Since the release of Dr. Lieberman’s study I’ve had a few requests from folks wanting me to show my test results from a gait analysis I had done at the UVA human performance lab. They’re curious to see how my Ground Reaction Force (GFR) chart compares with the one shown in the Nature video showing a barefoot runner (I’m assuming Lieberman himself) landing on a strike plate with a GFR chart beneath.

In the tests I did at UVA, I was wearing three different pairs of shoes (I was never tested barefoot): tai chi shoes, NB-MF800’s and NB-790’s. I’ve pasted in three graphs below. The first two are of a barefoot runner running with a heel strike, a barefoot runner running with a forefoot landing and the third graph is of me with the graphs of all three of my tests overlaid onto the same chart in three different colors.

GRF for a Heel Striker

GRF for a Forefoot Striker

GRF for Danny

Notice the differences in GFR between the three runners shown as a multiple of Body Weight measured during the initial weight-bearing phase. The Barefoot runner had a multiple of 1.85 x Body Weight. To make the comparisons fair, let’s assume all three tests were done with a runner who weights 150 lbs., that would mean (with a GFR of 1.85 x Body weight) that his heels were absorbing a force of 277.5 lbs. upon impact. Let’s say that his heel has an area of 5 sq. inches. that would mean that his heels were experiencing an impact of about 55.5 lbs./sq. inch. Ouch!!!

In the second figure, the runner is landing on his forefoot and his GFR is 2.64 x Body Weight during his support phase which figures out to 2.64 x 150 lbs. = 396 lbs. Now let’s say that the area of his forefoot is approximately 16 sq. inches. That would mean that his foot would be absorbing about 24.75 lbs./sq. inch. … or less than half of what the heel striker feels.

In the third figure I’m landing in a midfoot (or fullfoot) strike which means that the entire bottom of my foot is landing as my foot hits the ground. My GFR was measured at 2.47 x Body Weight or 2.47 x 150 lbs. = 370.5 lbs. Now, if the surface area of the entire bottom of my foot is roughly 30 sq. inches. (I’m a size 9.5 shoe), that would mean that the impact felt by my feet would be approximately 12.35 lbs./sq. inch. or half as much as the forefoot striker. That’s less than 25% of the impact per square inch the heel striker feels and half of what the forefoot striker feels. You can also see that my GFR was the same no matter which shoes I was wearing. I imagine that it would still have been the same had I been tested barefoot… possibly implying that there’s something to be said for working on improving your running technique. It’s about the runner, not the shoe.

I’ve used 150 lbs. as a standard weight for all three runners because I don’t know how much Dr. Leiberman weights. I also used the size of my feet in my calculations because I also don’t know his shoe size. BUT, the point I’m trying to make here is that whether or not you run with shoes on, your impact with the ground will be most if you land in a heel strike because there’s a lot of force going into a relatively small area of your foot. Subsequently, if you land in a forefoot strike, you land with more area of your foot touching the ground and it spreads the force of impact over a larger area thereby reducing the amount of impact per square inch. And lastly, if you land in a fullfoot strike, you spread the impact out over a much larger area and lower your impact per square inch even more still.

Since greater impact with the ground can most likely be directly related to greater incidence of impact injuries, this all boils down to one big question. How do you lower your impact with the ground so that you don’t hurt yourself when you’re running. My premise is that although some types of shoes can reduce shock and impact, it’s the runner who, in the end, is responsible for learning how to manage his or her impact with the ground in a way that consistently works. This is the need that is presented to every runner and it is one of the main reasons why ChiRunning was developed.

Dr. Liebermans study was a good beginning into seeing the difference in impact forces between shod and barefoot runners. Next, I would like to see a study comparing the difference in impact between heel strikers, midfoot strikers and forefoot strikers; with bare feet, with minimal shoes, racing flats, and with your basic high-heeled running shoes.

There are times to run with a forefoot strike. There are times to run with a fullfoot strike. And, there are times to run (believe it or not) with a heel strike. I’ll cover these in a future blog.

Run well…be well,
Danny

I just finished reading Born to Run while I was on my way out to Death Valley to teach ChiRunning. I can see why it’s such a popular book and also why it’s causing such a stir in the running community. It’s a really fun read. Chris McDougall is funny and wonderfully imaginative in his role as a “creative documentarian.” If I weren’t such a slow reader, I’m sure I would have read the entire book in one sitting. The last half of the book is especially riveting. I think it is very appealing to long-time ultra runners like myself because of his ability to capture many of the same thoughts and feelings that run through your head when you’re out in the middle of nowhere, not knowing how far you’ll be going…or sometimes even where.

