What do you make of the Evolution Running DVD. Is it worth it?
Triathlon Forum
Login required to started new threads
Login required to post replies
What do you make of the Evolution Running DVD. Is it worth it?
Re: Evolution running worth the money? [goolsbee]
[ In reply to ]
Pose is worth it. Buy the DVD. A clinic is much better, but of course, more expensive.
Evolution is like "chi" running, I believe. Like Pose, but with more fluff and fewer drills...
"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp
Evolution is like "chi" running, I believe. Like Pose, but with more fluff and fewer drills...
"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp
Re: Evolution running worth the money? [Rappstar]
[ In reply to ]
Evolution Running is actually quite different from Chi Running. It is based on solid science and extensive laboratory testing (and race results). The techniques were developed based on analysis of the Kenyan runners and tested to determine which techniques produced the lowest oxygen consumption. We have found improvements in economy of 4.5 to 8% in runners of all levels.
Some of the athletes I coach who use these techniques:
Dan MacKenzie just won the men's 20-24 at Lifetime Fitness by 18 minutes, outsplitting the second fastest runner of the top 5 by 8:02.
Steven Duplinsky, age 17, outran the US Under-20 National Team by 26 seconds per mile to win USAT Nationals, averaging 4:39 per mile.
Margie Shapiro placed 2nd at Worlds with the fastest run split and was recently outrun by Olympic medlist Sue Williams by 1 second.
Lisa Thomas won her age group and the Hawaii slot at Blackwater, with the fastest age group run split by over 4 minutes.
Ryan Bolton appears on the video. His coach Joe Friel taught him these techniques, which he used in the Olympics and in winning Ironman USA.
Athletes are naturally going to be skeptical about how much can be gained by improving running economy. We tend to thing ... run longer, run harder. Make sure to get opinions from people who have the book or video and have used the techniques. You will hear people skoff at the ideas even though they have no experience with them.
My book, The Triathlete's Guide to Run Training, and the video, Evolution Running: Run Faster with Fewer Injuries are vboth available at www.Fitness-Concepts.com and www.EvolutionRunning.com. Ken
Ken Mierke
Head Coach, Fitness Concepts
http://www.Fitness-Concepts.com
Author, The Triathlete's Guide to Run Training
Some of the athletes I coach who use these techniques:
Dan MacKenzie just won the men's 20-24 at Lifetime Fitness by 18 minutes, outsplitting the second fastest runner of the top 5 by 8:02.
Steven Duplinsky, age 17, outran the US Under-20 National Team by 26 seconds per mile to win USAT Nationals, averaging 4:39 per mile.
Margie Shapiro placed 2nd at Worlds with the fastest run split and was recently outrun by Olympic medlist Sue Williams by 1 second.
Lisa Thomas won her age group and the Hawaii slot at Blackwater, with the fastest age group run split by over 4 minutes.
Ryan Bolton appears on the video. His coach Joe Friel taught him these techniques, which he used in the Olympics and in winning Ironman USA.
Athletes are naturally going to be skeptical about how much can be gained by improving running economy. We tend to thing ... run longer, run harder. Make sure to get opinions from people who have the book or video and have used the techniques. You will hear people skoff at the ideas even though they have no experience with them.
My book, The Triathlete's Guide to Run Training, and the video, Evolution Running: Run Faster with Fewer Injuries are vboth available at www.Fitness-Concepts.com and www.EvolutionRunning.com. Ken
Ken Mierke
Head Coach, Fitness Concepts
http://www.Fitness-Concepts.com
Author, The Triathlete's Guide to Run Training
Re: Evolution running worth the money? [KenMierke]
[ In reply to ]
Okay, so explain to me how it is different than Pose?
Pose Athletes (who's credentials I don't need to list): Hunter Kemper, Tim Don, Leanda Cave. There are more.
Pose says good runners have a consistency of technique, that you find in the majority of elite runners, whether they be Kenyan, Ethiopian, Moroccan, etc.
What makes this anything other than copying the analysis and research Dr. Romanov did and supplementing it with some additional tests?
"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp
Pose Athletes (who's credentials I don't need to list): Hunter Kemper, Tim Don, Leanda Cave. There are more.
