Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We Evolved to Run But We're Doing It Wrong

news.nationalgeographic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 247 posts

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

#31

Post by lardo »

WalterSear wrote: post #18
rosser wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right. Thanks. Pushing off with the heel is actually specifically (if indirectly) part of what I'm working on with the bodyworker I mentioned, even. I really should have completed the thought. Thanks for catching and clarifying that.

Oh, another thing: $20 water shoes last only slightly less long than $100+ speciality 'barefoot' running shoes. :) https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002Z7EOK8/ref=oh_aui_deta...

Why not make your own? ^_^ http://barefootted.com/sandals.pdf

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

#32

Post by e12e »

WalterSear wrote: post #24
e12e wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have some more information on this? Are you talking about running on paved road, or in (rough) terrain? I admit I have some difficulty visualizing how you combine landing on the ball of your foot with pushing off with the heel (so I at least agree that it doesn't feel natural :-).

I'm definitely no expert, I'm afraid. Perhaps others can chime in. But notice how, in this gif, the maximum force is applied just as the heel starts to lift: https://i.makeagif.com/media/3-05-2014/hQcYHP.gif I think it's hard to imagine in part because it involves such a radical shift in the center of gravity, bringing the body over the knee, so the foot can act as a springy lever, minimizing the impact of your heel…

Thanks, that makes a lot more sense.

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

#33

Post by jackfoxy »

rosser wrote: post #9

The Fine Article doesn't really go into how we're doing it wrong, beyond a passing mention of barefoot running, and some dissing of treadmills (which is hyperbolic and orthogonal to reality; you can run "correctly" or "badly" on a treadmill or on the street or trail). I used to run a bit. Did an informal "couch to 5k" over a couple of months, before I'd even discovered that was a thing. The single most effective thin…

I never felt very good about running until I got Vibrams in my early 50s. They have steadily improved the shoe, but I think it could stand to have some more shock absorption in the ball of the foot area, where you land. The other unnatural thing we do is run on concrete and tarmac pavement. We also did not evolve to run on such hard surfaces for such great lengths. There are not too many places in the world where you can run on solid granite for long distances, which is the natural equivalent of modern pavement.

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

#35

Post by Asooka »

rosser wrote: post #9

The Fine Article doesn't really go into how we're doing it wrong, beyond a passing mention of barefoot running, and some dissing of treadmills (which is hyperbolic and orthogonal to reality; you can run "correctly" or "badly" on a treadmill or on the street or trail). I used to run a bit. Did an informal "couch to 5k" over a couple of months, before I'd even discovered that was a thing. The single most effective thin…

Don't you lose about 1/3rd of your stride when you strive to land on the front of your foot as opposed to the heel? Doing heel first lets me put my leg way in front of me as I land on it, then roll over it and push forward once my foot is directly under my body, like a spring. This means longer, more powerful strides. To land on the front of the foot, my leg would have to be very close to my body, meaning shorter, quicker strides. I tried doing this style of running - landing on the front of my foot as opposed to the heel, but I found myself having to use strides way shorter than what I'm used to. Is this correct, i.e. are the strides you have to use noticeably shorter and I would just have to get used to it if I want to do it that way?

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

#36

Post by icantdrive55 »

will_brown wrote: post #23

Another recently published running book is about "The Raven" a streak runner running 8 miles everyday for over 42 years. 125,000 miles; 5x around the earth; to the moon and back. I'm lucky enough to live in Miami and run with him sometimes. When he started the streak he went barefoot and later began wearing shoes, if you can call them that, his favorite are NB with about 2,500 miles on them that seem to have more hol…

This guy is interesting. Interesting on so many levels. His singing voice really surprised me. If the world was fair, he would have been a monetarily successful country singer. He's already a success in life, and that's probably more important.

Then again, he might have never picked up running, if found too much success singing? Someone stole one of his songs, and sold it to Walen Jennings. The greed/unethical behavior of certain monetarily "successful" people disgusts me.

