Running Technique Video Gliders vs. Gazelles
This is a great video looking at the difference between Gliders vs. Gazelles with some interesting things to think about when it comes to perfecting your running style. THe first 15 minutes shows pro triathletes and the different styles and after that he gets into the physics of Gliding vs. Gazelling.
Let me know your thoughts!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJWPwVF30yo&feature=em-subs_digest-vrecs
0
Comments
Ya this video analysis really makes you rethink your cadence and finding that optimal stride for your personal biomechanics and efficiency. Pretty crazy that Faris runs sub 3hrs with a cadence of 80...
OK I've watched the video and read Todd's blog, looked at his chart of cadence/pace. Reminds me of a thread here last year, where we had a prolonged but civil disagreement about the efficacy of running with a slower cadence/longer stride vs higher cadence/shorter stride in the IM marathon. I argued strenuously that there was much less energy cost in trying to gain speed by increasing cadence as opposed to increasing stride length. These videos show why that is so. Look carefully at how much work against gravity Carfrae is doing compared to Wellington. They're both going about the same speed, but Chrissie is not working as hard, because it is far easier to move your leg forward a few times per minute faster than it is to raise your whole body weight a few inches higher with each stride.
This is my current area of emphasis, trying to move from a cadence of 86 up to 92-4 when I am running an IM marathon. If each step is 3 feet long, and I do 7 more of them each minute, and I'm going for 4 hours (240 minutes), I will go 21 feet more each minute, or 5040 feet farther in four hours. That's about a mile further in the same time, or about 9-10 minutes faster for the marathon. Worth considering. And once considered, worth training and practicing for. Even getting up to 89 would gain me four minutes.
I think a more interesting video than a bunch of pros with near perfect form of different styles would be to have video analysis of different AG'ers taken around mile 20 of the marathon. This could compare several ~10hr finishers to several ~11hrs finishers to 12's, 13's, 14's, 15's... To see if there's a way a 13 hr finisher can improve fatigued form to become a 12 hr finisher. Comparing a pro's form from a 2:48 IM Mary to a another with a 2:53 IM Mary just doesn't look anything like what I see around me when I'm in the last hour or two of my IM Mary surrounded by other ~11hr finishers (people running anywhere from a 3:45-4:45 Mary)
A very timely topic for me as I actually had a running analysis on a treadmill just this morning. At Z1 and Z2 pace my cadence was 82, but @ Z4 pace it went up 85. The PT who did the analysis (specializes in runners and is a marathoner herself) said that my stride overall looked really good except that my left foot splayed out a little but no big deal. The only real comment was that my cadence was a little low. She said my stride actually looked better at the faster pace and cadence. Then she set up a metronome @ 90 and asked me to match its beat...WOW did that feel fast. But I felt light on my feet, like I was barely touching the ground. Once I got use to it, the effort felt easy too. So it is clearly something I'm going to work on, plus improve my flexibility. She is going to email the video...can't wait to see it.
I like Al's math on the impact on an IM marathon time of a faster cadence..
And 2x on John W's suggestion about filming 13-16 hour finishers @ mile 20. I bet you'll see some pretty awkward, ugly strides. But God bless them; they're about to finish an event that 99% or more of the population can't/won't. Who cares what their stride looks like if they beat 17 hours and Mike Reilly calls their name.
@ suhki - he is on the taller side so it somewhat makes sense.....
@ al - I wouldn't say she is lifting her entire body weight, if that was the case she would have a whole of vertical movement, but she doesn't. that fact that she leaning forward means that gravity is playing a role in her stride. next time you are out working on your cadence, trying leaning forward a bit, try to keep your cadence at 90, lift your legs a little higher and see how much faster you will go - with no additional effort.
@ John W. - one of Jack Daniel's main focal points is easy relaxed running, with a focus on form. once your cadence start dropping focus your form, lean a little forward and try to focus on lifting your feet of the ground rather than pushing off - that should keep your cadence up. And it is hard to ingrain the new cadence by using the foot pod, you should really trying the metronome . it will give you something to shoot for when you start slowing down.........
@ John - I noticed the same.........
@John - hear you on the energy - it's unclear to me what the physiological cost of the faster turnover vs. gazelle-like jump is.
That said, my desire to minimize injury risk has me focused on faster turnover vs. stride-length.
I want to be racing in twenty years.
It is clear that Faris Al-Sultan has a different set of goals than I have.
Side note - it is fun - and educational - to watch great runners run.
Sukhi - great video - thanks for sharing.
Great discussion team!
@Al, without seeing a randomized clinical trial, I'd have to agree with you that it appears that it would be a much higher energy cost being a gazelle.
Yet @JK I also think there's some truth to what you're saying,
I believe the answer is truly grey, not black or white. My area of expertise is looking at how the NS (nervous system) and what's occurring at the NMJ (neuromuscular junction). I believe that if one is built to be more like a gazelle it's a function of the sequence and firing of the NS & NMJ. Stepping out of ones "normal" may be the thing that requires more metabolic energy. The same can be said for the "natural" glider. I know the history of Chrissie because I read her book... she's a gifted athlete that hasn't been a runner nor triathlete for her entire life like most of her competitors. I'd say that most of us AG's will likely fall in the glider group. Is that why Chrissie's a glider???
@JW I've developed into a decent runner over the past several years, even though I never ran growing up and I'm noticing my body shift from a classic glider into a gazelle. When I hit my Z1 I'm closer to being a glider, as I move to intervals up to Z4-5 I see the gazelle come out. For me, I'm not trying to make my body be one or the other, I'm just trying to be calm and biomechanically efficient. I have some lofty run goals for 2013 so I personally believe that I need to find flow and grace for all my run training as that's the NS & NMJ pattern that I will fall into the deeper I get into 26.2. If I'm always using force, effort and fighting my pace and mechanics that's what I believe will show up on race day. I would be patient with yourself and try to find that "sweet spot" for yourself too, I believe it's the only way it will be sustained for 26.2.
Thanks for everyones opinion on this... makes me rethink, critique and in the end become a better me!
Great discussion team!
@Al, without seeing a randomized clinical trial, I'd have to agree with you that it appears that it would be a much higher energy cost being a gazelle.
Yet @JK I also think there's some truth to what you're saying,
I believe the answer is truly grey, not black or white. My area of expertise is looking at how the NS (nervous system) and what's occurring at the NMJ (neuromuscular junction). I believe that if one is built to be more like a gazelle it's a function of the sequence and firing of the NS & NMJ. Stepping out of ones "normal" may be the thing that requires more metabolic energy. The same can be said for the "natural" glider. I know the history of Chrissie because I read her book... she's a gifted athlete that hasn't been a runner nor triathlete for her entire life like most of her competitors. I'd say that most of us AG's will likely fall in the glider group. Is that why Chrissie's a glider???
@JW I've developed into a decent runner over the past several years, even though I never ran growing up and I'm noticing my body shift from a classic glider into a gazelle. When I hit my Z1 I'm closer to being a glider, as I move to intervals up to Z4-5 I see the gazelle come out. For me, I'm not trying to make my body be one or the other, I'm just trying to be calm and biomechanically efficient. I have some lofty run goals for 2013 so I personally believe that I need to find flow and grace for all my run training as that's the NS & NMJ pattern that I will fall into the deeper I get into 26.2. If I'm always using force, effort and fighting my pace and mechanics that's what I believe will show up on race day. I would be patient with yourself and try to find that "sweet spot" for yourself too, I believe it's the only way it will be sustained for 26.2.
Thanks for everyones opinion on this... makes me rethink, critique and in the end become a better me!
Great discussion team!
@Al, without seeing a randomized clinical trial, I'd have to agree with you that it appears that it would be a much higher energy cost being a gazelle.
Yet @JK I also think there's some truth to what you're saying,
I believe the answer is truly grey, not black or white. My area of expertise is looking at how the NS (nervous system) and what's occurring at the NMJ (neuromuscular junction). I believe that if one is built to be more like a gazelle it's a function of the sequence and firing of the NS & NMJ. Stepping out of ones "normal" may be the thing that requires more metabolic energy. The same can be said for the "natural" glider. I know the history of Chrissie because I read her book... she's a gifted athlete that hasn't been a runner nor triathlete for her entire life like most of her competitors. I'd say that most of us AG's will likely fall in the glider group. Is that why Chrissie's a glider???
@JW I've developed into a decent runner over the past several years, even though I never ran growing up and I'm noticing my body shift from a classic glider into a gazelle. When I hit my Z1 I'm closer to being a glider, as I move to intervals up to Z4-5 I see the gazelle come out. For me, I'm not trying to make my body be one or the other, I'm just trying to be calm and biomechanically efficient. I have some lofty run goals for 2013 so I personally believe that I need to find flow and grace for all my run training as that's the NS & NMJ pattern that I will fall into the deeper I get into 26.2. If I'm always using force, effort and fighting my pace and mechanics that's what I believe will show up on race day. I would be patient with yourself and try to find that "sweet spot" for yourself too, I believe it's the only way it will be sustained for 26.2.
Thanks for everyones opinion on this... makes me rethink, critique and in the end become a better me!
Great discussion team!
@Al, without seeing a randomized clinical trial, I'd have to agree with you that it appears that it would be a much higher energy cost being a gazelle.