Pose says good runners have a consistency of technique, that you find in the majority of elite runners, whether they be Kenyan, Ethiopian, Moroccan, etc.
What makes this anything other than copying the analysis and research Dr. Romanov did and supplementing it with some additional tests?
"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp
Re: Evolution running worth the money? [Rappstar]
[ In reply to ]
Personally I think the testing is one very important aspect of developing Evolution Running techniques. We could trade conjecture about the most economical techniques all you want, but when we're talking about technique making you faster, objective data is everything. If you run a 10K PR, many factors could have contributed. If you use less oxygen at 5:30 pace, you're running more efficiently. Do you want to listen to my opinion or the results of a metabolic analyzer?
Romnov has done some excellent work, but his methods deal exclusively with what is happening in the vertical plane. He says that a runner leans forward and gravity propels. There is much more to it than that. I think the forward-leaning posture puts the runner in position to use his/her legs optimnally to create propulsion, but that a runner's legs must produce the proulsion. At the starting line a runner weighs a certain amount, his/her center of mass is a certain height off the ground, and the body stores a certain amount of potential energy. At the finish line, that potential energy will be almost exactly the same. A runner can only fall forward once and then he/she has to use the legs to create horizontal propulsion. If gravity propels, wouldn't heavier runners be faster?
Evolution Running does analyze body position and foot-strike, but it also tells runners how they can most effeciently produce propulsion. The optimal method of propulsion is different from the two paradigms of propulsion that most runners use.
Ken
Ken Mierke
Head Coach, Fitness Concepts
http://www.Fitness-Concepts.com
Author, The Triathlete's Guide to Run Training
Romnov has done some excellent work, but his methods deal exclusively with what is happening in the vertical plane. He says that a runner leans forward and gravity propels. There is much more to it than that. I think the forward-leaning posture puts the runner in position to use his/her legs optimnally to create propulsion, but that a runner's legs must produce the proulsion. At the starting line a runner weighs a certain amount, his/her center of mass is a certain height off the ground, and the body stores a certain amount of potential energy. At the finish line, that potential energy will be almost exactly the same. A runner can only fall forward once and then he/she has to use the legs to create horizontal propulsion. If gravity propels, wouldn't heavier runners be faster?
Evolution Running does analyze body position and foot-strike, but it also tells runners how they can most effeciently produce propulsion. The optimal method of propulsion is different from the two paradigms of propulsion that most runners use.
Ken
Ken Mierke
Head Coach, Fitness Concepts
http://www.Fitness-Concepts.com
Author, The Triathlete's Guide to Run Training
Re: Evolution running worth the money? [KenMierke]
[ In reply to ]
So you merely validate efficiency. How is that teaching people anything. I agree that you can "prove" to people they are running more efficiently. But it's not an immediate thing because coordinating new muscular movements might increase your oxygen need, even if the motion was technically "more efficient" in terms of work done (or, in this case, not done -- not moving the body up/down).
What plane would you deal with? Lateral? Explain to me how lateral motion is going to help my running?
And the potential energy is only the same if you ONLY consider gravitational potential energy. Potential energy is not the same if you consider the potential energy of ATP in the body -- chemical potential -- of which there is a great deal, and that is what is used by the body.
Romanov talks EXTENSIVELY about minimizing vertical displacement. Probably as much as falling/pulling. That is part of why a high-cadence is so important. To minimize the amplitude of vertical oscillation.
There is no question that the legs are responsible for sustaining motion. What else could be? The legs produce propulsion in that they put you in a positon to be propelled forward. Friction on your shoe, which is attached to your leg, provides the reaction force, so really that is what "provides" propulsion. Your statement the legs "create" propulsion doesn't really say a whole lot.
Why would a heavier runner be faster? That's archaic. I believe somebody named Galileo proved that gravity exerts equal force on bodies...
What is your paradigm? Romanov tells everybody up front. Do you want people to buy your stuff to hear it?
I still don't see what you offer other than a copy of Pose...
"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp
What plane would you deal with? Lateral? Explain to me how lateral motion is going to help my running?
And the potential energy is only the same if you ONLY consider gravitational potential energy. Potential energy is not the same if you consider the potential energy of ATP in the body -- chemical potential -- of which there is a great deal, and that is what is used by the body.
