Running technique - footstrike position
I’ve been trying to change my footstriking position over the last two months so that I land on the mid-foot rather on the heal. It just seemed logical that there would be less impact on my knees, but I had no proof to back this up.
I came across this post by Dr. Ross Tucker that discuss this issue. It is a very interesting read.
The conclusion:
“There is no evidence that heel-strikers are injured more, no evidence that mid-foot runners are faster and perform better than heel-strikers, and so the ultimate question is:
Why would you want to change your foot landing to begin with? Science has little to offer you in support of this. And so my advice … is to forget about the possibility that you’re landing “wrongly”, and just let your feet land where, and how they land, and worry about all the other things you can when you run!
If there is one thing you change in your running, don’t focus on your footstrike, but rather on WHERE your feet land relative to your body. Because if you are over-reaching and throwing your foot out in front of you, that’s a problem, but what happens when the rubber meets the road is less relevant!”
A very interesting read and conclusion. Now what is the best position for your feet to land relative to your body?
Filed under: Run, Technique |
Digg! this story.
1 Comment: :
Running technique - footstrike position
April 2nd, 2008 1:04 pm
Karl McCracken says:
IMHO (not worth much, but there you go), closer to your body means higher cadence, which means faster for less effort.
Our Cross-Country teacher (an ex-GB team member) at school always recommended that you try to run as smoothly as possible, with as little up & down bounce. His reasoning for this was that up & down was energy being used in not moving you forward. It also happens to mean that your knees are acting as shock absorbers.