did they do it?
>> For me, I've found that running with less of a cross-over gait has forced
>> my weaker leg to bear more of the load, thus making it stronger. It also
>> helped A LOT with chafing. That said, I had specific issues that it helped
>> me resolve, on my goal to run a marathon. Pete's already run some
>> marathons, and doesn't seem to have these same issues... So would it improve
>> his speed, perhaps? I don't know.
>> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Oblinkin <oblin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> This from Peter Cavanagh in The Running Shoe Book in 1980 - one of the
>>> running biomechanics guys from the 70's-80's that I respect the most:
>>> "...most people place their left and right feet almost along a straight
>>> line when running at typical distance running speeds"
>>> Any video of experienced barefooters running from behind?
>>> Maybe it's time to film a race from behind, need to start working on my
>>> disguise :)
Only if it causes you problems. Of course, if chaffing is your only
problem, then you're not doing too bad. If it makes your knees give
out, then it could be a big issue.
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Oblinkin <oblinki...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I was looking for fossil prints earlier, couldn't find any (on-line, not
> outside). Need to dig some more (online, not outside).
> From a physics standpoint, wouldn't a more lateral foot plant result in a
> greater lever arm for the gravitational vector passing through the COM, thus
> requiring more effort from the glute medius to stabilize the hip?
> I also agree about pronation - much more likely with a more medial landing,
> but is that bad?
> On Friday, October 26, 2012 10:23:28 AM UTC-4, Tuck wrote:
>> Hey Dr. Pete: they've found some fossilized foot prints of primitive man
>> running: how did they do it?
>> For me, I've found that running with less of a cross-over gait has forced
>> my weaker leg to bear more of the load, thus making it stronger. It also
>> helped A LOT with chafing. That said, I had specific issues that it helped
>> me resolve, on my goal to run a marathon. Pete's already run some
>> marathons, and doesn't seem to have these same issues... So would it improve
>> his speed, perhaps? I don't know.
>> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Oblinkin <oblin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> This from Peter Cavanagh in The Running Shoe Book in 1980 - one of the
>>> running biomechanics guys from the 70's-80's that I respect the most:
>>> "...most people place their left and right feet almost along a straight
>>> line when running at typical distance running speeds"
>>> Any video of experienced barefooters running from behind?
>>> Maybe it's time to film a race from behind, need to start working on my
>>> disguise :)
Yeah, I feel like I'm running less smoothly with less cross-over... On the
treadmill, anyway. Don't really notice it out on the trail. But there's
clearly a trade-off here, because I wasn't going to get to 26.2 miles with
the amount of chafing going on...
"I also agree about pronation - much more likely with a more medial
landing, but is that bad?"
For my weak leg, it's been a constant source of problems. Obviously,
pronation's perfectly normal, but there's got to be a point where it's "too
much". Certainly my weak leg was past the "too much" point....
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Oblinkin <oblinki...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I was looking for fossil prints earlier, couldn't find any (on-line, not
> outside). Need to dig some more (online, not outside).
> From a physics standpoint, wouldn't a more lateral foot plant result in a
> greater lever arm for the gravitational vector passing through the COM,
> thus requiring more effort from the glute medius to stabilize the hip?
> I also agree about pronation - much more likely with a more medial
> landing, but is that bad?
> On Friday, October 26, 2012 10:23:28 AM UTC-4, Tuck wrote:
>> Hey Dr. Pete: they've found some fossilized foot prints of primitive man
>> running: how did they do it?
>> For me, I've found that running with less of a cross-over gait has forced
>> my weaker leg to bear more of the load, thus making it stronger. It also
>> helped A LOT with chafing. That said, I had specific issues that it helped
>> me resolve, on my goal to run a marathon. Pete's already run some
>> marathons, and doesn't seem to have these same issues... So would it
>> improve his speed, perhaps? I don't know.
>> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Oblinkin <oblin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> This from Peter Cavanagh in The Running Shoe Book in 1980 - one of the
>>> running biomechanics guys from the 70's-80's that I respect the most:
>>> "...most people place their left and right feet almost along a straight
>>> line when running at typical distance running speeds"
>>> Any video of experienced barefooters running from behind?
>>> Maybe it's time to film a race from behind, need to start working on my
>>> disguise :)
I think this cross over gait is also greatly influenced by genetics...depending how your hip bone is shaped and especially how your hip socket is angled and how your femur is positioned, how your muscles and tendons, ligaments are connected in that specific area...it is a complex issue...I think that strengthening of the hip area is good overall but some might just have hips that creates a slight cross over...
carl
________________________________ From: Tuck <tuck...@gmail.com> To: huaraches@googlegroups.com Sent: Fri, October 26, 2012 11:13:11 AM Subject: Re: [Minimalist Runner:125250] Re: How hard is it to run correctly in sneakers?