Romanov talks EXTENSIVELY about minimizing vertical displacement. Probably as much as falling/pulling. That is part of why a high-cadence is so important. To minimize the amplitude of vertical oscillation.
There is no question that the legs are responsible for sustaining motion. What else could be? The legs produce propulsion in that they put you in a positon to be propelled forward. Friction on your shoe, which is attached to your leg, provides the reaction force, so really that is what "provides" propulsion. Your statement the legs "create" propulsion doesn't really say a whole lot.
Why would a heavier runner be faster? That's archaic. I believe somebody named Galileo proved that gravity exerts equal force on bodies...
What is your paradigm? Romanov tells everybody up front. Do you want people to buy your stuff to hear it?
I still don't see what you offer other than a copy of Pose...
"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp
Re: Evolution running worth the money? [Rappstar]
[ In reply to ]
Your point about economy improvement not being immediate is an excellent one! I agree completely. That is the primary reason why there is so little published research on running economy. Getting long term studies funded is extremely difficult. A 4-week study is certain to "prove" that however each runner already runs is best.
The testing is not only to validate and "prove" what works, but to determine what works. During my research we tried many different techniques, incorporating those that reduced VO2 and discarding those that didn't. What the coach thinks looks smooth and what the athlete feels is good aren't necessarily the best methods.
I'm not talking about the lateral plane, but about how efficient runners use their legs to produce forward, horizontal propulsion. Romanov never covers this - never discusses at all what to do to create propulsion.
Effecient runners use hip extension and not knee extension or knee flexion to produce propulsion. This creates propulsion with minimal vertical displacement and uses greater muscle mass to generate propulsion, therefore minimizing the relative intensity at the muscles. Getting this right is especially important for triathletes who will be running on tired quads. Runners who start using Evolution Running will use their glutes far more than before, reducing the workload on the hamstrings and the quadriceps dramatically. Evolution Running is a real pain in the butt : )
Potential energy is a physics term referring specifically to gravity. Romanov says that runners simply need to fall forward and that gravity will propel them. I disagree with him on this point. I totally agree with you that the energy that propels is the ATP, glycogen, and fatty acids stored in the muscles and liver, not gravity. That was exactly my point.
Yes, Romanov deals extensively with reducing vertical displacement, and does an excellent job discussing this aspect of running technique. That is what I mean by his techniques all involve the vertical plane. That is not about horizontal propulsion. How does a runner move himself/herself forward? Not just by falling forward.
No researchers on running technique - Romanov, Danny Drayer, myself, or any other - has invented anything new. We simply analyzed runners who run with better economy than others and developed ways of teaching those methods. The Pose Method, Evolution Running, and Chi Running have a lot in common.
Romanov teaches the feeling that your legs move up and down and not horizontally. I disaagree with him greatly on this point. Economical runners generate propulsion largely from moving the femurs through an arc that is basically horizontal through the range where propulsion is generated.
Danny Dreyer teaches producing propulsion from hip rotation. While efficient runners do have some degree of hip rotation, I have not found improvements in economy by teaching this and I do not see greater hip rotation in more economical runners.
I'm not knocking the work of either Romanov or Dreyer. Both have value and will help runners who have never worked extensively on technique. Evolution Runnoing offers something different. I believe in that science plays an important role in performance improvement and I believe that my methods have been
Have you ready my book, viewed the video, or been to a clinic? If you had, you would see significant differences beteween the three.
Ken Mierke
Head Coach, Fitness Concepts
http://www.Fitness-Concepts.com
Author, The Triathlete's Guide to Run Training
The testing is not only to validate and "prove" what works, but to determine what works. During my research we tried many different techniques, incorporating those that reduced VO2 and discarding those that didn't. What the coach thinks looks smooth and what the athlete feels is good aren't necessarily the best methods.
I'm not talking about the lateral plane, but about how efficient runners use their legs to produce forward, horizontal propulsion. Romanov never covers this - never discusses at all what to do to create propulsion.
