We wrote an article regarding running economy.
2 sept. 2015
After the previous post, we looked into the
economy of running from the point of view of a researcher and not of a
coach. Researchers continue to struggle with the ECONOMY OF
RUNNING. Variables are many and they are not considered as variables most
of the time. We have problems to have models to study economy of running
because we are unable to see athletes; we just study theories instead of
looking at athletes or plain and simple technique models. Researchers
translate technique in a simpler way, when technique encompasses multiple
variables itself and it is impossible to break it down as it has been done by
researchers. It is like a word in a language that cannot be translated
because of its multiple meanings. Albert Einstein said it and
started looking at the phenomenon instead of playing with the theories:
Everything should be made
as simple as possible, but not simpler.
If, then, it is true that the axiomatic basis of theoretical physics
cannot be extracted from experience but must be freely invented, can we ever
hope to find the right way? I answer without hesitation that there is, in my
opinion, a right way, and that we are capable of finding it. I hold it true
that pure thought can grasp reality, as the ancients dreamed. (Albert Einstein, 1954)
It should be explained in a simple way but not simpler,
as Albert Einstein said. We looked into
the cost of running, actually while running. There are good attempts to study running while running
which consider technique, and especially foot ground contact:
Elite North African runners have performed
outstandingly on the track at international athletic events. Despite the high
level of runners participating in this study, a possible limitation was that
they were 3-4 minutes slower than athletes of an Olympic standard. A question
arises whether the physiological and biomechanical responses of the pace in
North African runners implies that their outstanding performance on the track
at international athletic events appears not to be linked to running
efficiency. The differences in metabolic demand at increased velocity were
found to be associated with differing biomechanical running patterns.
The ground contact is faster in faster runners; the
winners. The authors need to study
champions for a comparison. The authors
found foot ground contact as the only difference for the best running economy
and this is very simple to understand.
We assume that the energy store in our muscles and tendons is the most
important variable to keep running.
Our success in
linking metabolic cost to whole-body mechanics suggests that this approach has
potential to further advance the understanding of the relationship between the
mechanical activity of the musculoskeletal system and the energetic cost of
movement in general. Finally, we conclude that metabolic rates during running
are determined by the time course of muscular activation and the volume of
muscle recruited to apply support forces against the ground.
Technique implies that the center of gravity is in
front of the subject, foot ground contact as short as possible, utilization of
energy to move us forward instead of using the energy to lift the body weight.
I leave you with a good presentation and a question:
¿Could you find the confounding variables?
Technique and physical structure are complementary and belong to
different languages. Practice technique
and the physical structure will come with time; many years later.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire