Running Technique: Part 1

When looking at running technique you can’t put everyone in the same box. When we have an athlete in front of us we need to understand the needs analysis of their particular sport and their performance goals to decipher how we will analyse and resolve their running technique. For example, correct running technique is very different for a long distance runner compared to a sprinter. It is also different again when we talk about field or court sport athletes. Ultimately there is not one perfect running style, however there are some underlying principles that relate to running performance. Therefore this blog is aimed at explaining the importance of running technique and how we analyse and develop running technique for two types of athletes: the distance runner (Part 1) and the sprinter (Part 2).

RUNNING TECHNIQUE PART 1:

Improving running technique in distance runners

THE “DISTANCE RUNNER” DEFINED

 Distance runners can be defined as any runner who uses the oxidative energy system, which is the harvesting of ATP from pyruvic acid inside the mitochondria using oxygen (Krebs Cycle).  This is more commonly known as the aerobic system and in crude terms means they run long and slow over a long period of time. Elite long distance athletes have highly efficient aerobic systems, or  “tanks”, meaning they have superior abilities to consume oxygen, whilst withstanding fatigue at speeds close to their lactate threshold. Put simply, they can run at faster speeds for longer, than the novice.

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NOVICE AND ELITE

 We talk here about elite endurance runners versus the novice, as it is important to make this distinction from the beginning, before we discuss running technique. Generally at the elite level, endurance athletes have developed such efficient running techniques that they may not need to focus on this as much as they would use other more advanced training strategies (discussed more below ie. altitude training, nutrition interventions, high training volumes) that will set them apart from their competitors. The novice runner, however, is likely to have accumulated less years of high volume running experience, therefore will not have developed an efficient running technique. Furthermore, novice runners are often less concerned with purely performance goals and more focused on managing running training alongside work and family commitments and dodging injury.

 This brings us to the paradigm of training for performance goals versus training for injury prevention purposes. The first half of this blog will relate to the ways running technique can affect distance running performance. Following this, the second part of this blog will relate to how running technique relates to injury risk in distance runners.

 

IMPROVING DISTANCE RUNNING PERFORMANCE

 Distance running performance is affected by an athlete’s maximal oxygen uptake (VO2 max), lactate threshold and Running Economy (RE) (Moore, 2016).  RE has been defined as the steady state consumption (VO2) at a given running velocity and reflects the energy demands of running at a constant submaximal speed.  In more simple terms RE can be defined as “energy cost, ” where high RE means a runner spends less energy at a given velocity (Moore, 2016). 

 Take for example, two runners who are running at the exact same speed for a 5km time trial and have the exact same level of aerobic fitness (VO2max). When it comes to the last 1000m Runner A is feeling strong and is able to pick up the pace while Runner B starts to feel fatigued. Consequently Runner A surges ahead of Runner B and wins the race. This is not because of a superior level of fitness, it is because Runner A has a superior RE and in the first part of the race spent less energy than Runner B. Therefore Runner A had more energy to pick up the pace in the last 1000m.  Consequently, RE is a considerable area of value for runners and coaches who are wishing to improve their long distance running performance.

 RE can be improved using a number of training strategies, notably many of these are reserved for the elite runner. RE in distance runners has been improved using high training volumes, cumulative number of years of running training, high intensity training incorporated into training programs, altitude training, nutritional interventions, running technique and resistance training. These aforementioned strategies may be more suitable for the elite level runner. However, the development of running technique and implementation of resistance training may be a more practical means of improving RE in both the novice and the elite runner. Therefore, the section to follow will focus on these two strategies for improving RE.

            Running technique analysis for enhanced running economy

There has been mixed evidence across the research for determining optimal running technique in distance runners. Various coaches adopt different training strategies based on certain underlying premises of running technique. There is the Pose method (encourages leaning forward to use gravity to propel the runner forward, a forefoot landing and an increased cadence), Chi method (encourages a similar forward lean to the Pose, but a midfoot landing and an increased stride length), and barefoot running (which is thought to encourage a more “natural” foot strike on the mid-foot versus the rearfoot).  The principles underlying these methods of developing running technique are based on the assumption that there is a perfect running technique for all. This in itself poses problems, any blanket approach does, as not all bodies are the same and running technique is a lot more complex than a one style fits all approach.

 Without trying to sit on the fence and give you a typical coach answer  – “it all depends” to a multifactorial problem like “is there an economical running technique?” I will now try to explain the key phases of the running cycle that we examine in our running technique analyses and the reasons why we look at these in relation to improving RE.

Phase 1. Ground Contact

Here we are looking for the position of the foot on ground contact in relation to the body’s centre of mass (COM). Ideally we are looking for the foot to contact in line with the COM, or as close to underneath the hip as possible. In relation to RE, landing in front of the COM, often called “overstriding”, will actually apply a braking force and slow the athlete down. We are also looking for stiffness in lower leg (foot/ ankle) on ground contact as well as limited vertical oscillation.