Effecient runners use hip extension and not knee extension or knee flexion to produce propulsion. This creates propulsion with minimal vertical displacement and uses greater muscle mass to generate propulsion, therefore minimizing the relative intensity at the muscles. Getting this right is especially important for triathletes who will be running on tired quads. Runners who start using Evolution Running will use their glutes far more than before, reducing the workload on the hamstrings and the quadriceps dramatically. Evolution Running is a real pain in the butt : )
Potential energy is a physics term referring specifically to gravity. Romanov says that runners simply need to fall forward and that gravity will propel them. I disagree with him on this point. I totally agree with you that the energy that propels is the ATP, glycogen, and fatty acids stored in the muscles and liver, not gravity. That was exactly my point.
Yes, Romanov deals extensively with reducing vertical displacement, and does an excellent job discussing this aspect of running technique. That is what I mean by his techniques all involve the vertical plane. That is not about horizontal propulsion. How does a runner move himself/herself forward? Not just by falling forward.
No researchers on running technique - Romanov, Danny Drayer, myself, or any other - has invented anything new. We simply analyzed runners who run with better economy than others and developed ways of teaching those methods. The Pose Method, Evolution Running, and Chi Running have a lot in common.
Romanov teaches the feeling that your legs move up and down and not horizontally. I disaagree with him greatly on this point. Economical runners generate propulsion largely from moving the femurs through an arc that is basically horizontal through the range where propulsion is generated.
Danny Dreyer teaches producing propulsion from hip rotation. While efficient runners do have some degree of hip rotation, I have not found improvements in economy by teaching this and I do not see greater hip rotation in more economical runners.
I'm not knocking the work of either Romanov or Dreyer. Both have value and will help runners who have never worked extensively on technique. Evolution Runnoing offers something different. I believe in that science plays an important role in performance improvement and I believe that my methods have been
Have you ready my book, viewed the video, or been to a clinic? If you had, you would see significant differences beteween the three.
Ken Mierke
Head Coach, Fitness Concepts
http://www.Fitness-Concepts.com
Author, The Triathlete's Guide to Run Training
Re: Evolution running worth the money? [KenMierke]
[ In reply to ]
Potential energy actually does not only refer to gravity -- it can also refer to elastic potential (a rubber band) or chemical potential or electrostatic. Gravitational potential energy is the most common, but not the only kind. Just an FYI...
I agree that Romanov avoids propulsion almost too much. He tries so hard to get away from the idea of "pushing," that he does sort of refuse to acknowledge some things. I'm not at all surprised to hear you say "hip extension" is a major player in good running. Looking at sprinters, there is a reason that, to be quite frank, they all have HUGE asses (glutes).
Gravity is a player. You use ATP to allow you to use gravity, that's how I'd put it. you also use ATP for hip extensions. I agree that Romanov does essentially close himself off, but I know why he does it. He teaches the basics of his method, and doesn't concern himself with "incidental" byproducts (like hip-extension). He actually shuns them, which I don't like.
Romanov actual teaches a lot of leg swing in an arc like you describe. I think the drills are a lot of up/down like you say. But once you start moving forward, the exact arc you discuss comes into play.
I don't see Romanov as the be all and end all. I've had plenty of serious disagreements with him at clinics about some of these issues.
I am going to buy your book, and I'll let you know what I think.
Your part about "using the hip extensors" was largely what I was asking for in the beginning. I wanted to know what you said that was different from Romanov. "Learn to run like a Kenyan" doesn't really mean much. There are Kenyans that run like crap too...
"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp
I agree that Romanov avoids propulsion almost too much. He tries so hard to get away from the idea of "pushing," that he does sort of refuse to acknowledge some things. I'm not at all surprised to hear you say "hip extension" is a major player in good running. Looking at sprinters, there is a reason that, to be quite frank, they all have HUGE asses (glutes).
Gravity is a player. You use ATP to allow you to use gravity, that's how I'd put it. you also use ATP for hip extensions. I agree that Romanov does essentially close himself off, but I know why he does it. He teaches the basics of his method, and doesn't concern himself with "incidental" byproducts (like hip-extension). He actually shuns them, which I don't like.
Romanov actual teaches a lot of leg swing in an arc like you describe. I think the drills are a lot of up/down like you say. But once you start moving forward, the exact arc you discuss comes into play.