I can also see why McDougall is on the warpath against the major shoe manufacturers (esp. Nike). Once he saw and felt the difference that running on minimal shoes made in his biomechanics, he became a convert. There’s no way around it…if you run on less of a shoe, your foot has more of an opportunity to “educate” your body how to move more correctly because you can actually feel your connection with the Earth and develop a physical relationship with the ground passing by underneath you. Your footstrike changes, your posture changes, your point of balance changes…and that’s just the beginning!

If it takes a best-seller like this one to spark a dialog in the running community about demanding better designed shoes, then I’m all for it. I’ve been trying to convince shoe companies to make less of a shoe for years now and in describing my success with them I’ve ended up many times using the descriptive phrase, “It’s like trying to steer a tanker with a rowboat.”

I’m currently in the process of road-testing a number of minimal shoes and I plan to write reviews on each of the brands I try out. Here are some of the newest “flat” shoe companies: VivoBarefoot, FeelMax, Vibram FiveFingers, ECCO and Wilcor. I’ll be posting these reviews as soon as I feel I have a pretty complete sense of the shoes in question. If any of you have come across a minimal shoe made by someone not on this list, please forward me the name and contact info of the company and I’ll be happy to give them a try.

In addition to these shoes there are many racing flats that are currently being produced by the “majors” that work just fine as a minimal shoe. BUT, the problem with the racing flats made by Nike, NB, Asics, Mizuno, Brooks and the like is that I’m seeing a trend that I predict will continue. In the past, if I wanted a good, flat, cheap pair of minimal running shoes all I had to do was go online and order a $45 pair of flats and I was on my way. Racing flats have always been the cheapest shoes on the market because, I assume, they’re made with less materials. BUT, because of the current demand for more minimal shoes, I predict that, rather than spend their resources in developing a really cool minimal running shoe, we’ll be seeing racing flats increasing in cost to over $100…which will only entrench me further into the feeling that the big guns aren’t really out for the good of the runners. That being said, I’d be more than happy to see them prove me totally wrong.

Happy trails,
Danny

Yes, you can say you heard if first right here in the blog. All of my ChiRunning race-specific training paid off and I actually won my age group at the 2009 USATF National 10K Trail Championships last weekend. But, let’s be clear about this. It doesn’t mean that I’m the fastest 55-59 year old trail runner in the U.S. It just means that I was the fastest old guy who got it together to show up on race day.

The race was extremely enjoyable as well as being an extremely challenging experience. In the 6.2 miles of the course there were 1310′ of vertical gain (climbing) and the same amount of vertical loss (plummeting).
The race started literally on top of a mountain and was shaped like a cloverleaf where you had to descend the four sides of the mountain in separate loops, returning to the top of the mountain at the end of each loop. The best word I could come up with in describing the course was “treacherous.” It looked like it had been built by a work crew using only weed-eaters and pickaxes the week before and I had to rely on my wits (as well as my hands) to keep myself vertical a few times. The views were off the charts but, as you could guess, I didn’t have much time to take them in. I was busy using every ChiRunning focus in the book.

I don’t mean to sound like I didn’t like the course. On the contrary, I thrive in these conditions. I get to put everything in know to the test and this event felt like a final exam in a graduate course. I finished the race in 1:02:46, a mere 16 seconds behind my training partner, Billy Jonas. The winner of the race ran it in a totally unbelievable time of 39 minutes and some change. Do the math. That’s a 6:20/mile average for the course I just described! I figure the guy who won had one of three things going on: a.) he’s bionic… b.) he’s carrying a major death-wish… or c.) he forgot to do one of the required loops.

Hats off to Jason and his outstanding race crew for putting on such a “well-run” event. Y’all did a great job!

I’ll be running the Asheville Citizen Times Half Marathon on September 12th and I’ll be using the same race strategy…pass every gray-haired guy I can find.

Keep on Truckin’
Danny

In case you missed it, there was an article in last Sunday’s NY Times about how the “barefoot running” trend is effecting the shoe industry. Actually, it’s not so much a barefoot trend as it is a current upsurge in the questioning of the running shoe company’s ability to produce a shoe that actually has any effect on running injuries. ChiRunning was named as one of the organizations helping to promote good running technique and endorsing more of a minimal shoe approach to running.