"From a physics standpoint..."
Yeah, I feel like I'm running less smoothly with less cross-over... On the treadmill, anyway. Don't really notice it out on the trail. But there's clearly a trade-off here, because I wasn't going to get to 26.2 miles with the amount of chafing going on...
"I also agree about pronation - much more likely with a more medial landing, but is that bad?"
For my weak leg, it's been a constant source of problems. Obviously, pronation's perfectly normal, but there's got to be a point where it's "too much". Certainly my weak leg was past the "too much" point....
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Oblinkin <oblinki...@gmail.com> wrote:
I was looking for fossil prints earlier, couldn't find any (on-line, not outside). Need to dig some more (online, not outside).
>From a physics standpoint, wouldn't a more lateral foot plant result in a >greater lever arm for the gravitational vector passing through the COM, thus >requiring more effort from the glute medius to stabilize the hip?
>I also agree about pronation - much more likely with a more medial landing, but >is that bad?
>On Friday, October 26, 2012 10:23:28 AM UTC-4, Tuck wrote: >Hey Dr. Pete: they've found some fossilized foot prints of primitive man >running: how did they do it?
>>For me, I've found that running with less of a cross-over gait has forced my >>weaker leg to bear more of the load, thus making it stronger. It also helped A >>LOT with chafing. That said, I had specific issues that it helped me resolve, >>on my goal to run a marathon. Pete's already run some marathons, and doesn't >>seem to have these same issues... So would it improve his speed, perhaps? I >>don't know.
>>On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Oblinkin <oblin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>This from Peter Cavanagh in The Running Shoe Book in 1980 - one of the running >>biomechanics guys from the 70's-80's that I respect the most:
>>>"...most people place their left and right feet almost along a straight line >>>when running at typical distance running speeds"
>>>Any video of experienced barefooters running from behind?
>>>Maybe it's time to film a race from behind, need to start working on my disguise >>>:) >>>-- >>>"Minimalist Runner - Barefoot, Sandals, Shoes..." hosted by Barefoot Ted >>> >>>Membership Options: http://groups.google.com/group/huaraches/subscribe
"One comment I got was about me being a line runner with a near crossover gait. I'm not convinced that this is unusual or bad, thoughts?"
+1. I don't think it's a big deal either (there's a point where trying to correct slight imperfections (i.e., crossover gait) can have very negative consequences, especially once you become a pretty efficient runner (as you are) and are doing so pretty injury free.
Also, thanks for posting as that was interesting and informative to watch. My take away, no big deal :). We all know each different type of shoe has an impact and provides various degrees of variation from our barefoot landing which is our natural running form (assuming good barefoot running conditions).
My goal has always been to get footwear that allows me to get as close to barefoot as possible taking into account outside conditions (surface, weather, etc., and overall feel; some shoes just feel better than others) and further accepting that no footwear will allow me to run 100% identical to how I run barefoot. I've reached the point where I've likely migrated as far down as possible to maintain how/when/where I run.
Running is no different than any other sport in analyzing individuals (i.e., your reference to Haile). Once in basketball, we colored over Larry Bird and had a shooting expert analyze Larry's form and he broke it down and told us everything this player was doing wrong, then at the end, we let him know it was Larry Bird, one of the best pure shooters in NBA history (same analysis would apply to Haile G., Sammy W., or any other runner).
On Friday, October 26, 2012 6:03:03 AM UTC-6, Oblinkin wrote:
> The big difference between the Newtons and Skechers is the stiffness of > the sole - Newtons are very stiff and inflexible, whereas I can actually > flex the Skechers with my foot even though they have a lot of cushion. But > yes, barefoot probably most stable and least torque to the foot on contact. > Feel free to criticize, I'm far from perfect!
> One comment I got was about me being a line runner with a near crossover > gait. I'm not convinced that this is unusual or bad, thoughts?
> On Thursday, October 25, 2012 10:30:15 PM UTC-4, Tuck wrote:
>> You can see Pete correct his form in the Skechers, but the difference >> between the Newtons and barefoot is striking.
>> I'm not criticizing Pete, btw, as soon as I got my NB MT00s, I promptly >> reverted to a heel-strike myself, after several years of exclusively >> barefoot shoes and barefoot.
