The Official Thread for Runners

[Moliere]

I hate having to stop during a run, whether it is to adjust something (headphones) or just for traffic lights/street crossings. I don't know why, but I'm somewhat tied to my times and splits, in a somewhat unhealthy way.

So this morning I ran 4 miles and at about 3.9 miles I ran right past a guy that was lying in the middle of the sidewalk - sidewalk being a path that runs along the bayou near downtown. This part of town has some homeless people around, but this was the first time I'd seen one lying on the sidewalk. I was concerned he wasn't just sleeping but I wanted a good split time so I just went running right past the guy. After about 50 feet my conscious got the better of me and I turned around and walked back to check on him. After waking him up and realizing he was physically okay (for which he thanked me for my concern) I finished the last couple hundred feet of the run. I may have gotten a slow split on that last mile, but my conscious feels better.

[Eddie]

I hate having to stop during a run, whether it is to adjust something (headphones) or just for traffic lights/street crossings. I don't know why, but I'm somewhat tied to my times and splits, in a somewhat unhealthy way...

I know the feeling. Part of the reason I like running early is because I'm much less likely to come across someone I know who wants to chat.

I am NOT a type A personality. But when it comes to running I get very very focused. I have a certain pace or distance I want to run, and I don't want to be interrupted or I feel like I didn't "really" do that pace or distance due to stopping in between.

I have folks sometimes talk about running with me, and while I won't turn them down - I don't necessarily follow up with them and invite them to come along. I don't want to have them interfere with my workout goals - whether that is for pace/intervals, hills, distance, etc. Most of the time I just have to say that I begin most of my runs between 5:30-6am and they'll tell me never mind.

Probably the biggest lesson I need to learn is that I'll usually just push through any pain in order to finish the run I had planned. Today my calf was starting to feel a little sore - worrying me about pulling it. I managed to drop my pace to baby it a little, and had planned to maybe cut a mile off my run - but ended up doing the full distance anyway. Probably not the smartest thing ever.

[OhioBlue]

If you'll all allow a little reflection on lessons learned by a relatively novice runner (2 years this past May):

A little over a year ago I was sucked into the idea that forefoot/midfoot striking (not to mention shoes with lower heel-toe drop ratio, minimalist in features, etc etc) was going to make me a better runner. I started slowly integrating a forefoot strike and bought a couple pairs of Kinvaras. I did it all by the book, carefully and slowly, and convinced myself that I was becoming a better runner for it.

For most of that year I ended up battling chronic tibial aches and constantly fighting off full-blown MTSS (shin splints). I didn't figure it out until I studied my log more carefully. I didn't even think it was a factor for a long time...how could it be? A more natural footstrike is supposed to prevent injury, not cause it. I was convinced it was something else, but a few months later, seeing the timing and onset of shin pain correlated in my log so clearly with my venture into a new footstrike was too significant to ignore. And in a lot of my reading, I'm seeing this issue come up quite a bit with others as well (in addition to a rise in metatarsal stress fractures with forefoot/barefoot converts). It's validating, but frustrating. Here's a brief sampling of a recent study examining stress on the tibia from forefoot/midfoot landing: http://www.podiatry-arena.com/podiat...ad.php?t=80007

I have now gone back to what was my natural footstrike, a gentle heel contact followed by most of my weight loading on the midfoot. It varies based on how fast I'm running and how tired I am. A freeze-frame might reveal my foot slightly dorsiflexed at impact (toes slightly up) and a runner like myself 12 months ago might launch into all kinds of evangelism about how I was running less efficiently and making myself prone to knee/hip injuries. I would have looked down on my form as inferior and might have spat out the word 'heelstriker' the same I way I say 'Ute fan.'

I have kept some of what I learned about form during that year--namely, not overstriding (landing close to underneath my hips instead of with an extended leg way out front), increasing my cadence some in the process, and working for a soft, springy, quiet landing. I do all these pretty well. But I'm no longer going to force any sort of change in the way my foot meets the ground, and I'm going to be much more cautious in the way I talk about it with others. To the extent that a gentle shift in footstrike works for you, by all means go for it. But be careful with what you read out there--sometimes from very credible-seeming sources who are overhyping or overgeneralizing without a critical mass of research data yet--and trust your body a little bit.

It's been a frustrating year--I just barely had my first 20+ mile week in several months, and I had to take 3 months off at one point. That said, I have still progressed in the sport, I'm learning, and my times are improving. I ran a 6:41/mi pace in my last 5k and took home a trophy, and am close to my goal of sub-20. Still, if I could go back to the day I thought I'd switch up my footstrike and have someone offer the caution I'm offering right now, I don't doubt I'd be even further along.

happy running!

[Moliere]

If you'll all allow a little reflection on lessons learned by a relatively novice runner (2 years this past May):

A little over a year ago I was sucked into the idea that forefoot/midfoot striking (not to mention shoes with lower heel-toe drop ratio, minimalist in features, etc etc) was going to make me a better runner. I started slowly integrating a forefoot strike and bought a couple pairs of Kinvaras. I did it all by the book, carefully and slowly, and convinced myself that I was becoming a better runner for it.

For most of that year I ended up battling chronic tibial aches and constantly fighting off full-blown MTSS (shin splints). I didn't figure it out until I studied my log more carefully. I didn't even think it was a factor for a long time...how could it be? A more natural footstrike is supposed to prevent injury, not cause it. I was convinced it was something else, but a few months later, seeing the timing and onset of shin pain correlated in my log so clearly with my venture into a new footstrike was too significant to ignore. And in a lot of my reading, I'm seeing this issue come up quite a bit with others as well (in addition to a rise in metatarsal stress fractures with forefoot/barefoot converts). It's validating, but frustrating. Here's a brief sampling of a recent study examining stress on the tibia from forefoot/midfoot landing: http://www.podiatry-arena.com/podiat...ad.php?t=80007

I have now gone back to what was my natural footstrike, a gentle heel contact followed by most of my weight loading on the midfoot. It varies based on how fast I'm running and how tired I am. A freeze-frame might reveal my foot slightly dorsiflexed at impact (toes slightly up) and a runner like myself 12 months ago might launch into all kinds of evangelism about how I was running less efficiently and making myself prone to knee/hip injuries. I would have looked down on my form as inferior and might have spat out the word 'heelstriker' the same I way I say 'Ute fan.'

I have kept some of what I learned about form during that year--namely, not overstriding (landing close to underneath my hips instead of with an extended leg way out front), increasing my cadence some in the process, and working for a soft, springy, quiet landing. I do all these pretty well. But I'm no longer going to force any sort of change in the way my foot meets the ground, and I'm going to be much more cautious in the way I talk about it with others. To the extent that a gentle shift in footstrike works for you, by all means go for it. But be careful with what you read out there--sometimes from very credible-seeming sources who are overhyping or overgeneralizing without a critical mass of research data yet--and trust your body a little bit.

It's been a frustrating year--I just barely had my first 20+ mile week in several months, and I had to take 3 months off at one point. That said, I have still progressed in the sport, I'm learning, and my times are improving. I ran a 6:41/mi pace in my last 5k and took home a trophy, and am close to my goal of sub-20. Still, if I could go back to the day I thought I'd switch up my footstrike and have someone offer the caution I'm offering right now, I don't doubt I'd be even further along.

happy running!

Good thoughts/cautions and thanks for posting. I've followed a similar pattern except that my change was not for performance. In fact, I would have changed even if it slowed me down. My change was because I kept getting injured. I won't go back to the heel strike as I'm happy with my current midfoot strike that I've developed. I've had multiple stress fractures while heel striking and the change in strike (and soem other changes similar to the ones you mention) have so far allowed me to get up to 13-15 miles per week. I'll stay at this level at least until the heat drops a bit so then I'll find out if I can stay injury free.

On the tibial pain, I get that from time to time but not much. Maybe I don't have issues because I'm not consistently over 5 miles per run yet, but I'd take some sore muscles over a break in my tibia any day.

I run in Nike Frees and I midfoot strike in them. Once a week I run 3-4 miles in Vibrams and I tend to do more of a forefoot strike in those shoes. I doubt I'll ever try anything over 4 miles in the Vibrams, but running every once in a while in them helps me to keep my changed form. I'm also faster in the Vibrams (might be mental but they are also crazy light) and will likely use them in my next 5K.

[Topper]

If you'll all allow a little reflection on lessons learned by a relatively novice runner (2 years this past May):

A little over a year ago I was sucked into the idea that forefoot/midfoot striking (not to mention shoes with lower heel-toe drop ratio, minimalist in features, etc etc) was going to make me a better runner. I started slowly integrating a forefoot strike and bought a couple pairs of Kinvaras. I did it all by the book, carefully and slowly, and convinced myself that I was becoming a better runner for it.

