login
Chi Running (Page 2)
-
No new posts
|
 2008-10-21 3:20 PM in reply to: #1755357 |
Champion  6503    NOVA - Ironic for an Endurance Athlete |  Subject: RE: Chi RunningHow about adding a choice? WTF is Chi Running? |
| 2008-10-21 4:12 PM in reply to: #1757328 |
Elite 3650   Laurium, MI | Subject: RE: Chi Running It's very interesting to me that the majority of the people that seem to be worrying about foot strike are newer runners. Not sure if it's the natural tendency to think that there such thing as 'free speed' and that by simply altering your running style you get faster or what. I personally think of running style like driving a 5 speed. When you first learn to drive a 5 speed, you concentrate on just working the clutch and moving without killing it. You don't attempt to master the finer points of double clutching and short shifting your first time out. I think many who are worried about foot strike just need to spend some time actually running. High frequency, low mileage, and work your way up. If you pay attention and learn from your runs, you will find what works for you. I started life as a big heel stiker...not I'm more of a midfoot. I never focused on this change, it just happend somewhere in the middle of my marathon training. Running is hard; to get better at it, you have to run more. |
| 2008-10-21 4:12 PM in reply to: #1757162 |
Master 2381 Dallas, Texas | Subject: RE: Chi Running djluscher - 2008-10-21 2:21 PM zia_cyclist - 2008-10-21 10:35 AM I'm interested in the issue (or non-issue) of heel striking also. I tried the experiment you have mentioned and find that you absolutely CAN balance on your heels. If you are balanced on your heels then your center of gravity is over your feet; more precisely, it is directly over your heel. So your assertion that one cannot heel strike and have their feet contact under the center of gravity is incorrect. Scout7 - 2008-10-21 8:27 AM Fatdoggy - 2008-10-21 9:24 AM Scout7 - 2008-10-21 8:18 AM At its core, I don't have an issue with it. The basic message is "Run lots, mostly easy, sometimes hard when you're ready." Funny, this is the same message that Daniels, Pfitzinger, Glover, Lydiard, etc etc etc seem to echo. I disagree with the form recommendations. I disagree with the heel strike and cadence stuff; it's too specific to be universally applied. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your post and/or not remembering the book clearly. Are you saying Chi Running advocates a heel strike? That's not what I recall or got out of it...just the opposite. I think they advocate a more "neutral" foot strike. The idea of running in sand and making a perfect footprint each time or running on ice, using a kind of circular stride is what resonated with me. I disagree with the notion that the majority of people need to change their foot strike, and that heel strike is inherently bad. Many top marathoners heel strike. To say that one needs to change foot strike just because is, in my opinion, not always wise. I agree that the foot needs to land close to the center of gravity, but I disagree that a forefoot or midfoot strike is inherently better than a heel strike. Here's what puzzles me every time these foot strike discussions come up. How does one land with one's foot under the center of gravity and, at the same time, heel strike (that is, land on the heel of the foot). Seems to me that is mostly impossible. Stand up and try it. Heel strike will always be out in front of the center of gravity, correct? I'm not advocating one foot strike or the other, just that the mechanics of heel strike means it's out in front of the center of gravity. I didn't mean balance on your heels. Try running with a heel strike and have your heels strike the ground under your center of gravity. Maybe it can be done, but I couldn't. |
| 2008-10-21 5:27 PM in reply to: #1756666 |
Coach 10487 Boston, MA | Subject: RE: Chi Running zia_cyclist - 2008-10-21 11:35 AM incorrect. It is possible and done by many many elite runners, just watch any front field of a big marathon.Here's what puzzles me every time these foot strike discussions come up. How does one land with one's foot under the center of gravity and, at the same time, heel strike (that is, land on the heel of the foot). Seems to me that is mostly impossible. Stand up and try it. Heel strike will always be out in front of the center of gravity, correct? I'm not advocating one foot strike or the other, just that the mechanics of heel strike means it's out in front of the center of gravity. |
| 2008-10-21 5:30 PM in reply to: #1757186 |
Coach 10487 Boston, MA | Subject: RE: Chi Running MikeTheBear - 2008-10-21 2:28 PM Agree about the "chi" stuff, but the book was very useful. You may also want to read some stuff about POSE to get more of the "science" behind it. You don't need to buy a book on POSE because there's lots of free stuff at http://www.posetech.com/.IMO, POSE and Chi are very similar. The method works for me in terms of efficiency and decreased injuries. I'm currently stuck at a weight of 220 and I just completed a half marathon with no knee pain at all. you meant running economy and the only way to determine this is via testing in a lab. Unless you did this you have no idea whether you are more economical or not. |
| 2008-10-21 5:35 PM in reply to: #1755999 |
Coach 10487 Boston, MA | Subject: RE: Chi Running Scout7 - 2008-10-21 8:27 AM well said. except for mechanical issues, most run injuries are related to training load (doing too much, too fast, not enough) rather than foot strike. I disagree with the notion that the majority of people need to change their foot strike, and that heel strike is inherently bad. Many top marathoners heel strike. To say that one needs to change foot strike just because is, in my opinion, not always wise. I agree that the foot needs to land close to the center of gravity, but I disagree that a forefoot or midfoot strike is inherently better than a heel strike. for most beginners the best path to better/faster run just means run lots, most of the time easy, sometimes moderate or hard. repeat this as often as possible building up slowly and your running will be much better. |
| 2008-10-21 8:00 PM in reply to: #1755001 |
Master 1887 Loveland, Ohio | Subject: RE: Chi Running I definitely identify myself as a ChiRunner. I'm also a new runner. As a new runner who was experiencing very bad knee pain and really, really wanted to do a triathlon, I was very hungry to try out ChiRunning so I got the book from the library. I just loved it. Of course, I'm very OCD and analytical and I love trying to understand all of the little instructions and put them together to make them work in my body. I easily concede that is where some people can get frustrated and just toss the book. I don't begrudge them a bit and I don't get offended if they don't like it. You'll either love it or think it's a nice theory but just not for you. I had knee pain before I started running, but running exacerbated the pain. I've been running this way since April and I have no knee pain during or after my runs. I still deal with my regular 'ol knee pain, but the running does not add to it. The book argues against landing on your heel and encourages a midfoot strike. The author likens it to putting on brakes and why would you press on the brakes when you're trying to go fast? I actually posted about my experience on my blog the other day if you want to check it out. Thanks for listening... http://whyidotris.blogspot.com/2008/10/whats-chi-and-why-is-it-running.html |
| 2008-10-21 9:32 PM in reply to: #1757333 |
Expert 986 Michiana | Subject: RE: Chi Running pga_mike - 2008-10-21 4:20 PM How about adding a choice? WTF is Chi Running? X2. I think its some kind of tea, but have no idea what it has to do with running... For the record. Real men don't drink tea, get messages, shave their legs or need a book to tell them how to run. |
|
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK