OBJECTIVE
Run
ACHIEVED
3.96 mi.@ 8:32
5:31 AM 31° 91% 0 mph
I thought I was going to have some sort of running epiphany once I finally got back on the road. But after my two-week layoff, nothing. It was just another run.
I didn't post a training schedule for this week because I'm just "winging it". No pressure to run specific mileage or pace; just trying to get a few miles on my legs and a few hours on my feet.
During my time off, I really let my body rest. As a result, I'm sure I've lost fitness. On top of that, I ate pretty much anything I wanted during the first week and only moderated my nutrition decisions slightly during the second week.
I read a little bit of running stuff. One of the points which kept coming up no matter what source I was relying on, was mechanical efficiency in running. I don't think my form is great but I don't think it's horrible either. But how would you know? Nobody is going to come up and say something like, "You run like a walrus."
One thing I've known for a long time (thanks to my friend Jonathan and my subsequent reading) is 180 foot strikes per minute is an efficient running cadence. I haven't ever really checked mine. Sure, I've counted strides for 15 seconds to get an idea. I think I was always short of 180. Well in my reading on mechanical efficiency, I came across the idea that approximately 80% of runners overstride. Interestingly. I've always felt like I really slow down while running downhill due to overstriding. With this 80% statistic, I wondered if I always overstride. Further reading from multiple sources, suggests that efficient running occurs when the ball of the foot does not extend beyond the hips. So I'm thinking, an efficient runner takes very small strides! Then the light bulb came on for me. In order to get 180 strides per minute, the strides necessarily need to be shorter. In addition, by keeping the ball of the foot directly under the hips, a natural forward lean results. So I'm noodling on these concepts.
Today over the last mile or so, I tried shortening my stride and keeping my feet under my hips. It really didn't feel like much except that I was taking quite a few more steps than usual. Well, guess what .... After uploading my run, I see that I covered the last mile in 7:45. This is very interesting to me because I didn't notice any more effort being expended than over the first 3 miles which averaged around 8:40. There just might be something to this running form and mechanical efficiency concept. Maybe this is the epiphany ....
PRE RUN
water
POST RUN
weight = 160 (I'm surprised my weight held steady with my lack of dietary control the past 2 weeks!)
water, multivitamin, low-fat granola w/1% milk
3 comments:
Aaah, sounds like a nice break. Have you ever heard of the Pose method? My brother-in-law swears by it. The idea is just that- quicker turnover, ball of foot making contact directly under hips, slight forward lean. He used to be very injury prone and this method has solved that problem.
P.S. I run like a walrus!
Dude, you run like a walrus. I'm trying to work on my form, too, but as you say, tweaking your own form is pretty difficult to do.
Finally, a true friend steps up and tells me, I run like a walrus. Thanks, Josh! Actually your blog entry about form and your new Newton's came at the time I seemed to be seeing a lot about running form and efficiency. Please keep me posted on how the Newton's work for you. I know your legs were sore after the first time out. I've considered Newton's but not seriously until now.
Mandy,
I only recently became aware of the Pose method. Thank you for letting me know that it's worked for someone you know. I think the concepts may be the same as those espoused in the book "The Chi of Running", which is moving up my "to read" list.
I would like to note that after thinking about it, I've decided walruses are strong and, given their physical limitations, quite fast.
Post a Comment