For most of that year I ended up battling chronic tibial aches and constantly fighting off full-blown MTSS (shin splints). I didn't figure it out until I studied my log more carefully. I didn't even think it was a factor for a long time...how could it be? A more natural footstrike is supposed to prevent injury, not cause it. I was convinced it was something else, but a few months later, seeing the timing and onset of shin pain correlated in my log so clearly with my venture into a new footstrike was too significant to ignore. And in a lot of my reading, I'm seeing this issue come up quite a bit with others as well (in addition to a rise in metatarsal stress fractures with forefoot/barefoot converts). It's validating, but frustrating. Here's a brief sampling of a recent study examining stress on the tibia from forefoot/midfoot landing: http://www.podiatry-arena.com/podiat...ad.php?t=80007

I have now gone back to what was my natural footstrike, a gentle heel contact followed by most of my weight loading on the midfoot. It varies based on how fast I'm running and how tired I am. A freeze-frame might reveal my foot slightly dorsiflexed at impact (toes slightly up) and a runner like myself 12 months ago might launch into all kinds of evangelism about how I was running less efficiently and making myself prone to knee/hip injuries. I would have looked down on my form as inferior and might have spat out the word 'heelstriker' the same I way I say 'Ute fan.'

I have kept some of what I learned about form during that year--namely, not overstriding (landing close to underneath my hips instead of with an extended leg way out front), increasing my cadence some in the process, and working for a soft, springy, quiet landing. I do all these pretty well. But I'm no longer going to force any sort of change in the way my foot meets the ground, and I'm going to be much more cautious in the way I talk about it with others. To the extent that a gentle shift in footstrike works for you, by all means go for it. But be careful with what you read out there--sometimes from very credible-seeming sources who are overhyping or overgeneralizing without a critical mass of research data yet--and trust your body a little bit.

It's been a frustrating year--I just barely had my first 20+ mile week in several months, and I had to take 3 months off at one point. That said, I have still progressed in the sport, I'm learning, and my times are improving. I ran a 6:41/mi pace in my last 5k and took home a trophy, and am close to my goal of sub-20. Still, if I could go back to the day I thought I'd switch up my footstrike and have someone offer the caution I'm offering right now, I don't doubt I'd be even further along.

happy running!

These are good observations as I have made many of the same mistakes, suffered the normal range of running injuries, and have not focused upon foot positioning but rather work on soft landing, working against over-striding and cadence.

Some people go for those glovelike shoes, which I have not tried, but one runner I know swears by them. I reverted to Asics Kayano without injured after floating around to others. The Kayano is a heavy shoe but it provides lots of support for 300 to 400 miles. Do what works.

[ERCougar]

I've tried to emphasize this every time I've talked about "minimalist" running, but maybe not successfully. I think people make a mistake when they emphasize midfoot or forefoot striking. I remember either SB or BG mentioning that when people try to forefoot strike, they often just end up with the same stride, but up on their toes, which is obviously not a good efficient motion. The key is to view a heelstrike as a POSSIBLE symptom of a problematic stride, i.e. your foot is coming down in front of your hips. Minimalist shoes can be helpful in that they can help you to get a better feel for that slight "braking" interaction that can sneak into your stride. Besides slowing you down and making your stride inefficient, it also increases the forces on your knees, hips, and back. But that braking interaction is not the root--it's a sign of the root, which is much more of a front-back balance or overstriding problem than anything else.

The best tips I've followed and passed on to others is to keep a slight forward lean, a straight line from head to hips to foot, a fully straight and extended spine, and the image of trying to push back on the ground like you're running on a treadmill. Oh, and bend your knees--it's very difficult to overstride or brake with bent knees.

[Pheidippides]

These are good observations as I have made many of the same mistakes, suffered the normal range of running injuries, and have not focused upon foot positioning but rather work on soft landing, working against over-striding and cadence.

Some people go for those glovelike shoes, which I have not tried, but one runner I know swears by them. I reverted to Asics Kayano without injured after floating around to others. The Kayano is a heavy shoe but it provides lots of support for 300 to 400 miles. Do what works.

All of my reading and experience says these three things are the biggies. Some of the most ardent supporters of midfoot-forefoot have acknowledged they still heel strike sometimes but don't worry about it too much if those three are in place. And you can certainly look at Meb, who is a heel striker.

[OhioBlue]

Good thoughts/cautions and thanks for posting. I've followed a similar pattern except that my change was not for performance. In fact, I would have changed even if it slowed me down. My change was because I kept getting injured. I won't go back to the heel strike as I'm happy with my current midfoot strike that I've developed. I've had multiple stress fractures while heel striking and the change in strike (and soem other changes similar to the ones you mention) have so far allowed me to get up to 13-15 miles per week. I'll stay at this level at least until the heat drops a bit so then I'll find out if I can stay injury free.

On the tibial pain, I get that from time to time but not much. Maybe I don't have issues because I'm not consistently over 5 miles per run yet, but I'd take some sore muscles over a break in my tibia any day.