I don't see Romanov as the be all and end all. I've had plenty of serious disagreements with him at clinics about some of these issues.
I am going to buy your book, and I'll let you know what I think.
Your part about "using the hip extensors" was largely what I was asking for in the beginning. I wanted to know what you said that was different from Romanov. "Learn to run like a Kenyan" doesn't really mean much. There are Kenyans that run like crap too...
"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp
Re: Evolution running worth the money? [Rappstar]
[ In reply to ]
It sounds like one of the major differences is that Romanov considers the push an incedental and I consider the "how" of the push to be a fundamental.
I have found that many athletes learning the Pose method find it to be hamstring intensive. This is likely due to inadequate hip extension and to hamstring contractions to lift the heel. I teach athetes to use the angular momentum of the lower leg to bring the heel up at completion of the follow through. The technique is similar to a martial artist swinging a pair of chucks (not sure how to spell the whole word). He holds one stick and controls the other through the chain using angular momentum. A runner can do the same to accomplush the heel flick without contracting the hamstring. Since the hamstrings are a hip extensor, which generate propulsion, I don't want runner fatiguing that muscle group doing anything else.
Like I said earlier, Romanov has done some excellent work and I agree with him on a lot more points than I disagree with him.
Ken
Ken Mierke
Head Coach, Fitness Concepts
http://www.Fitness-Concepts.com
Author, The Triathlete's Guide to Run Training
I have found that many athletes learning the Pose method find it to be hamstring intensive. This is likely due to inadequate hip extension and to hamstring contractions to lift the heel. I teach athetes to use the angular momentum of the lower leg to bring the heel up at completion of the follow through. The technique is similar to a martial artist swinging a pair of chucks (not sure how to spell the whole word). He holds one stick and controls the other through the chain using angular momentum. A runner can do the same to accomplush the heel flick without contracting the hamstring. Since the hamstrings are a hip extensor, which generate propulsion, I don't want runner fatiguing that muscle group doing anything else.
Like I said earlier, Romanov has done some excellent work and I agree with him on a lot more points than I disagree with him.
Ken
Ken Mierke
Head Coach, Fitness Concepts
http://www.Fitness-Concepts.com
Author, The Triathlete's Guide to Run Training
Re: Evolution running worth the money? [goolsbee]
[ In reply to ]
Not to sidetrack Rappstar and Ken's comments, but here's a current real-world story. I'll keep it short.
Early this spring I found a run coach.
He said my style was all wrong....and set a plan to change it. (Psuedo Pose ball running stuff)
So, I changed..wasn't really that hard.
So, I tore my calf muscle and spent the past 2 months recovering from it.
This whole process sucked
This weekend, I bumped into a former 10x or so All-American stud triathlete friend and told him the story. He laughed and said "just run".
Too bad he wasn't around a few months ago.
Just run. Within reason, you can work your style to work for you.
Early this spring I found a run coach.
He said my style was all wrong....and set a plan to change it. (Psuedo Pose ball running stuff)
So, I changed..wasn't really that hard.
So, I tore my calf muscle and spent the past 2 months recovering from it.
This whole process sucked
This weekend, I bumped into a former 10x or so All-American stud triathlete friend and told him the story. He laughed and said "just run".
Too bad he wasn't around a few months ago.
Just run. Within reason, you can work your style to work for you.
Hi Smitty,
For sure, any change in technique puts different demands on your tissues and training volume and intensity need to be decreased initially and gradually ramped back up. It sounds like your running coach was a l;ittle too aggressive as you adjusted your technique. Fot athletes who want to perform to their potential, a period of reduced running volume is worth long term performance improvments. For others it might not be. Ken
Ken Mierke
Head Coach, Fitness Concepts
http://www.Fitness-Concepts.com
Author, The Triathlete's Guide to Run Training
For sure, any change in technique puts different demands on your tissues and training volume and intensity need to be decreased initially and gradually ramped back up. It sounds like your running coach was a l;ittle too aggressive as you adjusted your technique. Fot athletes who want to perform to their potential, a period of reduced running volume is worth long term performance improvments. For others it might not be. Ken
Ken Mierke
Head Coach, Fitness Concepts
http://www.Fitness-Concepts.com
Author, The Triathlete's Guide to Run Training