Phase 2. Toe off/ propulsion

Here we are looking for less leg extension with the trailing leg, and a large stride angle, particularly more front side dominance.

There are many other spatiotemporal, kinematic, kinetic, and neuromuscular factors that could be considered, however they have inconclusive findings or limited understanding in the literature. Therefore, when it comes to improving RE we focus our analysis on the aforementioned biomechanical factors during ground contact and propulsion phases (such as less leg extension at toe-off, larger stride angles, alignment of the ground reaction force and leg axis, and low activation of the lower limb muscles), which appear to have the strongest direct links with running economy. 

            Resistance training to improve running economy

There are three types of resistance training methods that have been found to improve RE in long distance runners (Vos, 2019).  These include heavy resistance training (<6RM), strength endurance resistance training (>6RM) and plyometric training (PT) (Vos, 2019). For the purpose of this blog we will discuss the relevance of PT training and furthermore its relationship to improving running technique.

PT is typified by explosive body weight resistance exercises that involve an eccentric (lengthening) muscle contraction followed immediately by a rapid concentric (shortening) muscle contraction (Turner et al., 2003). This type of muscle action has also been referred to as the stretch-shortening cycle (SSC). PT is used to train muscles to produce maximum force as quickly as possible, thus improving the quality of power. Common plyometric exercises include activities such as bounding, jumping and hopping performed with maximal effort and high velocity (Turner et al., 2003).

The use of PT in conjunction with endurance training was seen to improve RE and performance outcomes in recreational, moderately trained and highly trained long-distance runners with no recent history of participation in a structured PT program (Vos, 2019). Changes in RE are thought to be due to neuromuscular adaptations including increased muscle-tendon stiffness and increases in muscle power (Vos, 2019). PT may also bring about alterations in running mechanics, potentially leading to improved RE (Saunders et al, 2006). Proposed mechanisms for improvement in RE include better coordination and timing of ground force application (Saunders et al., 2006).

Whilst the optimal training recommendations for the addition of PT to endurance training are yet to be determined, evidence suggests that 1-3 sessions per week comprising 1-6 PT exercises for a minimum of 6 weeks is desirable (Vos, 2019). PT training programs should begin with less complex exercises (double and single leg continuous vertical jumping) before progressing to exercises of higher complexity (alternate leg horizontal bounding, double and single leg continuous horizontal jumping over hurdles) and apply principles of progressive overload to reduce potential risk of injury and maximise training adaptations (Vos, 2019).

 Generally, we will provide plyometric drills during the warm-up portion of the running session. This will include different running mechanic drills such as the A-walk, A-Skip, bounds, pogo jumps, broad jumps, ankling and other running specific drills based on what we are working on with the athlete in front of us. These are low level plyometrics, which are perfect whilst the athlete is beginning to develop their SSC and changing their running technique. As the athlete’s training and development progresses we might beging to implement more higher level plyometrics (such as reactive continuous jumps/ hops or depth jumps) into warm-ups or gym-based programs.  

IMPROVING RUNNING TECHNIQUE TO REDUCE INJURY RISK

 So far we have looked specifically at running technique for enhancing distance running performance, specifically improvements in RE. However, running technique may also play a large role in injury biomechanics. Therefore we will focus this next section on how we analyse running technique in distance runners to assess injury risk.

 There are several areas that we focus our attention on in a technique analysis.

 FOOT INCLINATION ANGLE ON CONTACT

An increased foot inclination angle has been related to higher peak knee extensor moments, increased knee energy absorbed, higher peak vertical ground reaction force, and greater braking impulse during running (Souza, 2016). Each of these variables has been implicated in injury biomechanics, suggesting that a very high foot inclination angle at initial contact may not be desirable (Wille et al, 2014). 

 TIBIA ANGLE ON LOADING

For a runner that suffers from impact-related running injuries, an extended tibia is not ideal. A vertical or flexed tibia allows the runner to dissipate impact more readily though knee flexion (Souza, 2016).

 KNEE FLEXION ANGLE DURING STANCE

Although explicit cutoffs have not been developed for this variable, a runner who demonstrates considerably less than 45° of knee flexion may suggest reduced shock absorption, and intervention may be warranted (Dierks et al, 2011).

 HIP EXTENSION DURING LATE STANCE

Commonly observed compensations for runners with reduced hip extension include increased lumbar spine extension, bounding, a strategy to increase float time to increase overall stride length in the absence of adequate hip extension, increased overstriding, including excessive reaching during initial contact as a strategy to increase stride length, and increased cadence to increase running speed in the presence of a limited hip extension (Souza, 2016).

