Last week I developed a minor problem in my right calf, and worried I shouldn't run on it, went to see my physio, who gave it a deep massage, and suggested alternating ice & a hot wheatbag to treat it. This has all worked very well, and I am now back running on it without pain.

To get to the point though, the physio has also lent me a video on the POSE method of running, (see www.posetech.com). The technique looks very good in theory, and promises to help acheive my main goals to stay injury free, and run faster for triathlon.

Before I embark on trying the drills, and attempting to convert to the new running style, however, I wondered if RW writers, or any other runners had any experience of this method and would like to share their thoughts. I have experimented running on the balls of my feet and picking up my heels for a few strides her & there, but it does feel like it would take quite a lot of work to get strong enough to maintain that over any distance.

Also - does anybody know if any POSE clinics or training sessions are ever run in the UK?

Many thanks for any advice, Jane

Tri - can't help on the POSE running, but tell me about the wheatbag...

Oh deary me. Now you've opened a real bag of frogs! There's some folks round here who feel rather strongly about this sort of thing. Let us sit back and watch the fireworks.

More seriously . . . Is changing your natural running style wise? Potentially you might be exchanging one set of injuries for another.

Meerkat - My wheatbag was also purchased from the physio, last year when I was having upper back problems. It just goes in the microwave for 3-4 minutes, then can be used as a heatpack for aches & pains, (not sure if advisable for all injuries). There seem to be loads of websites doing all sorts of varieties of them these day, but I've no idea which are the best, (or the best value).

Mim - I thought that might be the case, but couldn't find a similar thread. I've often wondered why some people naturally run so much faster than others with apparently the same effort, (I'm among the naturally slow). In swimming & cycling, you can get staggering differences in performance by improving technique, so I wondered whether the same was true of running.

I'm not condoning this method, just seeking opinion, however firey the debate gets.

Jane

Tom, I changed my running style last August to the POSE style. Actually, I followed the late Gordon Pirie's advice from 'Running Fast and Injury Free' - a book that you can download from http://www.gordonpirie.com Since then I've also seen the POSEtech video and essentially its teaching you the same thing albeit it is a bit more structured because of all the drills.

You shouldn't underestimate the amount of effort (mainly concentration) required to switch over though, it's probably took me at least three months to adapt to forefoot running as a natural style i.e. not having to think about it.

The benefits, that I've noticed, are :-

1. I'm a little faster, this isn't some secret magic formula, it's simply that its easier to stay on the forefoot if you increase your cadence (stride rate) and the natural consequence of this is you go faster. This is at the cost of slightly increased effort though.

2. I've had no injuries since switching over. None at all, previously I'd never managed to run continuously for 6 months without any injuries.

3. Shoes are cheaper - you only ever run in very lightweight racing shoes as most of the common 'boots' are too inflexible and have heels that are too raised to prevent you running properly - hence the injuries (that's the theory anyway). Look in the back of RW magazine, shops are always discounting racing shoes e.g. Asic Tiger Paw so you can get them cheap.

The disadvantages are obviously the effort involved in retraining yourself and you will initially feel some slight calf pain (usually for around two weeks). This is because the calf is the main shock absorption spring and it's probably not used to performing this function currently.

If you decide to go ahead with this, my top tips for making this as easy as posssible would be :-

1. Buy some racing shoes from the outset. And make sure that they have a low heel and are very flexible. In fact the thinner the sole the better - avoid any with 'cushioning' or 'stability' features. I would recommend Asics Tiger Paw, NB RC150 (difficult to find) or NB RC240. I know you don't want to spend money if you're not convinced but you'll find it difficult in ordinary running shoes, and if you don't go ahead you can always use the racers for short races.

2. Try and increase your cadence early on. This obviously involves increased effort and so do shorter runs initially.

3. Avoid landing on your heels when going downhill. It's easy to take it easy downhills but if you do this you'll bang down on your heels with shoes with no cushioning (increasing your chance of injury). So lean forward and maintain the cadence.

Finally, if you're at all unconvinced by the theory - take off your shoes and try running barefoot. Which way do you run now ?

Sorry, don't why I adressed my previos post to myself. Please read 'Jane' instead of 'Tom'.

I've started to read Gordon Perie's book and I am experimenting with the forefoot landing. Not too sure I agree with everything he says though, it needs to be bourne in mind that the book was written 10 at least 10 years ago and shoe technology has moved on since then. He also makes no allowance for bio-mechanical problems.

I have found it very easy to adopt the fore foot landing but when increasing my pace I still want to kick out and lengthen the stride rather than speeding the legs up.

I found GP's book is a bit hard going at time as he's such an opiniated sort. I think your worries about biomechanical problems don't apply to forefoot running (unless they're very severe) because I think the legs cope with it.

I'm not a podiatrist but overpronation surely only applies to walking or running on your heels because its the rolling action of your foot when moving from heel to forefoot. I wouldn't have thought the pronation plays a significant part in running on the forefoot, so overpronation and supination shouldn't be a problem.

Thanks for the advice Tom. I'm definitely currently a heel-to-toe neutral runner, and find Nike Pegasus do the job OK for the relatively low mileage I've done to date. I'm training for my 1st 1/2M in Stafford in March, however, so am trying to increase my miles, and after that will be into the triathlon season, when I'd like to be able to run faster than last year.