Yet @JK I also think there's some truth to what you're saying,
I believe the answer is truly grey, not black or white. My area of expertise is looking at how the NS (nervous system) and what's occurring at the NMJ (neuromuscular junction). I believe that if one is built to be more like a gazelle it's a function of the sequence and firing of the NS & NMJ. Stepping out of ones "normal" may be the thing that requires more metabolic energy. The same can be said for the "natural" glider. I know the history of Chrissie because I read her book... she's a gifted athlete that hasn't been a runner nor triathlete for her entire life like most of her competitors. I'd say that most of us AG's will likely fall in the glider group. Is that why Chrissie's a glider???
@JW I've developed into a decent runner over the past several years, even though I never ran growing up and I'm noticing my body shift from a classic glider into a gazelle. When I hit my Z1 I'm closer to being a glider, as I move to intervals up to Z4-5 I see the gazelle come out. For me, I'm not trying to make my body be one or the other, I'm just trying to be calm and biomechanically efficient. I have some lofty run goals for 2013 so I personally believe that I need to find flow and grace for all my run training as that's the NS & NMJ pattern that I will fall into the deeper I get into 26.2. If I'm always using force, effort and fighting my pace and mechanics that's what I believe will show up on race day. I would be patient with yourself and try to find that "sweet spot" for yourself too, I believe it's the only way it will be sustained for 26.2.
Thanks for everyones opinion on this... makes me rethink, critique and in the end become a better me!
Great discussion team!
@Al, without seeing a randomized clinical trial, I'd have to agree with you that it appears that it would be a much higher energy cost being a gazelle.
Yet @JK I also think there's some truth to what you're saying,
I believe the answer is truly grey, not black or white. My area of expertise is looking at how the NS (nervous system) and what's occurring at the NMJ (neuromuscular junction). I believe that if one is built to be more like a gazelle it's a function of the sequence and firing of the NS & NMJ. Stepping out of ones "normal" may be the thing that requires more metabolic energy. The same can be said for the "natural" glider. I know the history of Chrissie because I read her book... she's a gifted athlete that hasn't been a runner nor triathlete for her entire life like most of her competitors. I'd say that most of us AG's will likely fall in the glider group. Is that why Chrissie's a glider???
@JW I've developed into a decent runner over the past several years, even though I never ran growing up and I'm noticing my body shift from a classic glider into a gazelle. When I hit my Z1 I'm closer to being a glider, as I move to intervals up to Z4-5 I see the gazelle come out. For me, I'm not trying to make my body be one or the other, I'm just trying to be calm and biomechanically efficient. I have some lofty run goals for 2013 so I personally believe that I need to find flow and grace for all my run training as that's the NS & NMJ pattern that I will fall into the deeper I get into 26.2. If I'm always using force, effort and fighting my pace and mechanics that's what I believe will show up on race day. I would be patient with yourself and try to find that "sweet spot" for yourself too, I believe it's the only way it will be sustained for 26.2.
Thanks for everyones opinion on this... makes me rethink, critique and in the end become a better me!
Great discussion team!
@Al, without seeing a randomized clinical trial, I'd have to agree with you that it appears that it would be a much higher energy cost being a gazelle.
Yet @JK I also think there's some truth to what you're saying,
I believe the answer is truly grey, not black or white. My area of expertise is looking at how the NS (nervous system) and what's occurring at the NMJ (neuromuscular junction). I believe that if one is built to be more like a gazelle it's a function of the sequence and firing of the NS & NMJ. Stepping out of ones "normal" may be the thing that requires more metabolic energy. The same can be said for the "natural" glider. I know the history of Chrissie because I read her book... she's a gifted athlete that hasn't been a runner nor triathlete for her entire life like most of her competitors. I'd say that most of us AG's will likely fall in the glider group. Is that why Chrissie's a glider???
@JW I've developed into a decent runner over the past several years, even though I never ran growing up and I'm noticing my body shift from a classic glider into a gazelle. When I hit my Z1 I'm closer to being a glider, as I move to intervals up to Z4-5 I see the gazelle come out. For me, I'm not trying to make my body be one or the other, I'm just trying to be calm and biomechanically efficient. I have some lofty run goals for 2013 so I personally believe that I need to find flow and grace for all my run training as that's the NS & NMJ pattern that I will fall into the deeper I get into 26.2. If I'm always using force, effort and fighting my pace and mechanics that's what I believe will show up on race day. I would be patient with yourself and try to find that "sweet spot" for yourself too, I believe it's the only way it will be sustained for 26.2.
Thanks for everyones opinion on this... makes me rethink, critique and in the end become a better me!
Great discussion team!
@Al, without seeing a randomized clinical trial, I'd have to agree with you that it appears that it would be a much higher energy cost being a gazelle.