 OVERSTRIDING

Overstriding is a description of a running pattern in which the foot lands in front of the person’s center of mass. A study by Wille and colleagues (2014) identified a metric that is closely related to overstriding—the distance from the heel at initial contact to the runners center of mass—is a significant predictor of knee extensor moment (the sagittal plane torque across the knee joint during stance) and braking impulse (an important contributor to shock attenuation and running energetics) during running.

NOISE ON LANDING

Greater noise with striking the ground may be associated with higher impact forces (Souza, 2016). In addition, asymmetries can quickly be identified by listening to the foot strike patterns of the runner (Souza, 2016). All of this information can be very valuable for a biomechanical running analysis.

CADENCE

The step rate, or cadence, is a variable easily measured in a variety of ways. One strategy is to count the number of right foot strikes over a 1-minute period. This number is equivalent to the “stride rate.”  Multiplying this number by 2 equates to the “step rate.” Several recent studies have evaluated the biomechanical consequences of manipulating cadence (Hunter et al., 2007). These data suggest that an increase in cadence can result in several biomechanical changes in running form, many of which may be desirable in specific runners. For example, it has been demonstrated that increasing cadence by 10% can reduce center of mass vertical excursion, braking impulse, and mechanical energy absorbed at the knee, as well as decrease peak hip adduction angle and peak hip adduction and internal rotation moments during running (Heiderscheit et al, 2001).The optimal cadence has been an area of debate, with some suggesting that approximately 180 steps per minute being ideal. However, the majority of support for this comes from running economy studies, not studies on injury mechanics (Hunter et al, 2007). 

PELVIC DROP IN STANCE

It is possible that pelvic drop may serve as a surrogate measure for hip and/or core muscle weakness. Pelvic drop during running has been reported to be significantly related to both hip abductor strength and hip extension strength, and fatiguing of these muscles have been observed to result in excessive pelvic drop (Noehren et al, 2007). Looking for side to side differences can be helpful in detecting excessive pelvic drop and correlation with associated kinetic chain deficits should be performed to see how this contributes to injury. Although further research is necessary in this area, pelvic drop remains as a variable of interest in a biomechanics running analysis (Souza, 2016).

It is important to note that these variables mentioned here should not be looked at in isolation. They form part of a complex system related to the individual under analysis. Before changes are made and interventions assigned its important to understand the costs versus benefits of making such technical changes. 

CONCLUSION

From our perspective, running technique alterations should be made gradually and put into a big picture scenario for the athlete. It is not just a matter of using a cue such as “don’t overstride”, what does that even mean to an athlete? It is figuring out why the athlete is overstriding in the first place. Is it related to posterior chain weakness in hip extension or is it to do with their stride length or cadence? Language is important here too and the runner should never be made to feel that overstriding is “bad” or that pelvic drop means your core is “weak”. There is so much more at play here.

Changing running technique requires a holistic emphasis on specific mobility work, strength exercises, plyometric running drills and simple “cues” to be adopted in specific running training sessions. Additionally, empowering the athlete to understand how optimal running “feels” not just looks is a key to our programming style. Essentially running is a skill that may need to be re-learned and can take time, supervised coaching and consistent effort to elicit long-term changes.

References

Dierks T.A. et al. (2011) Lower extremity kinematics in runners with patellofemoral pain during a prolonged run. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 43(4):693–700.

Heiderscheit B.C., Chumanov E.S., Michalski M.P. (2011) Effects of step rate manipulation on joint mechanics during running. Medicine and Science of Sports and Exercise. 43(2): 296–302. 

Hunter I. and Smith G.A. (2007). Preferred and optimal stride frequency, stiffness and economy: changes with fatigue during a 1-h high-intensity run. European Journal of Applied Physiology.100 (6):653–61. 

Moore I.S. (2016) Is There an Economical Running Technique? A Review of Modifiable Biomechanical Factors Affecting Running Economy. Sports Medicine. 46:793-807.

Noehren B, Davis I, Hamill J. (2007) ASB clinical biomechanics award winner 2006 prospective study of the biomechanical factors associated with iliotibial band syndrome. Clinical Biomechanics. 22(9):951–6.

Saunders, P.U. et al. (2006) Short-term plyometric training improves running economy in highly trained middle and long distance runners. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 20(4): 947-954.

 Souza R. B. (2016). An Evidence-Based Videotaped Running Biomechanics Analysis. Physical medicine and rehabilitation clinics of North America, 27(1), 217–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmr.2015.08.006

 Turner, A.M., Owings, M., Schwane, J.A. (2003)  Improvement in running economy after 6 weeks of plyometric training. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 17(1):60-67,.

 Vos J.M (2019) The effect of plyometric training on running economy in long distance runners. Journal of Australian Strength & Conditioning. 27(01): 64-69

 Wille C.M. et al. (2014). Ability of sagittal kinematic variables to estimate ground reaction forces and joint kinetics in running. Journal of Orthopaedics and Sports Physical Therapy. 44(10), 825-30.