Comments on: Do You Need to be Taught How to Run?

By: David Smith

David Smith — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 19:58:25 +0000

New research is also showing the static stretching is not the panacea that everyone said it was. Scientific studies suggest that we’d be better off spending the time lifting weights, cooling down, warming up or doing dynamic stretches. Looks like all of our gym teachers had it wrong.

By: Do You Need to be Taught How to Run? (part II) » Complete Running Network

Do You Need to be Taught How to Run? (part II) » Complete Running Network — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 02:35:26 +0000

[...] (part two in a series) ———————————————– In Do You Need to be Taught How to Run Part I, we touched on some of the most common reasons why runners get injured, and concluded that poor running form is often left out of the discussion. That set the stage for Part II: Whether you should work on improving your form. [...]

By: Dawn - Pink Chick

Dawn - Pink Chick — Tue, 29 Aug 2006 16:03:47 +0000

Form is an interesting topic. Several years ago when I went to a running clinic I was taught a more upright form but more and more today I see people heading towards a more relaxed version of the upright form. With the introduction of Pose,”Run like a kid” forms and other such forms, one has to wonder which one is really the best way to run.If it’s not what you’re doing how do you change or improve on bad habits.

I look forward to reading more on this.

By: Meg

Meg — Tue, 29 Aug 2006 04:06:37 +0000

I have absolutely no form…. bring it on. Part 2, oh, part 2, where are you?

(Can’t wait!)

By: Adeel

Adeel — Tue, 29 Aug 2006 02:31:43 +0000

The 10% rule is bizarre. I have actually heard people talking about going from 10 mpw to 11 mpw and making it to 15 mpw in about a month or two. When increasing volume, I keep it to about an extra five minutes (1 km) per run, or about 6-7 km per week.

I like where this series is going, and I think a lot of us know where it’s headed. I know you have videos, so please post them if possible.

By: Joe Ely

Joe Ely — Tue, 29 Aug 2006 00:36:57 +0000

Mark, looking forward to the series. For some reason, I’ve been playing more attention to form the past several weeks. But that’s just been by feel. I look forward to your further posts…thanks!!

By: Jank

Jank — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 23:44:56 +0000

Huh. Never thought of it as pace-based.

Thanks.

By: Mark Iocchelli

Mark Iocchelli — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 18:59:11 +0000

Jank: Yes, I think it would be safe to say there might be a lower mileage limit where the 10% rule might not apply. However, one might also argue that even the lower distances might benefit from the rule if one is running them at faster paces. Just a thought.

Jeanne: I don’t think you’ll die, although some may consider it torturous enough to think it a fate worse than death!

By: Jeanne

Jeanne — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 17:14:37 +0000

it will kill some of us!

By: jank

jank — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 17:13:06 +0000

I’ve had some doubts about the 10% rule. Mostly, I wonder if maybe there shouldn’t be some mileage limit beneath which it doesn’t apply. IE, say I’m running 2 miles three times a week for a grand total of 6 miles a week.

Is it really going to kill me to suddenly jump up to, say, 3 miles a day three days a week (increase of 33%), or to go to 4 days a week (increase of 25%)? What if I’ve been reliably cross-training?