I think the explanation is sound if you consider the physics.
Your links don’t really point to much.
1st & 2nd link are the same information. And all they really say is that running and hopping require similar energy expenditure, but also say that they naturally choose flat angles of landing velocity (which I take to mean they don’t come down steeply, or does it mean something else?)
3rd link contradicts itself.
Stride angle was negatively correlated with RE
RE was positively correlated with ground contact time
stride angle was correlated with ground contact time
edit: although I suppose the correlation could be a directly opposed relationship
Spring mass model is physics. All motion is wavelike and the amount of vertical component is based on the spring itself.
Fair enough. I was specifically thinking of the VO of the body mass. I am sure that keeping the VO of the body to a minimum is still a key to energy conservation, I imagine it’s learning how to load the legs within that confine that brings the SMM into play.
On inspection of the video I notice what I consider to be a different explanation to many of the descriptions I have heard before. To me they all land in front of both their hips and center of gravity, however what I see as most specific is the fact that the loading on the leg all seems to come the second the shin reaches vertical. This prevents the braking forces often touted as being the curse of overstriding, because none of the weight can be focused on an oppositional leverage/structure.
Reducing vertical oscillation during running has been shown to decrease running economy which begs the question why Garmin even has those metrics in the first place.
Source?