| Forum Index > TL Community |
|
funkie
Venezuela9377 Posts
On October 23 2010 04:38 eshlow wrote: Hmmm, your deadlift should be higher than your squat by now I think.... I had to cut back, since I can't find a decent chalk or something to save my hands from dying | ||
|
Malinor
Germany4757 Posts
http://www.sportsscientists.com/2008/04/running-technique-footstrike.html It doesn't deal directly with the injury-aspect though, but it's still definitely a very good read. Personally, I'm really skeptical about all the heel-to-toe hate. It's one of the few things where I don't just take eshlow's word on it  edit: Just read it again, and it's really a great read^^ Maybe eshlow has some more recent science on that matter up his sleeve. | ||
|
Meat
Netherlands3751 Posts
On October 22 2010 09:14 eshlow wrote: NOooooo heel toe technique is the way to get injured fast. Mid-foot strike or somewhat of a forefoot strike is the best. BUt you gotta take it slow when transferring over because it's easy to get overuse injuries. And yeah, you want a higher dose of vitamin D than that if you're not out in the sun a lot. Practiced mid and front foot running a bit today, I think i have mid foot running figured out but front foot running was harder. Also mid and front foot running went more natural at higher speeds and seems to stimulate that as well. At a lower speed I really have to push my foot in the right position. Will take it easy like you said, cause my chins and achilles were hurting pretty bad while walking during a relatively short session of mixed running and walking. Surprisingly they didn't hurt if i started running again but that didn't seem like a very good plan | ||
|
eshlow
United States5210 Posts
On October 23 2010 06:39 Malinor wrote: With regard to the heel vs midfoot debate: I very much like this article (Seems I'm not the only one, last time I checked it was barely first page on google and now it is the first hit). http://www.sportsscientists.com/2008/04/running-technique-footstrike.html It doesn't deal directly with the injury-aspect though, but it's still definitely a very good read. Personally, I'm really skeptical about all the heel-to-toe hate. It's one of the few things where I don't just take eshlow's word on it Most of the orthopedic deficiencies such as flat feet (yes, flat feet is a problem) derive from running with shoes. Heel-toe is a technique exclusively done on shoes (it's not done barefoot or with minimalist shoes). Given that shoes contribute enormously to orthopedic insufficiencies which I cover in both of these articles, this is one of the things I wholeheartedly am against. http://www.eatmoveimprove.com/2009/11/shoes-sitting-and-lower-body-dysfunction http://www.eatmoveimprove.com/2010/10/a-firm-foundation-focusing-on-the-feet/ It's only teh amazing adaptability of the human body that people can run all those long distances races with the crappy heel-toe technique. Almost all of the problems associated with barefoot injuries are from overuse. People don't know that their feet have atrophied THAT much from shoes and need to start slow. This is one of the confounding factors that sportsscientists article does not take into account. Nearly 100% of people that they're looking at in the studies are ADAPTED to shoes running. It's going to take a slow volume buildup to slowly transition over. Of course, there's going to be many injuries that way if people don't know what they are doing. Fitting shoes to supinated/regular/pronated feet don't actually decrease injury rates or pain. The only major argument FOR heel strike is it does conserve energy. That's because instead of your muscles taking the stress (like they should be) your bones are aligned up and taking the brunt of the stress. If you want accelerated arthritis from this by all means be my guest and continue to heel-toe strike. Anyway I'm done ranting. Like I say in these threads no one has to believe what I say... but for pretty much at least 99% of the stuff I do say in here is supported from the literature. | ||
|
eshlow
United States5210 Posts
On October 23 2010 06:22 funkie wrote: I had to cut back, since I can't find a decent chalk or something to save my hands from dying Mixed grip! | ||
|
Ilikestarcraft
Korea (South)17743 Posts
I thought that video was mad cool. Need to try barefoot running one day. | ||
|
Cambium
United States16368 Posts
 | ||
KizZBG
u gotta skate8152 Posts
Yeah try this, I pulled 100KG x3 today without chalk or anything.  | ||
|
eshlow
United States5210 Posts
On October 23 2010 08:08 Ilikestarcraft wrote: eshlow was it you who put that video where it shows where people run barefoot and with shoes how different it is. Like with shoes you do a heel first while barefoot you naturally run more on your toes. I thought that video was mad cool. Need to try barefoot running one day. Here's one of them There'd definitely like at least 3-4 versions of it though | ||
|
ShaLLoW[baY]
Canada12499 Posts