"I think this cross over gait is also greatly influenced by genetics...depending how your hip bone is shaped and especially how your hip socket is angled and how your femur is positioned, how your muscles and tendons, ligaments are connected in that specific area...it is a complex issue...I think that strengthening of the hip area is good overall but some might just have hips that creates a slight cross over..."
+1. I tend to agree. This is where we can really start splitting hairs. It's one thing if what you are doing is causing issues like injury but there are just natural differences between each runner that results from a multiple of reasons and factors.
I'm constantly criticized for carrying my arms too low (much like Ryan Hall) but I refuse to change it because it feels better, I breath better and I run with less effort. Point is there's probably many reasons why a low arm carriage works for me and would not work for the next runner and since I haven't been injured in years and my performance is fine by me, there's no further analysis needed.
On Friday, October 26, 2012 9:25:10 AM UTC-6, Viking Runner wrote:
> I think this cross over gait is also greatly influenced by > genetics...depending how your hip bone is shaped and especially how > your hip socket is angled and how your femur is positioned, how your > muscles and tendons, ligaments are connected in that specific area...it is > a complex issue...I think that strengthening of the hip area is good > overall but some might just have hips that creates a slight cross over... > carl
> ------------------------------ > *From:* Tuck <tuc...@gmail.com <javascript:>> > *To:* huar...@googlegroups.com <javascript:> > *Sent:* Fri, October 26, 2012 11:13:11 AM > *Subject:* Re: [Minimalist Runner:125250] Re: How hard is it to run > correctly in sneakers?
> "From a physics standpoint..."
> Yeah, I feel like I'm running less smoothly with less cross-over... On the > treadmill, anyway. Don't really notice it out on the trail. But there's > clearly a trade-off here, because I wasn't going to get to 26.2 miles with > the amount of chafing going on...
> "I also agree about pronation - much more likely with a more medial > landing, but is that bad?"
> For my weak leg, it's been a constant source of problems. Obviously, > pronation's perfectly normal, but there's got to be a point where it's "too > much". Certainly my weak leg was past the "too much" point....
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Oblinkin <oblin...@gmail.com<javascript:> > > wrote:
>> I was looking for fossil prints earlier, couldn't find any (on-line, not >> outside). Need to dig some more (online, not outside).
>> From a physics standpoint, wouldn't a more lateral foot plant result in a >> greater lever arm for the gravitational vector passing through the COM, >> thus requiring more effort from the glute medius to stabilize the hip?
>> I also agree about pronation - much more likely with a more medial >> landing, but is that bad?
>> On Friday, October 26, 2012 10:23:28 AM UTC-4, Tuck wrote:
>>> Hey Dr. Pete: they've found some fossilized foot prints of primitive >>> man running: how did they do it?
>>> For me, I've found that running with less of a cross-over gait has >>> forced my weaker leg to bear more of the load, thus making it stronger. It >>> also helped A LOT with chafing. That said, I had specific issues that it >>> helped me resolve, on my goal to run a marathon. Pete's already run some >>> marathons, and doesn't seem to have these same issues... So would it >>> improve his speed, perhaps? I don't know.
>>> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Oblinkin <oblin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> This from Peter Cavanagh in The Running Shoe Book in 1980 - one of the >>>> running biomechanics guys from the 70's-80's that I respect the most:
>>>> "...most people place their left and right feet almost along a straight >>>> line when running at typical distance running speeds"
>>>> Any video of experienced barefooters running from behind?
>>>> Maybe it's time to film a race from behind, need to start working on my >>>> disguise :)
I was thinking the same thing, highly individual, and in the absence of knowledge of the "normal" range of variation it's really difficult to identify an abnormality. I suspect body and leg mass also play a role.
On Friday, October 26, 2012 11:25:10 AM UTC-4, Viking Runner wrote:
> I think this cross over gait is also greatly influenced by > genetics...depending how your hip bone is shaped and especially how > your hip socket is angled and how your femur is positioned, how your > muscles and tendons, ligaments are connected in that specific area...it is > a complex issue...I think that strengthening of the hip area is good > overall but some might just have hips that creates a slight cross over... > carl
> ------------------------------ > *From:* Tuck <tuc...@gmail.com <javascript:>> > *To:* huar...@googlegroups.com <javascript:> > *Sent:* Fri, October 26, 2012 11:13:11 AM > *Subject:* Re: [Minimalist Runner:125250] Re: How hard is it to run > correctly in sneakers?
> "From a physics standpoint..."