The big debate is whether or not building more cushioning and structure into running shoes has the advertised effect or if it’s just another case of corporate marketing looking for an effective way to sell shoes to an uneducated populace. Well, in answer to the first part of the debate, as we’ve seen by the percentage of runners who get injured every year, nothing has changed since running shoes for the general public began being produced in the 1970’s. If anything, the injury rate has gone up. And, in answer to the second part of the big debate, yes, it seems to have been a very good marketing ploy that sold gazillions of shoes to people thinking that they’d be safe in their running by buying the right shoe.

I’m so thankful that articles like this are starting to surface in the national media. More attention needs to be paid by the shoe industry to make shoes that fit the needs of an ever-growing population of runners who are working on changing their running form, to prevent injuries, instead of thinking that the right shoe will do the job. For ten years now ChiRunning and ChiWalking classes have been teaching runners and walkers how to run and walk pain-free, injury-free and faster. Check out our schedule of classes if you’re interested. And, while you’re there, check out the results of a West Virginia University poll done with 2500 ChiRunners which reports remarkable findings on the effectiveness of running technique improvement on injury rates.

There are a number of forward thinking shoe companies out there that are working on producing less of a shoe and that’s good news for those of us who are no longer willing to suffer through the over-built “corrective” shoes that have been the norm since the running boom started in the ’70’s. actually almost all of the running shoe companies sell shoes that are perfectly good for the midfoot striker…but many runners are scared away by the model name “racing flat.” Most racing flats have all the great attributes a midfoot runner craves: lots of flexibility in the sole, great ventilation, very minimal lift in the heel and (until the secret gets discovered by the shoe companies) a cheap price. I wear NB-790’s which cost $45 online (while the supply lasts) and which, in the past few years, have been one of the best selling running shoes NB has ever produced. But, as with all great running shoes…they’ve decided to quit producing what I’ve considered the perfect shoe. Go figure. I’m now looking at FiveFingers, Adizeros, La Sportiva, and yes, even the Nike Free for the next “ideal” shoe.

Viva la revolution!
Danny

p.s. Since the article in the NY Times came out it is the 8th most emailed article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/30/business/30shoe.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

When I ask attendees at my ChiRunning workshops, I’m always amazed at how many runners don’t run trails. I suppose there are lots of reasons why someone might be a bit shy about heading out into Nature with nothing but dirt to land on. Could it be the wild animals that lurk in the woods? Or maybe it’s just the serial killers. Whatever the reasons are for anyone, I’m sure it’s based in fear of some sort. There have been only a very few times in my 35+ years of trail running that I’ve felt fear. I’ve never been chased by a wild animal and certainly not by another human being (with the exception of my competitors in racing events). I have been caught in a lightning storm at 11,000′ elevation in the Colorado Rockies and I’ve jumped over a rattlesnake that I mistook for a rock. I’ve run along trails where one misstep could result in a vertical plunge of a couple hundred feet. But, generally I feel trail running to be much safer than running in a city. So, if we can take some of the fear out of running on trails, maybe we can turn more runners on to the joys of running “pavement free.”

Here’s my contribution to dissipating some of the fears that might come up. I’m guessing that one of the reasons for not trail running has got to be either the fear of running on an uneven or slippery surface or even worse…falling down on an uneven or slippery surface. So, here are a couple of tips for you newbies.

Running Downhill on Loose Gravel
If you’re running downhill on a single-track trail and the surface is loose dirt or gravel there are a couple of things to do. If there is grass growing along the sides of the trail I suggest running there where the traction is better. The next best thing to do is look for spots on the trail where your feet won’t slip. These could be buried rock, roots or any place where you can see solid ground. If you begin to train your eye to see only the solid places on the trail, pretty soon all of the loose footing will disappear from your field of view and all you’ll see will be the multitude of safe places for your feet to land.

 For Spring Break our family traveled to the San Francisco Bay Area where ChiRunning was conceived and launched. I thoroughly enjoyed seeing many of our old friends and doing a little sightseeing, which for me means trail running in the Marin Headlands, home to arguably some of the most beautiful trail runs in the world. Over the next few blogs I’ll post some of the photos I took just before my camera died an untimely death at Stinson Beach.

