We Evolved to Run But We're Doing It Wrong • Hacker News Board

Re: We Evolved to Run But We're Doing It Wrong

#241

Post by pg314 » Wed, Aug 02, 2017, 1:13 PM UTC

sjeohp wrote: post #237

pg314 wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As a lifelong athlete the on-your-toes style of barefoot running is the best way to run. If you cannot run on your toes you are not built to run. Nonsense. You can go tell Meb Keflezghi, winner of both the Boston and New York marathon, that he's not built to run. He's a prime example of a heel striker [1], though slightly less prominent in his later years. More generally, in [2], a study of elite level runners in t…

> Meb Keflezghi, winner of both the Boston and New York marathon, that he's not built to run. He's a prime example of a heel striker [1], though slightly less prominent in his later years. Trained hard and overcame the limitation for a time? I did say there are exceptions. > More generally, in [2], a study of elite level runners in the half marathon, found that at the 15km point the top 50 was comprised of 62% rear-f…

> I did say there are exceptions.

You said: There are rare heel-running sportspeople but running is not their competitive strength.

Do you agree that Meb Keflezghi's competitive strength is running?

The study you link to mentions multiple studies that say that 75-80% of elites are heel-striking. Would you call that rare?

Re: We Evolved to Run But We're Doing It Wrong

#242

Post by therealdrag0 » Thu, Aug 03, 2017, 12:42 AM UTC

austinjp wrote: post #77

So here's the deal. There is no absolute truth regarding running, footwear, and injuries. Anyone who says there is, well they're selling something. And that's the absolute truth.

I remember reading about a study that found correlation between footwear and injuries. Neither group had less injuries, but the types of injuries were different between the different shoe groups. So pick your poison I guess. (Sorry don't have source on me)

Re: We Evolved to Run But We're Doing It Wrong

#243

Post by bb611 » Thu, Aug 03, 2017, 2:08 AM UTC

zzalpha wrote: post #71

Fordrus wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having been to a run clinic, I can absolutely call bull on the claim "Footwear is irrelevant, here.". At least the run clinic I went to assured me multiple times that my impression that wearing "trainers" specifically and greatly increases the difficulty of running "correctly" by striking with the middle of your foot with slightly bent knee. The large heel of virtually all training shoes makes landing in the middle o…

Was the clinic run by a store selling overpriced Vibrams by any chance? I've run on regular runners for years. Nothing about them makes good technique harder. There may be less feedback you're doing it wrong (in the form of less pain and discomfort), but the designs themselves don't stop you from running properly. That said, it's not easy . It requires real self-awareness and a willingness to fight the urge to overru…

> overpriced Vibrams

A particularly odd criticism, since Vibrams cover the same price spectrum as more traditional running shoes, and both groups are essentially centered on selling shoes for just above $100 (and have been for more than a decade now).

Re: We Evolved to Run But We're Doing It Wrong

#244

Post by sjeohp » Thu, Aug 03, 2017, 6:13 AM UTC

pg314 wrote: post #241

sjeohp wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Meb Keflezghi, winner of both the Boston and New York marathon, that he's not built to run. He's a prime example of a heel striker [1], though slightly less prominent in his later years. Trained hard and overcame the limitation for a time? I did say there are exceptions. > More generally, in [2], a study of elite level runners in the half marathon, found that at the 15km point the top 50 was comprised of 62% rear-f…

> I did say there are exceptions. You said: There are rare heel-running sportspeople but running is not their competitive strength. Do you agree that Meb Keflezghi's competitive strength is running? The study you link to mentions multiple studies that say that 75-80% of elites are heel-striking. Would you call that rare?

No, I think his competitive strength is probably mental fortitude, but that's just speculation.

We're splitting hairs now.

The numbers tilt steeply towards toe-striking at the competitive end, because toe-striking has a higher technical floor and ceiling.

Re: We Evolved to Run But We're Doing It Wrong

#245

Post by austinjp » Thu, Aug 03, 2017, 12:13 PM UTC

therealdrag0 wrote: post #242

austinjp wrote: post #77

So here's the deal. There is no absolute truth regarding running, footwear, and injuries. Anyone who says there is, well they're selling something. And that's the absolute truth.

I remember reading about a study that found correlation between footwear and injuries. Neither group had less injuries, but the types of injuries were different between the different shoe groups. So pick your poison I guess. (Sorry don't have source on me)

Indeed. See Simspons's paradox, sub-grouping, and so on. There are deep problems in: the lessons we can learn from a population, vs how a specific individual will respond to a specific intervention; plus the filthy complexity of real life outside the lab.

Basically it boils down to this: we don't know where you as an individual lie on any of a huge number of bell-curves. Statistically, you're likely to be in the middle of all of them -- and yet it would be impossible to find an individual who actually is. So the more complex an intervention (and running is a very complex situation) the more trial and error you'll probably have to go through.

This is not a popular thing to say.

Re: We Evolved to Run But We're Doing It Wrong

#246

Post by sndean » Fri, Aug 11, 2017, 1:16 AM UTC

riku_iki wrote: post #79

sndean wrote: post #72

> he calls treadmills the "junk food of exercise. > he believes running barefoot is more natural—and less likely to result in injury. This has always bothered me, and, even on HN, it still bothers me. Too many experts. I ran track and XC (HS, DIII, then DI for a season), did 100+ miles/week, won a half marathon, etc. Reasonably successful without any injuries, over ~15 years. Even I would get constant advice from eve…

> I've been wearing this same model of Brooks shoe since I was 15. Which model exactly? :-)

I didn't see your comment for some reason.

Brooks Adrenaline GTS :)

Re: We Evolved to Run But We're Doing It Wrong

#247

Post by nthcolumn » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 11:46 PM UTC

prestonbriggs wrote: post #210

nthcolumn wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ultra-long distance dudes from Mexico the Tarahumara allegedly run like this. I also heard a story about some guy in Aussie who ran like that - won some crazy long distance race too, smashing the record. It is true that a man will beat a horse in a race if the man is allowed to pick the distance. How about that for evolution? The ultimate persistence hunter.

If it's hot (say, above 70 degree F), a well-trained man can out run a horse over a long distance. If it's cold, the horse will win. The horse's cooling is largely dependent its breathing which is constrained by its pace.

FEI Endurance horse run to 100 kms in over 15 hours. Ultra-marathons of 100 miles are won in just over 14hrs. In UAE, in Slovakia, in Wales. In all conditions, man beats horse over distance.