Rearfoot Striking Runners Are More Economical than Midfoot Strikers.

AuthorsOgueta-Alday A, et al. Show all Journal
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2013 Aug 30. [Epub ahead of print]

Affiliation
Department of Physical Education and Sports, Institute of Biomedicine (IBIOMED), University of León, León, Spain.

Abstract
PURPOSE: To analyze the influence of foot strike pattern on running economy and biomechanical characteristics in sub-elite runners with a similar performance level.

METHODS: Twenty sub-elite long-distance runners participated and were divided into two groups according to their foot strike pattern: rearfoot (RF, n= 10) and midfoot strikers (MF, n= 10). Anthropometric characteristics were measured (height, body mass, BMI, skinfolds, circumferences and lengths); physiological (V?O2max, anaerobic threshold and running economy) and biomechanical characteristics (contact and flight times, step rate and step length) were registered during both incremental and submaximal tests on a treadmill.

RESULTS: There were no significant intergroup differences in anthropometrics, V?O2max or anaerobic threshold measures. RF strikers were 5.4, 9.3 and 5.0% more economical than MF at submaximal speeds (11, 13 and 15 km·h respectively, though the difference was not significant at 15 km·h, p=0.07). Step rate and step length were not different between groups, but RF showed longer contact time (p<0.01) and shorter flight time (p<0.01) than MF at all running speeds.

CONCLUSIONS: The present study showed that habitually rearfoot striking runners are more economical than midfoot strikers. Foot strike pattern affected both contact and flight times, which may explain the differences in running economy.

Well there you go….

Rearfoot Striking Runners Are More Economical than Midfoot Strikers when running on a treadmill.

MSP – Member
Rearfoot Striking Runners Are More Economical than Midfoot Strikers when running on a treadmill.

They still won’t take off, though.

more economical? are midfoot shoes more expensive?
what does economical mean in this context?

Faster runners are faster irrespective of rear / forefoot striking

Apparently it’s also more ‘economical’ to pedal with a cadence of <65. Not that popular in the pelaton though.

Awaits forefoot converts indignation.

I rearfoot with my left and midfoot with my right. What will become of me?

They still won’t take off, though.

Does that not depend on if they have a headwind or a tailwind?

I rearfoot with my left and midfoot with my right. What will become of me?

You’ll only ever be able to run round right hand corners.

Who cares. Its speed that counts not economy.

You’ll only ever be able to run round right hand corners. in circles

Abstract
PURPOSE: To analyze the influence of foot strike pattern on running economy and biomechanical characteristics in sub-elite runners with a similar performance level.

Pah! This is the denzien of athletic perfection. This research does not apply to the STW super humans.

Who cares. Its speed that counts not economy.

Adds racing snake tag to Surfer.

Speeds not much cop to me, tbh. No point flying if I can only get 1/5 of the targeted distance done before collapsing into a crumpled heap. Gently sobbing amongst the heather and tussocks, desperately pawing the darkest corners of my bum bag for a long forgotten jelly baby.

“Faster runners are faster irrespective of rear / forefoot
striking”

Sort of this. IMO lots of the fore/mid foot strike stuff is a marketing department at work. As is the rear foot strike stuff of course.

Asics are fastest though FACT.

I just run. In a highly amusing and uncoordinated way. Does that make me efficient?