Those shoes should end the footware debate. Just buy what feels right, and use them until they wear out. (There's a picture of him standing next to his pile of worn out shoes. Yes--he admits to being a bit of a horder. I get it. I'm that way with books. Just can't get rid of them, but might be forced too soon.

Do I intuitively feel running eight miles a day is healthy. I don't know. It looks like his heart is taking a beating. Supposedly, his arteries are clear.

Got off topic a bit. I just kinda related to this guy's life.

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

#37

Post by peterwwillis »

WalterSear wrote: post #11
rosser wrote: post #9

The Fine Article doesn't really go into how we're doing it wrong, beyond a passing mention of barefoot running, and some dissing of treadmills (which is hyperbolic and orthogonal to reality; you can run "correctly" or "badly" on a treadmill or on the street or trail). I used to run a bit. Did an informal "couch to 5k" over a couple of months, before I'd even discovered that was a thing. The single most effective thin…

>When you run barefoot, or in a pair of ultra-light "shoes" like Vibrams, you learn very quickly not to do that, or you stop running. The "right" way is to land on the ball of the foot, with the knee slightly bent. The knee bends further to dissipate the force of the landing. This is how evolution "meant" for us to do it. There's more to it than that. Please make sure that you are pushing off with your heel. Many peo…

Or, don't push off with your heel, if that's more natural to you and is what your body is conditioned for.

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

#38

Post by mlinksva »

vinay427 wrote: post #19
mlinksva wrote: post #8

I wish the interview was a bit more substantial, but I like the exercise should be free/gyms are bad (exaggeration mine) idea. Gyms are like skyways (eg in Minneapolis), or like mass transit stations surrounded by parking: they detract from the vibrancy of street life and subvert their purpose.

By that logic, tennis courts, swimming pools, and other recreational facilities do the same. Not everyone uses a gym to run on a treadmill, or even to do cardio-based exercises.

They do, to some small extent. I'm not claiming that indoor gyms should not exist at all or that on should never ever drive to one, nor that there is never a case for a skyway or parking at a transit station (though parking should never ever be gratis). Only that the costs exist and should be considered.

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

#39

Post by glibgil »

Asooka wrote: post #35
rosser wrote: post #9

The Fine Article doesn't really go into how we're doing it wrong, beyond a passing mention of barefoot running, and some dissing of treadmills (which is hyperbolic and orthogonal to reality; you can run "correctly" or "badly" on a treadmill or on the street or trail). I used to run a bit. Did an informal "couch to 5k" over a couple of months, before I'd even discovered that was a thing. The single most effective thin…

Don't you lose about 1/3rd of your stride when you strive to land on the front of your foot as opposed to the heel? Doing heel first lets me put my leg way in front of me as I land on it, then roll over it and push forward once my foot is directly under my body, like a spring. This means longer, more powerful strides. To land on the front of the foot, my leg would have to be very close to my body, meaning shorter, qu…

Yes, the stride will be shorter, but you get used to it. You can still produce a longer stride by "kicking" out as you lift off and trying to raise your knees up as high as possible

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

#40

Post by brahmwg »

Asooka wrote: post #35
rosser wrote: post #9

The Fine Article doesn't really go into how we're doing it wrong, beyond a passing mention of barefoot running, and some dissing of treadmills (which is hyperbolic and orthogonal to reality; you can run "correctly" or "badly" on a treadmill or on the street or trail). I used to run a bit. Did an informal "couch to 5k" over a couple of months, before I'd even discovered that was a thing. The single most effective thin…

Don't you lose about 1/3rd of your stride when you strive to land on the front of your foot as opposed to the heel? Doing heel first lets me put my leg way in front of me as I land on it, then roll over it and push forward once my foot is directly under my body, like a spring. This means longer, more powerful strides. To land on the front of the foot, my leg would have to be very close to my body, meaning shorter, qu…

Not a kinesiologist, but I think running landing on the ball of the foot will be more energy efficient, recycling momentum more effectively than heel-first landing. Eventually, you'll get faster and better at running using the ball of foot landing, at least that's what happened anecdotally for me. At first it was a difficult transition, but long term more efficient and effective.
Post reply on HN