LINK: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fspor.2020.00102/full 

New research has shown that there were more similarities than differences between heel-strikers and those who land on the midfoot or forefoot. Specifically this was with World Championship marathon runners.

The study, available for free download from the open access journal, Frontiers in Sports and Active Living, analysed 28 men and 28 women competing in the marathon at the 2017 IAAF World Championship, held in London. The athletes analysed included six British and Irish runners.

The athletes were analysed using 3D techniques. Their running biomechanics were measured near the end of the loop on the last two laps. Half of the athletes analysed in each race were heel-strikers. The other half were midfoot or forefoot strikers.

No discernible differences

Surprisingly, there were no differences in step length, step frequency or speed between how each group landed. However, the midfoot and forefoot strikers did land with their foot a few centimetres closer to the body. In turn they relied more on distance covered during flight.

Nearly all of the technical differences between heel-strikers and midfoot-strikers unsurprisingly occurred at first contact with the ground, with the rest of the running movement virtually identical.

Men and women had similar running styles.  Men’s faster running speeds occurred mostly because they had longer steps. The main visual difference between the sexes was that men bent their knees more when swinging them forwards under the body in recovery.

Neither mid foot or heel striking preventing a slow down

As expected, nearly all athletes slowed from the second-last to the last lap.  Neither footstrike pattern helped to prevent this.

Heel-strikers are advised that changing to midfoot or forefoot-striking is unlikely to provide any improvements in marathon performance, and to work within their natural style to develop cardiovascular and muscular endurance.

What to take away?

Fast Running Coach Robbie Britton suggests “this isn’t information to change how you’re running, but just goes to show that if someone suggests they’ve “cracked the code”, it’s just not that simple.”

“We’re all really different and if you’re a forefoot, mid-foot or heel striker and you’re not injured then take confidence in your running  from this research.”

Interested readers can contact the authors for more information by emailing Dr Brian Hanley (b.hanley@leedsbeckett.ac.uk).

Want to run faster? For just £30 per month athletes are provided with a Final Surge plan for each day of the week, coaching advice from Robbie Britton and Tom Craggs, as well as access to the unique Fast Running Performance community.

If you would like more information on joining the project, click here. 

The post Heel striking makes little difference to marathon appeared first on Fast Running.

The research by Linda Schücker and Lucy Parrington at the University of Munster, Germany, looked at 12 different recreational runners. The aim of the study was to determine whether external or internal factors affected our running economy.

The findings could be interesting for anyone who tries to focus on form or breathing during their running.

Methodology

After a short warm-up, runners undertook three six minute efforts at 60% 1km best. It was a moderate effort level and then a three minute rest between efforts. The researchers intervened at 30 second intervals to affect the focus. Commands were given depending on whether the focus was to be internal or external. These included “pay attention to breathing in and out” and “pay attention to the push-off and the forward movement of your legs”.

Motion sensors monitored the runners’ movements. At two and four minutes physiological markers were noted in each interval.

The findings

Previous work established that an external focus, a video of a running track around a lake, was the same as a control condition so it was not included. The difference was clear between external (video) focus and internal (form and breathing). Those focusing on the video were more efficient.

When runners focused on both their form and their breathing they became less efficient runners. Those focusing on their breathing took on more oxygen, but at the cost of running economy.

Runners focusing on their form generally increased vertical oscillation, the distance off the ground they were between each footfall, and this led to an increase in running economy costs.

So we’re better off focusing on our surroundings or something ahead than on ourselves.

What should we focus on?

What does this mean to the average runner? Or an elite runner for that matter. Well, one aspect that might be interesting to investigate is whether this changes due to our levels of fatigue. Is a runner at the end of a marathon going to benefit more from focusing on their form or breathing than someone running shorter distances?

It is certainly food for thought. When we are running fresh we most likely will run in the optimal way for our body. When our conscious mind tries to intervene at this stage, it is less efficient than our subconscious ability to just run. Will tiredness and fatigue affect the results?

A previous study done by Schemer looked at athletes undertaking three by 10 minute efforts at 85% effort to see if the attentional focus also had an effect at higher intensities. They found that it did. At higher intensities, it is still better to have an external focus, although this study just looked at breathing as the internal focus, not form.

We already know that smiling will help performance. Do athletes now need to resist the urge to think about their breathing and form, as we have always been told in the past? Focus ahead, look around, but whatever you do, don’t forget to run fast.

Are you a fan of Fast Running? Then please support us. For as little as the price of a monthly magazine you can support Fast Running – and it only takes a minute. Thank you.

The post Thinking about your running movement makes you less efficient appeared first on Fast Running.