On October 22 2010 16:48 ShaLLoW[baY] wrote: im quite drunk, this is relevant because my drunk self says it is, but yeah, midfoot ftw. I'm very proud of myself for this. | ||
|
AoN.DimSum
United States2983 Posts
I woke up at 61.9 which is really good. Im about 62.6 right now. Hoping to go 6 for 6 :DD | ||
|
Energies
Australia3225 Posts
Good luck Dim, smash some faces! | ||
|
Malinor
Germany4757 Posts
On October 23 2010 06:51 eshlow wrote: Most of the orthopedic deficiencies such as flat feet (yes, flat feet is a problem) derive from running with shoes. Heel-toe is a technique exclusively done on shoes (it's not done barefoot or with minimalist shoes). Given that shoes contribute enormously to orthopedic insufficiencies which I cover in both of these articles, this is one of the things I wholeheartedly am against. http://www.eatmoveimprove.com/2009/11/shoes-sitting-and-lower-body-dysfunction http://www.eatmoveimprove.com/2010/10/a-firm-foundation-focusing-on-the-feet/ It's only teh amazing adaptability of the human body that people can run all those long distances races with the crappy heel-toe technique. Almost all of the problems associated with barefoot injuries are from overuse. People don't know that their feet have atrophied THAT much from shoes and need to start slow. This is one of the confounding factors that sportsscientists article does not take into account. Nearly 100% of people that they're looking at in the studies are ADAPTED to shoes running. It's going to take a slow volume buildup to slowly transition over. Of course, there's going to be many injuries that way if people don't know what they are doing. Fitting shoes to supinated/regular/pronated feet don't actually decrease injury rates or pain. The only major argument FOR heel strike is it does conserve energy. That's because instead of your muscles taking the stress (like they should be) your bones are aligned up and taking the brunt of the stress. If you want accelerated arthritis from this by all means be my guest and continue to heel-toe strike. Anyway I'm done ranting. Like I say in these threads no one has to believe what I say... but for pretty much at least 99% of the stuff I do say in here is supported from the literature. First off all I do not see you ranting... I see you explaining stuff well-mannered to someone who has doubts (besides the arthritis part, which is uncalled for. Just because I don't just believe everything what you are saying?). Secondly, noone here really doubts that you know more about all this stuff here than anyone else on these forums... still, that doesn't mean you are right all the time and sometimes you get defensive incredibly fast when someone is not agreeing with you. And I am simply not agreeing with you on this issue, I read your linked articles long time ago and I'm not convinced. See the argument with "all I say is supported by literature" only takes you so far, since in this world volumes have been written about stuff which turned out to be wrong.. The article I linked made some very good points why the issue is not as easy as some people may believe ("A is always better than B"). Obviously you disagree, but I am pretty certain named author would also have to say something about the stuff you write that he doesn't like and probably be able to back it up. That's just how science works. I came into this thread and took nearly all your advice on working out with weights, everything you predicted turned out to be true, it worked like a charme. On the other hand, I have prepared and run a whole marathon with heel-to-toe running years ago, and I haven't had any of the problems you are constantly reffering to. And when I run in the park and look around, Idon't believe I'm a lucky exception (edit: that's not meant to be an argument for heel-to-toe running, just an obersvation that most people run this way. As Rosaparks pointed out, it's a shitty and weak line and I shouldn't have used it at all). I believe a lot of this discussion has to do with running-speed (as described in the article). Walking is pretty much heel-to-toe, and the running speed of most of the people here is probably closer to walking then to being really fast (playing Rugby like Decaf is obviously another story). At least Heel-to-toe feels pretty natural to me. When I'm doing intervall sessions, I'm running way more midfoot while sprinting. Since I read your take on this issue a couple of months ago I actually trained midfood running and have done it for quite some time (exactly because you know so much stuff). It still doesn't feel very comfortable and also it doesn't feel natural. But again, given my actual weight, I am running pretty slowly. When I switch to heel-strike it mostly feels better. But of course I know that I'm adapted to this kind of running, so I'm still experimenting and trying different stuff out. | ||
|
funkie
Venezuela9377 Posts
fml. | ||
|
RosaParksStoleMySeat
Japan926 Posts
On the other hand, I have prepared and run a whole marathon with heel-to-toe running years ago, and I haven't had any of the problems you are constantly reffering to. And when I run in the park and look around, Idon't believe I'm a lucky exception. Yeah, and my grandfather smoked until he was 85 years old. He died in a car crash. See this? This is called anecdotal evidence. It is certainly logical to look to anecdotal evidence in our daily lives, as this is how humans survive. However, discounting contemporary scientific data because you see people in the park doing something is unbelievably irresponsible. If you have a good counter argument to modern scientific thinking, great. Unfortunately, "science isn't always right" just doesn't cut it. | ||
|
Malinor
Germany4757 Posts
On October 23 2010 10:39 RosaParksStoleMySeat wrote: Yeah, and my grandfather smoked until he was 85 years old. He died in a car crash. See this? This is called anecdotal evidence. It is certainly logical to look to anecdotal evidence in our daily lives, as this is how humans survive. However, discounting contemporary scientific data because you see people in the park doing something is unbelievably irresponsible. If you have a good counter argument to modern scientific thinking, great. Unfortunately, "science isn't always right" just doesn't cut it. I actually use it exactly as anecdotical evidence to explain, WHY I'm skeptical, not as an argument to support a certain kind of running. Please don't try to call me out with a comment you give your average high-school kid. If you take the time to read through some stuff on this matter you would see that there is a debate, and just because eshlow is on one side of the table doesn't mean there isn't knowledgeable people on the other side. Otherwise, there wouldn't be a debate. My linked article doesn't actually take a stance to which kind of running is better, and neither do I actually. I just see a lack of evidence that heel-to-toe is as bad as people make it out to be. edit: The people in the park argument probably sounds awful (my bad), but what I actually meant is that most people are running heel-to-toe (by quite a margin actually). Just stating that most of them are or will probably suffer of "accelerated arthritis" because of this is actually not scientific at all. edit2: angry posting is angry. Made it a bit nicer. | ||
|
ShaLLoW[baY]
Canada12499 Posts
| ||
|
RosaParksStoleMySeat
Japan926 Posts
Maybe I came off condescending. If I did, my bad. I haven't been having the greatest of days so I may be acting a little bit like a dickhead. | ||
|
eshlow
United States5210 Posts
Like I said I definitely agree heel-toe is superior for energy conservation, but like I argued before it's not healthy. And I also stand by the arthritis point because it's true. Heel toe will increase preponderance of developing arthritis in the ankles, knees, hips, and back. Studies indicate decrease ROM and increases in joint pressure etc shown in arthritis of the joints and of the tons of studies I cited in the shoes/sitting/etc. article bear out this as well. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12638796 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19735628 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1549336 The whole first page is just studies about how shoes/sitting are bad: http://www.eatmoveimprove.com/2009/11/shoes-sitting-and-lower-body-dysfunctions/ Note the atrophy of the muscles, increases of joint torque, and decreased range of motion of various joints as associated with shoes and given that ALL of these are present in arthritis I don't think it's too big a leap to come to the conclusion that it's a major contributing point. The fact that the biggest increases in torque and joint forces come from heel-toe movements which are ONLY applicable to shod running drives home my point. But feel free to disagree... If you feel that techniques works the best for you by all means continue. I'm just here to inform people on what I've researched (give that this type of stuff IS going to be my career as I'm in physical therapy school, and have combed the literature for this type of stuff because I like to be up to date). | ||
|
Energies
Australia3225 Posts
My current training has one purpose only, cut down to <10% bf for summer. I have incorporated 2-3 spin classes a week into my routine, but in order to do this I had to switch to a split routine (chest/tri - back/bi - shoulders/misc - legs) as I couldn't achieve this doing 5x5. I honestly just couldn't do a spin class on the off days of 5x5, let alone on the same day, it's too intense. In terms of pure fat loss, what would be better, standard 5x5 or my current routine, assuming my diet is immaculate in either case. | ||
| ||
[ Submit Event ] |
|
|
|
Replay Cast
RSL Revival
Clem vs Lambo
Scarlett vs Cure
CranKy Ducklings
Epic.LAN
IPSL
Dragon vs Hawk
RSL Revival
Classic vs Trap
herO vs SHIN
Sparkling Tuna Cup
OSC
IPSL
Bonyth vs Ret
WardiTV Weekly
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