How do you think a bit of mixing & matching work during the transition? I did wonder whether I could do intervals of old & new style, but I guess that won't work as I wouldn't want to do heel-to-toe in uncushioned shoes, and you say forefoot landing will be difficult in my current shoe.

I guess I could try initially doing short runs in lightweight shoes with the new style, but still do my long runs "the old way" until I've built up the calf strength to attempt a longer run "the new way". I suspect this might make the overall transition take a bit longer, but at least I'll be getting the endurance benefits of long runs, (which I'll need for the 1/2M), and then I'd have to play it by ear as to when I think I'm ready to switch over for a triathlon run.

I think I'll probably invest in some lighter shoes to give it a go.

Thanks, Jane

I think you may find it hard to mix styles. I know some people that run on their heels for long slow runs and on their forefoot when sprinting.

Personally, having spent the last few months training myself I wouldn't want to risk undoing the work.

Also you'll find it quite hard work initially trying to run on the forefoot because it won't feel natural and when you get tired you'll naturally slip back to heel running. I think mixing styles will propbably encourage this, but you know yourself better than anyone - do whats best for you.

You are probably right, and that's why I think the transition will take longer if I mix styles.

I just think it will be nigh on impossible for me to complete a 1/2M in March if I switch completely from now on, (after 6 weeks off-training in Nov-Dec, I still have to build the fitness to be confident I'll complete the distance). As a result, it looks like I have 3 choices:

1) Forget about switching at all for now.
2) Cancel the 1/2 Marathon, and concentrate on switching styles.
3) Start including the odd short run on the forefoot for now, and once I've got the 1/2M behind me start to increase the length and frequency of these.

I'm hoping that I have interpreted what GP was saying, I think he was saying that your foot should strike the ground directly underbneath you. The knee should be bent and the initial contact with the ground should be the ball of the foot rather than the heal and that your heal would then continue towards the ground so that the calf muscle stretched and when it contracts that provides a launch into the next stride.

I find that on my low FLM training runs at 9.5 min miles, my heal actualy contacts the ground lightly. Not sure what hapens when I speed up though.

I can do it!!!

I haven't changed shoes yet, but decided whilst out this lunchtime to try forefoot striking, and see how long I could keep it up for. It does take a reasonable amount of concentration on technique, (i.e.: not landing on the toes, focussing on lifting the heels etc), but after 25 minutes, when I thought I was getting tired, and attempted to go back to heel-to-toe running for a rest, the latter felt so heavy & slow that I went back into forefoot after only a few strides, and completed the rest of the 40 minute run like that!! My heels were brushing the ground occasionally after the forefoot strike, but certainly not heavily.

I doubt my technique is perfect, and I don't know how my calves will be tomorrow, but this definitely feels like the way to go. Although it required concentration, (which perhaps took my mind off the effort of running), and my heartrate was quite high (178 avg), it generally felt lighter, less laboured, and more efficient than my usual gait, and I think with practice I should be able to run faster this way. My cadence was approx. 160/min, which I think is faster than normal, but clearly could be improved on.

All in all a promising start... I hope.

I wanted to bump this up again as I have just made the switch to Pose.

I cannot believe the difference - my "natural" running style was appalling and made me injury prone. I switched after a repeat of shin splints that wouldn't budge. Now they are going despite running in a pair fo shoes that make racers look heavy (some Classic Tiger flats - 1cm of sole t/out!).

I used to run in motion control shoes with orthotics and now I can feel my legs hurt more in shoes with even minimal support. I am convinced that heels in running shoes are a bad thing that makes the problem worse. Radical I know, but I "had" to have orthotics for 13yrs and now I am doing ALL my running in racing flats AND I'm going faster at the same effort.

We really need to get this debate up and running again as I see people talking about getting orthotics on these forums every week. 13 years later I wish I had learnt to run efficiently (as opposed to "naturally") and never got them.

Tom - how's it going now - 6 months later?

I believe that Serpentine organised a Pose clinic recently. Perhaps this is what next month's Running Fitness magazine article will be based on. Any Serpie's around?

Can this really make you faster? Why don't the pros use it?

This *IS* exactly how both M Johnson and H Geb both run!! But the Pose method has put together a system to achieve this degree of biomechanical efficiency through a series of drills.

All the essential ingredients are there:
1) Land on ball of foot, not heel
2) Land with knee bent
3) Land under Centre of gravity with knee, ankle and shoulder in vertical alignment.
4) Lift ankle under hips
5) Higher stride turnover resulting in very brief contact with ground when combined with (4).

Compare them with the average club runner landing with leg extended in front of body on heel - OUCH!

Sounds interesting. I read something about making gravity work for you in a pose conversation. I think I'm going to have to look into this a bit more. Going home now though.

Might this work for me with my recurrent back problems? Is it less strain on the back do you think?

Sassie - I did think of you with regard to this. You will have to work much harder than most with the drills for 2 reasons:
1) You probably have serious biomechanical issues in the first place.
2) You will need to get the technique VERY good to be able to benefit from less impact when running.

When done corrcetly though, the impact is minimal compared to "normal" <<cough, cough>> running. If you back problem is impact related this may well give you a whole new lease of life...