Spring is upon us and I hope these shots inspire you to get out and see Nature in its finest season (in my opinion). There’s nothing better than feasting your eyes on the millions of shades of green that paint the landscape this time of year. I had a wonderful 90 minute run through redwoods, past waterfalls, and along vast fields of blooming Lupines. I hope you enjoy these pictures as much as I enjoyed running to find them. I find that it’s really hard to match trail running for connecting your eyes, your heart …and your legs!

Carpe diem!
Danny

This is a shot of San Francisco looking south from the top of the Matt Davis Trail above Stinson Beach. The tower in the background is Sutro Tower which rises above Golden Gate Park. The water you see is the Pacific Ocean as it enters the San Francisco Bay (to the left, out of the picture). 

Looking south from the Matt Davis Trail towards ocean side of San Francisco

Part 1 of 5: The Bridge

embedded by Embedded Video

embedded by Embedded Video

In my previous blog I talked about the simplest and most effective way for walkers to reduce impact to their knees and hips. So, in all fairness to you runners, this post is for you.

Since runners, as a rule, are a bit more injury-prone than walkers, the simplest way to avoid knee pain or knee injury is not as simple as it is with walking. I’ve read that running can increase your body weight upon impact by 6-10 times depending on whether you’re running on flat ground or running downhill. That’s an incredible amount of weight for your knees and hips to bear with every foot strike. So, it behooves us all to do everything we can to lower that multiple. If I weight 145 lbs. that means I’m putting 870 lbs. of pressure on my knees every time my foot hits the ground.

There are two reasons for this increase in impact to your knees. Part of that increase in weight comes from the fact that you’re leaving the ground between strides and as you return to earth, your body is accelerated by the pull of gravity. The other part of that weight increase happens because of the braking effect created if your foot happens to land in front of your center of mass. For most runners I’d have to say that is the biggest culprit of increasing impact.

So what’s the simplest solution?

Don’t step in front of your hips when you run. You heard me right… and you’re also correct if you’re thinking, “That’s easier said than done.” It’s not really that difficult to do, but it does take some patience and practice. It all comes down to learning how to run with a midfoot strike because it’s the best way to prevent your foot from landing out in front of your body. You can further reduce the amount of impact to your knees by landing with your foot even slightly behind your center of mass. This will minimize any chance of braking as your feet hit the ground.

If you’ve read the ChiRunning book you already know about landing with a midfoot strike and how that’s accomplished. If you haven’t read the book, I highly suggest you check it out. Another part of this equation is keeping your hips loose and your pelvis rotating. This will keep you running level across the ground and prevent the impact that comes from excessive bouncing.

If you can change where your foot lands and minimize your bounce you can seriously reduce the impact to your knees. I was recently tested at the gait lab at the University of Virginia and found that my vertical GRF (ground reaction force) was only 2.4 times my body weight. That’s a far cry from 6-10 times mentioned earlier!

My long range goal is, of course, to get that number down to zero… so I can run on water.

Happy trails,
Danny

In a recent NY Times article I read a quote that states, “Training a little bit beyond your capabilities is the only way to get better…”.

For now, I want to comment on that one statement. As an overarching theory, I agree, but what I don’t agree with is what the article and that statement implies. Most running coaches believe that more training is the only way to become a better runner. So what do they mean by better and what do they mean by training?

I’ll start with the question about training. When most people talk about training for running they are usually either talking about running more miles or doing some sort of strength training for their legs. So, when you “train a bit beyond your capabilities” it generally means you run farther or faster. I do agree that you need to train beyond your current capability to get better, but I think the focus should be on improving your running form and technique, not just running faster and farther. If you focus only on running faster and further, you are setting yourself up for injury.

If you focus on improving your running form, you are setting yourself up to run faster and/or longer distances with greater proficiency and efficiency.

This brings up the question of what it actually means to be “better.” In most cases I think most people define “better” as becoming faster, which is somewhat of a limited vision of improving your sport.

The ChiRunning approach takes on a much more holistic view. Getting better means running more efficiently so that you can run with less perceived effort no matter what speed or distance you run. It means working on your running technique so you can run injury-free and there’s no down side to your running. It means not working so hard that you have to recover after every run. It means finding long-lasting joy in your running so your relationship with it doesn’t fade with the years. And, it can mean, if you so desire, to use running as an internal practice to improve your mind and body as well as your spirit.

So, the next time you think of “training” to “get better” with your running take the time to include the whole picture or you could be missing out on something much more valuable than speed and distance.