Terrible running technique happened.

She's leaning back and heel-striking forward of her center of gravity. She landed with her leg completely straight and basically pole-vaulted herself.

I foresee knee problems in her future.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

This achievement has earned you your "Silver Tongue" Level 1 Badge!

>> ^rychan:

The advice might be good but the reasoning they're using to justify it is false. Things are much more complicated than they make out.
Why not take their third grade reasoning to the extreme and propose that you should run with zero bounce? If you tried this you'd find it requires very unnatural and inefficient movements.


Things don't need to be complicated if you don't go into the metabolism side of things. Running is different from walking in that both of you feet are off the ground at the same time. You're basically flying through the air most of the time, or should be. Bouncing too much shows that you make contact with the ground for too long. By simply landing on the balls of your feet (not your toes or, worse, your heels) without trying to push yourself forward (i.e. with legs straight down under you at the instant your whole foot is contacting the ground and then pulling the foot up instead of pushing out with your toes), you can create a spring like reaction in your leg muscle that will give you just enough vertical energy to stay level with the ground, reducing the bounce to a theoretical minimum of zero. What makes you advance forward is your previous momentum combined with gravity making your slightly forward-leaning body fall at an angle (the lean will need to be more pronounced the faster you want to run). With good form, you can easily create a very constant stride without bounce since you do not rely on your leg muscles to propel yourself, but only to keep you up in the air for the longest possible proportion of time (resulting in less friction, more energy transfer from gravity, etc.). Look at horses : their hind legs are bent backwards for propulsion, yet they still have no bounce (we feel a bounce because we ride in the middle, but in absolutes they do not bounce). Plus, their front legs always hit the ground at a 90 degree angle right under them. In human terms, the front legs are our legs, the hind legs are our slight forward lean. If we had not adapted this way, we'd either be running like kangaroos, i.e. by actually bouncing, or we'd not be able to run at all, like monkeys.

tl;dr : landing on the balls of your feet keeps you in the air at a stable, constant height; leaning slightly forward allows gravity to pull you forward.

Walking though is very different. Here you want the pendulum effect created by the arms to conserve energy, but the same principle applies for maximum efficiency : land with the legs at 90 degrees to the ground, under your center of gravity and don't push with your toes. Of course there are ways to walk/run faster with less efficiency, it all depends whether you're in a marathon or a race.

>> ^Sagemind:

After ripping my knee out in a dirt-bike accident (think snapping a chicken wing in two), I don't run.
Having said that, I think it's crazy that man has reduced a basic function of the human body down to scientific knowhow! Should we tell our tribal ancestors they've been doing it all wrong all this time??


On the contrary, they're the ones who have been doing it right all along. Mass consumerism + fad marketing destroyed our feet with "running" shoes. Plus, scientists have assumed for a long time that everyone knows instinctively how to run properly. They were wrong. Just as we learn how to walk we must learn how to run. Some can learn on their own, some copy others like Angua1 and some just can't run or end up copying bad running forms from people who "unlearned" how to run thanks to padded "running" shoes. Our ancestors learned how to run properly because for them it was a vital skill, just like using a bow, a knife or a sling. Plus they didn't have padded shoes, medical treatment or motorized locomotion so running badly was not an option if they were to survive long enough to reproduce.

That said, the video is bullshit. Go look for the POSE method of running for accurate information. This method also addresses the crossover problems.

>> ^budzos:

^ Well, the measurements may be pseudo-scientific, but these are all good points:
1. Reduce bounce... you realize we're talking about people here and not rubber balls... pretty much all the energy directed downwards is lost and the return height comes from muscular exertion.. "bounce" is used figuratively.
2. Optimize stride length... for most runners, optimal is a little longer.
3. Minimize overstride... figured this out myself in high school, observing the fastest guy on our team's stride... he practically looked like he was tripping his overstride was so far into the negative. He also ran on his toes which I copied and learned that you could avoid shin splints by reducing foot-flop.
4. Minimize crossover... this is good advice... I think of it as "keep your hips square" but it's all the same shit. Was also extremely easy to figure out as it's true your legs get tired almost instantly from crossover.


Well said on the bounce thing, i don't think humans bounce very much at all. Especially from such a small height onto such a rigid surface. And if they bounced as he suggested - with no extra energy being added to the system - the bounce would decrease in vertical displacement until it stopped being a bounce. Just like a rubber ball on a hard surface - it loses bounce height because you lose energy to various things such as sound, heat, some lost as the ball changes shape on impact, etc.

You're only counting the down part of the bounce, the 4" fall. That's converting potential energy to kinetic energy. And that may seem like free kinetic energy, but it has to come from somewhere.

And that somewhere is the kinetic energy exerted by the runner pushing their body up. Extra energy used pushing the body up is energy lost for pushing the body forward.

I think you took a bad Physics course.

Their math was dubious at best (the delusional ramblings of a crazy person at worst), but the basic concept that reducing bounce conserves energy is absolutely true.>> ^rychan:

Bouncing, in fact, requires NO energy other than what is lost to friction. There's a question of just how efficiently the human skeletal system can rebound, but this video isn't getting in to that. They simply assume that an up and down motion is using a lot of energy. Physics 1 would teach you how wrong this is.

I felt they were trying to sell you something, the phoney acting by this alleged patient and this miracle doctor and all, getting rid of the microfiber while his shoulders blocking the camera etc etc. I am a bit skeptical about that part. But the first 2/3rd of the video concerning the running techniques seemed pretty plausible.

By the looks of it, it's a commercial built on already known facts about running technique to market a bullshit scar tissue reducing super magic wonder massage.

I agree that the physics and math are dubious, but the basic points seem to hold true. There are observable differences in the running techniques displayed here, the precise angles involved aren't exactly relevant. The points about stride length and point of foot contact are worth thinking about if you run, and as suggested, increased mobility of the major joints is an important factor in enabling you to run better.

As I noted, it is a commercial, and for a service I feel is dubiously marketed. I've experienced myself that proper massage can do wonders for mobility, practically immediately, but I'd expect serious proof to believe it can actually reduce scar tissue. If interested, look up "self-myofascial release" and "trigger point massage"

Your video, The importance of running technique, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 1 Badge!

To dismiss it after 2 minutes really isn't fair. It's a well-reasoned look at running technique. In any sport, the technique you use is a major part of performance. There are other less controllable factors--will, response to adversity, etc. that affect performance, but technique can be adjusted. For example, look at how similar all NBA All-stars shoot jumpshots.

I like the above comment about copying the best runner in school. That is exactly how I've learned technique for various sports I'm interested in. If you closely study people who do it well, you pick up subtle details that improve your own technique.

The bit about stride and its physical demands on the legs were particularly interesting. I am not a good runner, in fact, I HATE running for exercise (unless its secondary to the sport I'm playing), but I've come across a few articles in the past few years on this topic. The big focus of these articles is stride--heel-toe motion is a major cause of shin-splints and leg fatigue. Now you see those weird 'feet' running shoes that are designed to encourage less heel-to-toe motion.