Yet @JK I also think there's some truth to what you're saying,
I believe the answer is truly grey, not black or white. My area of expertise is looking at how the NS (nervous system) and what's occurring at the NMJ (neuromuscular junction). I believe that if one is built to be more like a gazelle it's a function of the sequence and firing of the NS & NMJ. Stepping out of ones "normal" may be the thing that requires more metabolic energy. The same can be said for the "natural" glider. I know the history of Chrissie because I read her book... she's a gifted athlete that hasn't been a runner nor triathlete for her entire life like most of her competitors. I'd say that most of us AG's will likely fall in the glider group. Is that why Chrissie's a glider???
@JW I've developed into a decent runner over the past several years, even though I never ran growing up and I'm noticing my body shift from a classic glider into a gazelle. When I hit my Z1 I'm closer to being a glider, as I move to intervals up to Z4-5 I see the gazelle come out. For me, I'm not trying to make my body be one or the other, I'm just trying to be calm and biomechanically efficient. I have some lofty run goals for 2013 so I personally believe that I need to find flow and grace for all my run training as that's the NS & NMJ pattern that I will fall into the deeper I get into 26.2. If I'm always using force, effort and fighting my pace and mechanics that's what I believe will show up on race day. I would be patient with yourself and try to find that "sweet spot" for yourself too, I believe it's the only way it will be sustained for 26.2.
Thanks for everyones opinion on this... makes me rethink, critique and in the end become a better me!
Same way you get to Carnegie Hall ... practice, practice, practice. At 90 steps per minute.
I suggest this approach:
-acknowedge that high stride rate is important enough to make a continuous, concerted effort.
-everything that is non-main set is time spent thinking about stride rate.
-find an "on/off" ratio that will let you include these comfortably in your run while (1) still getting the distance done, and (2) allowing you to finish with 90 strikes per minute
-I would suggest, as a starting point, 3 minutes of perfect 90, followed by 2 minutes of whatever you need to do (run at whatever feels natural, walk, whatever), repeated over the entire w/o. 3 minutes seems to be just long enough to force you to concentrate and work on it, and still have a nice, long break of your more familiar running to look forward to.
-after a few weeks - two, maybe four - go up to 4 mins at 90 rpm, 1 min walk. Once you're carrying this with comfort, next progression is 4 / 1, but the last 10 minutes of the workout as perfect 90rpm. Then the last 15 minutes as perfect 90 rpm. Then alternate the intervals to 8 or 9 mins at 90, 1 or 2 minutes walk.
-put your head into it. No headphones, no talking with buddies, no daydreaming. When you're trying to make this change, you are very aware of the high cadence, and thinking about your running all the time.
-favorite counting method of mine is counting the 30 steps in 20 seconds. So, anytime I glance at my watch, I just wait until i'm on the :x5 or :y0; and start counting. When I get to 30, I look at the watch, and it damned well better say a :x5 or :y0. If it doesn't, I bump up a shade for the next 20 seconds.
And trust me on this: it's worth the effort.
I would agree that Gazelles may seem to use more energy. but lots of factors. and needs to be studied.
All stand alone good marathoners are Gazelles. So gliding better for Ironmaners?
I assume height needs to be factored in there. I do not think I should be shooting for 90 rate. Lots of energy swinging my 6-6 frame at that rate. I do agree that I need to keep the rate up there.
RE: the energy expenditure of gazelle (more vertical motion) vs gazelle (less vertical motion):
Todd mentions this very important aspect of muscle elasticity in his writeup (bolding mine):
"So the question is, is one style more efficient? The gliders don’t use any energy to generate a Vy. All of their energy goes to Vx – moving forward. Note that they often look as if they are skating just above the ground with no bouncing. BUT – they do need a faster turnover. The Gazelles must generate a Vy, and in turn absorb the same Vy on landing. Clearly more costly energy-wise – BUT – is active muscle contraction used, or is most of the force generated through muscle and connective tissue elasticity? If so, the additional energy cost may be greatly reduced. But if you don’t have springs for legs, trying to run like a gazelle is probably going to be very costly – especially if you aren’t one of wraith-like physique. "
From (http://ttbikefit.com/blog/?p=1176)
So, for all the discussion of whether it's more efficient to have a higher turnover and stay lower to the ground, or to have a lower turnover but spend more time in the air and thus have to get more vertical - the answer is likely never going to be 100% one way or the other, and likely to be very individualistic. If someone has anatomy such that their connective tissue allows for easy return of energy upon impact, and that elasticity provides a significant chunk of the energy required to leap back into the air, then they may not see significant additional energy requirements as opposed to a glider who is staying closer to the ground.
This actually reminds me of a tri-talk podcast episode where he mentioned how there was a study that found that those who had the lower range of motion had a higher running economy - could have been because a lower range of motion meant more elasticity to return energy back during the running motion (http://ec.libsyn.com/p/1/a/6/1a663505eafc0b66/tri_talk_64.mp3?d13a76d516d9dec20c3d276ce028ed5089ab1ce3dae902ea1d01ce8436d0c0590b2f&c_id=2458780).