W2R1 question

[AlanP]

Laura advises to land on the heel to avoid injury. This seems contrary to everything else I've read or seen. I had thought mid foot was the ideal landing. Anyone know for sure? Is Laura's advice good? Cheers

[greenlegs Graduate]

Greenlegs jumps onto soapbox

I've tried asking Admins about this, but haven't had a clear answer yet - but all the posts that I've seen on here from people doing c25k agree that mid foot is much more comfortable. Have you read Born to Run? I'm halfway through it, and, while it may be written by someone with a bit of a mission, it does sound entirely sensible.

I really don't understand why the podcasts go on about heel striking, when everything I've read suggests that it is the cause of injuries. (Or maybe - that over-padded shoes stop people running naturally, and the shoes are the real cause of the injuries, as suggested in Born to Run )

Then again, I'm just a new runner, who has only been reading about running for a few weeks (but injury free so far).

[greenlegs Graduate]

Here's a copy of the summary of the article in the scientific journal 'Nature' in Jan 2010 - so it isn't new - about footstriking in barefoot and shod runners:

-----------

Humans have engaged in endurance running for millions of years1, but the modern running shoe was not invented until the 1970s. For most of human evolutionary history, runners were either barefoot or wore minimal footwear such as sandals or moccasins with smaller heels and little cushioning relative to modern running shoes. We wondered how runners coped with the impact caused by the foot colliding with the ground before the invention of the modern shoe. Here we show that habitually barefoot endurance runners often land on the fore-foot (fore-foot strike) before bringing down the heel, but they sometimes land with a flat foot (mid-foot strike) or, less often, on the heel (rear-foot strike). In contrast, habitually shod runners mostly rear-foot strike, facilitated by the elevated and cushioned heel of the modern running shoe. Kinematic and kinetic analyses show that even on hard surfaces, barefoot runners who fore-foot strike generate smaller collision forces than shod rear-foot strikers. This difference results primarily from a more plantarflexed foot at landing and more ankle compliance during impact, decreasing the effective mass of the body that collides with the ground. Fore-foot- and mid-foot-strike gaits were probably more common when humans ran barefoot or in minimal shoes, and may protect the feet and lower limbs from some of the impact-related injuries now experienced by a high percentage of runners.

-----------

More background information here:

runbare.com/389/new-study-b...

Highly padded shoes may actually be a reason for high injury rates in runners. Confusing?!

[greenlegs Graduate]

Back again - just thought - i wonder when were the podcasts were made? Perhaps this information wasn't commonly accepted knowledge then?

[Beads Graduate]

If you can land on your forefoot you have your ankle and knee absorbing the impact as both joints will move. If you land on your heel then the whole of the impact will be felt in your knee as the extra shock absorption from the ankle flexing isn't there. That's how I see it anyway.

I'm trying to work my way forwards on my feet, I can mid-strike but can't get the front down first (need to go a bit faster so I can lean into it more and stay on my toes, but end up out of breath too quickly), but I'm working on it!

[didntrunthat Graduate]

There is conflicting information out there on this one. In my opinion I think when you are starting out running just go with what feels natural to you. I spent so much time worrying out my feet, my breathing, my pace etc... they first few weeks that I was over thinking it all.

If you find something telling you to something one week, you'll find another study telling you to do the opposite the next. We're all individuals and we are all different.