Hacker News Reader

Comment by sjeohp | Hacker News Reader

As a lifelong athlete the on-your-toes style of barefoot running is the best way to run. If you cannot run on your toes you are not built to run. There are rare heel-running sportspeople but running is not their competitive strength. Over long distances it is easy to fall back on heel-running out of laziness, because the impact is absorbed more by joints and less by tired muscles, but that is a failure of fitness and a sub-optimal style.

Barefoot vs shoes is more of a personal choice. A cushioned heel can permit bad style by reducing pain, whereas barefoot forces proper technique or else breaks your feet. However proper technique once you have it doesn't depend on footwear.

View on HN

> As a lifelong athlete the on-your-toes style of barefoot running is the best way to run. If you cannot run on your toes you are not built to run.

Nonsense. You can go tell Meb Keflezghi, winner of both the Boston and New York marathon, that he's not built to run. He's a prime example of a heel striker [1], though slightly less prominent in his later years.

More generally, in [2], a study of elite level runners in the half marathon, found that at the 15km point the top 50 was comprised of 62% rear-foot strikers, 36% mid-foot, and 2.0% fore-foot strikers.

If a certain running style works for you, i.e. you've been running injury-free, don't try to change it. You are more likely to do harm than good.

[1] https://runblogger.com/2011/11/meb-keflezighis-running-from-...

[2] http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/abstract/2007/08000/foot_s...

> Meb Keflezghi, winner of both the Boston and New York marathon, that he's not built to run. He's a prime example of a heel striker [1], though slightly less prominent in his later years.

Trained hard and overcame the limitation for a time? I did say there are exceptions.

> More generally, in [2], a study of elite level runners in the half marathon, found that at the 15km point the top 50 was comprised of 62% rear-foot strikers, 36% mid-foot, and 2.0% fore-foot strikers.

Reflects that heel-strikers are more common.

From a quick search:

1,991 runners were classified by foot-strike pattern, revealing a heel-strike prevalence of 93.67% (n=1,865). A significant difference between foot-strike classification and performance was found using a Kruskal-Wallis test (p < 0.0001), with more elite performers being less likely to heel-strike.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4801105/

> I did say there are exceptions.

You said: There are rare heel-running sportspeople but running is not their competitive strength.

Do you agree that Meb Keflezghi's competitive strength is running?

The study you link to mentions multiple studies that say that 75-80% of elites are heel-striking. Would you call that rare?

No, I think his competitive strength is probably mental fortitude, but that's just speculation.

We're splitting hairs now.

The numbers tilt steeply towards toe-striking at the competitive end, because toe-striking has a higher technical floor and ceiling.

But again, what you're saying here is purely anecdotal. Actually, it may not be, but I have absolutely no idea because the way you are presenting it is in a purely anecdotal way.

Is this not basic physics looking at pivot points? If 160+ pounds is landing on your heels, the shock of that must be absorbed entirely by your knees and hips. If the same weight lands on the the front of your feet, you have the added absorption offered by your toes, ankles, and achilles tendon. That's not exactly anecdotal.

As for the long-term health effects of one or the other, that's still being debated and might be dependent on the joint health of the individual runner. See [1].

[1] http://journals.lww.com/acsm-msse/Citation/2013/12000/Forefo...

I don't know if your heel touching the ground first is the same thing as what you're describing. I usually run as a 'midfoot' but I sometimes let my heel touch the ground first. I don't drop my weight onto it, though. I just roll the foot forwards. 'Heel striking' doesn't mean running on your heels.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com