I run in Nike Frees and I midfoot strike in them. Once a week I run 3-4 miles in Vibrams and I tend to do more of a forefoot strike in those shoes. I doubt I'll ever try anything over 4 miles in the Vibrams, but running every once in a while in them helps me to keep my changed form. I'm also faster in the Vibrams (might be mental but they are also crazy light) and will likely use them in my next 5K.

Good thoughts. And you are an example of why for some, easing into a different way of running can be a very good thing. I've just learned that it's not 'one size fits all' when it comes to this stuff. The very thing that has helped you was the thing that hurt me.

BTW I have followed your running with interest for a while now, and have been rooting for you (not always super-vocally on the forum, but all the same). I know those two SFXs were hell for you and I'm excited that you're making progress pain-free, you deserve it.

[OhioBlue]

I've tried to emphasize this every time I've talked about "minimalist" running, but maybe not successfully. I think people make a mistake when they emphasize midfoot or forefoot striking. I remember either SB or BG mentioning that when people try to forefoot strike, they often just end up with the same stride, but up on their toes, which is obviously not a good efficient motion. The key is to view a heelstrike as a POSSIBLE symptom of a problematic stride, i.e. your foot is coming down in front of your hips. Minimalist shoes can be helpful in that they can help you to get a better feel for that slight "braking" interaction that can sneak into your stride. Besides slowing you down and making your stride inefficient, it also increases the forces on your knees, hips, and back. But that braking interaction is not the root--it's a sign of the root, which is much more of a front-back balance or overstriding problem than anything else.

The best tips I've followed and passed on to others is to keep a slight forward lean, a straight line from head to hips to foot, a fully straight and extended spine, and the image of trying to push back on the ground like you're running on a treadmill. Oh, and bend your knees--it's very difficult to overstride or brake with bent knees.

Yep. You can easily find two runners, both of whom make their initial contact with the ground with their heels, who have vastly different form, impact forces, and injury potential.

[Moliere]

Good thoughts. And you are an example of why for some, easing into a different way of running can be a very good thing. I've just learned that it's not 'one size fits all' when it comes to this stuff. The very thing that has helped you was the thing that hurt me.

BTW I have followed your running with interest for a while now, and have been rooting for you (not always super-vocally on the forum, but all the same). I know those two SFXs were hell for you and I'm excited that you're making progress pain-free, you deserve it.

Thanks! I sincerely appreciate that. I did 4 miles this morning @ 8:18 pace (includes checking on the sleeping homeless man ), all pain free and I feel great. There is a local 5K coming up in early September and I think I'm going to run in it with MJ. With her SIL living with us we can probably both get our early and run in it together. I want to see if I can go below 23:30 (my PR is 24:16 and that was basically the last 3.1 of a 4 mile training run). My ultimate goals now are to run a marathon and break 22 minutes in a 5K.

I'll say that the advice in this forum on changing strides (Niku posted a bit and gave me some good links and others have been very helpful) really helped. I was under the impression I just needed to land on my toes, but after doing some research I also upped my cadence and changed my posture just like others have said.

[Joe Public]

I may have gotten a slow split on that last mile, but my conscious [sic] feels better.

That's how I looked at it this weekend when I was 15 miles into an 18-miler and an old lady in a full-size, out-of-gas pick-up called me over to push it a few blocks to the next parking area.

[OhioBlue]

20:10 in my 5k today felt good, but would've felt much better had the course actually been a full 3.1. All the 5ks I've run lately have been long (enough to throw off the times), this is the first I've run that was short. Still, good enough for 13th overall, 1st in AG...a good day's work.

[Coach McGuirk]

20:10 in my 5k today felt good, but would've felt much better had the course actually been a full 3.1. All the 5ks I've run lately have been long (enough to throw off the times), this is the first I've run that was short. Still, good enough for 13th overall, 1st in AG...a good day's work.

Nice work OB. I have yet to compete in a race that is short.

[Moliere]

20:10 in my 5k today felt good, but would've felt much better had the course actually been a full 3.1. All the 5ks I've run lately have been long (enough to throw off the times), this is the first I've run that was short. Still, good enough for 13th overall, 1st in AG...a good day's work.

That's great!

I did 5.5 miles this morning. It sucks to run the Monday after fast Sunday but I pushed through and had an average pace of 8:29/mile, which felt great. I was covered in sweat as the temp was around 82 degrees with high humidity and I walked into my office building and got the chills as the air conditioning and sweating made it feel like 50 degrees inside the building.

[TexTechCoug]

3.12 miles in 25:40, only 7:40 off my PR. Granted that was 17 years and 60 pounds ago. Ran the lat mile in 7:30. You gotta start somewhere.