> Yeah, I feel like I'm running less smoothly with less cross-over... On the > treadmill, anyway. Don't really notice it out on the trail. But there's > clearly a trade-off here, because I wasn't going to get to 26.2 miles with > the amount of chafing going on...
> "I also agree about pronation - much more likely with a more medial > landing, but is that bad?"
> For my weak leg, it's been a constant source of problems. Obviously, > pronation's perfectly normal, but there's got to be a point where it's "too > much". Certainly my weak leg was past the "too much" point....
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Oblinkin <oblin...@gmail.com<javascript:> > > wrote:
>> I was looking for fossil prints earlier, couldn't find any (on-line, not >> outside). Need to dig some more (online, not outside).
>> From a physics standpoint, wouldn't a more lateral foot plant result in a >> greater lever arm for the gravitational vector passing through the COM, >> thus requiring more effort from the glute medius to stabilize the hip?
>> I also agree about pronation - much more likely with a more medial >> landing, but is that bad?
>> On Friday, October 26, 2012 10:23:28 AM UTC-4, Tuck wrote:
>>> Hey Dr. Pete: they've found some fossilized foot prints of primitive >>> man running: how did they do it?
>>> For me, I've found that running with less of a cross-over gait has >>> forced my weaker leg to bear more of the load, thus making it stronger. It >>> also helped A LOT with chafing. That said, I had specific issues that it >>> helped me resolve, on my goal to run a marathon. Pete's already run some >>> marathons, and doesn't seem to have these same issues... So would it >>> improve his speed, perhaps? I don't know.
>>> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Oblinkin <oblin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> This from Peter Cavanagh in The Running Shoe Book in 1980 - one of the >>>> running biomechanics guys from the 70's-80's that I respect the most:
>>>> "...most people place their left and right feet almost along a straight >>>> line when running at typical distance running speeds"
>>>> Any video of experienced barefooters running from behind?
>>>> Maybe it's time to film a race from behind, need to start working on my >>>> disguise :)
" . . . and in the absence of knowledge of the "normal" range of variation it's really difficult to identify an abnormality."
This is where I crack up as a former athlete and at times, I'm guilty as charged. The vast majority of elite level athletes come from poor backgrounds with no access or idea as to what is a normal range of anything . . . they just do it . . . and do it over and over and over.
The funny thing is when an athlete comes along that does something different and becomes the best, what is the "normal range" is re-defined by the academics. Just think about the progression of the forehand in tennis, from a flat Jimmy Connors forehand to unconventional Bjorn Born with his western grip and massive topspin which ultimately redefined how to fit a forehand in the modern game and how to use spin in the game of tennis.
The game changers have been training, diet, technology, etc. Running is one of the most individual things out there and it gets proven over and over especially when you watch the lead pack in a race and everyone looks different (arms, legs, head, etc. . . . all slightly different). Wouldn't you love to see Haile's face is someone said, "we need to fix that pronation" :)
On Friday, October 26, 2012 9:46:19 AM UTC-6, Oblinkin wrote:
> I was thinking the same thing, highly individual, and in the absence of > knowledge of the "normal" range of variation it's really difficult to > identify an abnormality. I suspect body and leg mass also play a role.
> On Friday, October 26, 2012 11:25:10 AM UTC-4, Viking Runner wrote:
>> I think this cross over gait is also greatly influenced by >> genetics...depending how your hip bone is shaped and especially how >> your hip socket is angled and how your femur is positioned, how your >> muscles and tendons, ligaments are connected in that specific area...it is >> a complex issue...I think that strengthening of the hip area is good >> overall but some might just have hips that creates a slight cross over... >> carl
>> ------------------------------ >> *From:* Tuck <tuc...@gmail.com> >> *To:* huar...@googlegroups.com >> *Sent:* Fri, October 26, 2012 11:13:11 AM >> *Subject:* Re: [Minimalist Runner:125250] Re: How hard is it to run >> correctly in sneakers?
>> "From a physics standpoint..."
>> Yeah, I feel like I'm running less smoothly with less cross-over... On >> the treadmill, anyway. Don't really notice it out on the trail. But >> there's clearly a trade-off here, because I wasn't going to get to 26.2 >> miles with the amount of chafing going on...
>> "I also agree about pronation - much more likely with a more medial >> landing, but is that bad?"
>> For my weak leg, it's been a constant source of problems. Obviously, >> pronation's perfectly normal, but there's got to be a point where it's "too >> much". Certainly my weak leg was past the "too much" point....
>> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Oblinkin <oblin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I was looking for fossil prints earlier, couldn't find any (on-line, not >>> outside). Need to dig some more (online, not outside).
>>> From a physics standpoint, wouldn't a more lateral foot plant result in >>> a greater lever arm for the gravitational vector passing through the COM, >>> thus requiring more effort from the glute medius to stabilize the hip?
>>> I also agree about pronation - much more likely with a more medial >>> landing, but is that bad?
>>> On Friday, October 26, 2012 10:23:28 AM UTC-4, Tuck wrote:
>>>> Hey Dr. Pete: they've found some fossilized foot prints of primitive >>>> man running: how did they do it?
>>>> For me, I've found that running with less of a cross-over gait has >>>> forced my weaker leg to bear more of the load, thus making it stronger. It >>>> also helped A LOT with chafing. That said, I had specific issues that it >>>> helped me resolve, on my goal to run a marathon. Pete's already run some >>>> marathons, and doesn't seem to have these same issues... So would it >>>> improve his speed, perhaps? I don't know.
>>>> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Oblinkin <oblin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> This from Peter Cavanagh in The Running Shoe Book in 1980 - one of the >>>>> running biomechanics guys from the 70's-80's that I respect the most:
>>>>> "...most people place their left and right feet almost along a >>>>> straight line when running at typical distance running speeds"
>>>>> Any video of experienced barefooters running from behind?
>>>>> Maybe it's time to film a race from behind, need to start working on >>>>> my disguise :)
Yeah, agreed. Unless you've got a clear issue, as I did, I wouldn't mess
with it. Other than my negatives improving, I haven't noticed any other
benefits.
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Oblinkin <oblinki...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I was thinking the same thing, highly individual, and in the absence of
> knowledge of the "normal" range of variation it's really difficult to
> identify an abnormality. I suspect body and leg mass also play a role.
> On Friday, October 26, 2012 11:25:10 AM UTC-4, Viking Runner wrote:
>> I think this cross over gait is also greatly influenced by
>> genetics...depending how your hip bone is shaped and especially how
>> your hip socket is angled and how your femur is positioned, how your
>> muscles and tendons, ligaments are connected in that specific area...it is
>> a complex issue...I think that strengthening of the hip area is good
>> overall but some might just have hips that creates a slight cross over...
>> carl
>> *Sent:* Fri, October 26, 2012 11:13:11 AM
>> *Subject:* Re: [Minimalist Runner:125250] Re: How hard is it to run
>> correctly in sneakers?
>> "From a physics standpoint..."
>> Yeah, I feel like I'm running less smoothly with less cross-over... On
>> the treadmill, anyway. Don't really notice it out on the trail. But
>> there's clearly a trade-off here, because I wasn't going to get to 26.2
>> miles with the amount of chafing going on...
>> "I also agree about pronation - much more likely with a more medial
>> landing, but is that bad?"
>> For my weak leg, it's been a constant source of problems. Obviously,
>> pronation's perfectly normal, but there's got to be a point where it's "too
>> much". Certainly my weak leg was past the "too much" point....
>> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Oblinkin <oblin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I was looking for fossil prints earlier, couldn't find any (on-line, not
>>> outside). Need to dig some more (online, not outside).
>>> From a physics standpoint, wouldn't a more lateral foot plant result in
>>> a greater lever arm for the gravitational vector passing through the COM,
>>> thus requiring more effort from the glute medius to stabilize the hip?
>>> I also agree about pronation - much more likely with a more medial
>>> landing, but is that bad?
>>> On Friday, October 26, 2012 10:23:28 AM UTC-4, Tuck wrote:
>>>> Hey Dr. Pete: they've found some fossilized foot prints of primitive
>>>> man running: how did they do it?
>>>> For me, I've found that running with less of a cross-over gait has
>>>> forced my weaker leg to bear more of the load, thus making it stronger. It
>>>> also helped A LOT with chafing. That said, I had specific issues that it
>>>> helped me resolve, on my goal to run a marathon. Pete's already run some
>>>> marathons, and doesn't seem to have these same issues... So would it
>>>> improve his speed, perhaps? I don't know.
>>>> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Oblinkin <oblin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> This from Peter Cavanagh in The Running Shoe Book in 1980 - one of the
>>>>> running biomechanics guys from the 70's-80's that I respect the most:
>>>>> "...most people place their left and right feet almost along a
>>>>> straight line when running at typical distance running speeds"
>>>>> Any video of experienced barefooters running from behind?
>>>>> Maybe it's time to film a race from behind, need to start working on
>>>>> my disguise :)
