It’s important to remember that when talking about athletes in motion, centre of gravity is a better term to you use rather than centre mass. When running your centre of gravity is actually in front of you so these athletes are in fact landing directly under their centre of gravity which happens to be in front of their centre mass; simply because they are in motion. Center mass is really only relevant to discuss if we’re taking about stationary rotational movements. But when running jumping or flipping it’s all in relation to centre of gravity as that is what is necessary to keep an object/athlete in motion. You’re right that athletes don’t land directly under themselves when you view them on touchdown on a freeze frame but it’s important to remember that to the athlete it feels as if they are landing directly under themselves because their centre of gravity is actually quite far in front of them. The last thing you’d want is for young athletes to watch this video and their takeaway is to try and cue themselves to land in front of their “centre mass” because when you freeze frame elite athletes on touch down their foot makes contact slightly in front of them.
@@jonahwantenaar2652 the last thing I would want anyone to do is get false information, otherwise known as misinformation. How someone interprets a fact that we have shared here is not the point. This is a scientifically proven thing and not a theory. Notice how we did not tell anyone what to do or how to do it, we simply stated a known mathematical fact that runners do not land under their CoM/CoG. Anything other than this is not what we are covering and we are simply refuting the misinformation that social media influencers are getting wrong. We are not giving cues to land in front of CoM/CoG, simply stating that anything other than the facts is not true. Nothing more. Thanks for your comment.
@@theslingmethod You’re right. You didn’t give any instruction and you’re not responsible for what people do with this info. So I take that part of what I said back it’s not fair to hold you to that. But I do notice that you’re using centre mass and centre of gravity as if they’re the same thing when they aren’t. They can happen to be located in the same place if an object is stationary or spinning in place but when in motion like running they are actually located in different places. Athletes do not land under their centre mass because they are landing under their centre of gravity. The faster an athlete runs the more in front of them their centre of gravity is and thus the further they will need to land in front of themselves. Therefore it is not scientifically accurate to say that athletes land both in front of their centre mass and centre of gravity as if they are the same thing they are not.
I think coaches give that queue to fix sprinters who are over striding but in actuality you are not landing underneath your hip. Because if you say land a bit in front of the hip they start tippy toeing, reaching which is not good. Good stuff brother
@@osamaalshareef491 after speaking with hundreds of coaches about this, the vast majority actually do believe they can land under their body and that it is beneficial. The sad part also is that most don’t even understand or accept the fact that the faster we run, the further away we land from our CoM. They, for some reason believe that the faster we run the closer to CoM we land.
Correct it’s never been like that nobody can strike directly under them theirs just not enough time to produce the force it’s like the high knee queue it’s an exaggeration
Point 1) "Landing under your hips" is a coaching cue to prevent the athlete from over reaching too far in front of hips. Over reaching is a common problem of people trying to increase their stride length and the term 'land under your hips' gives a proper mental image for the athlete to follow to prevent the over stride. Point 2) In those videos, the foot is touching very slightly in front of the hips, but the actual landing or absorption of impact IS directly under the hips instead of out front. If absorption of impact/the actual landing was in front of the hips, those sprinters would be watching the races instead of participating. Point 3) 'Under the hips' is relative and not exact.
Point 1) many coaches actually don’t know it’s not possible to land under our hips/CoM/CoG and blindly say it is possible. Point 2) “touch down” IS the “landing” as per the actual research and force plate analysis of runners. Pre mid-stance can I licit over 500lbs of force in sprinters and a little less in endurance runners. Point 3) “under the hips is under the hips” it’s either under the hips or it isn’t, and it isn’t. 👍
@@theslingmethodpoint1) at the speeds that these athletes are going at it’s completely impossible to differentiate between and inch of where your landing. Point 2) they are TRYING to strike under their center of mass and they don’t only because it’s not physically possible. It’s not a literal meaning it’s a cue (a very good one I might add) to get people to minimize breaking forces. Point 3) you seem to have very limited idea of these methods so please do not act so annoying.
@@justsomenapalm5067 you seem to not have an understanding of slow motion video capture and force plate analysis we use in the laboratory to assess runners….in light of that ignorance, please don’t act so annoying! 🙄
@@theslingmethod ???? Are you not seeing my point? It’s not a factual statement it’s a coaching and mental cue that helps athletes sprint tall and have a forceful foot strike.
It's the shin angle or more precisely the force vector is initially applied vertically. Notice in each instance the shin angle is perpendicular to the ground at initial contact. The point is to not "reach out". Short of someone missing half their foot, the initial contact point will always be in front of the COM. It's the direction of the applied force That should be under the COM. Sprinters are cued to "stomp roaches", "press into the ground", " hammer the ground". Yes back in the 80's and 90's we were told to reach out and "tear the track back." You can compare shin angles at the point of contact between Flojo and Julienne Alford to see the difference.
I’m by no means a pro sprinter, currently aiming for sub 11 but the general aim is when your front foot strikes the ground you want to have created a figure 4 like bolt has at 1:23
The most efficient point for your leg to "fire" is when the ground reaction force moves behind the hip joint. If the leg fires before this point the leg drives backwards as it fires, if you wait too long after this point you lose efficiency. The ideal is your leg to finish loading just as you hit this point so you can fire instantly. So the leg has to land in front of this point so it has time to load (the knee bending so you can then straighten it when firing). How far in front depends on how fast you are going. The faster you are going the more in front you will land as the body is moving faster and so catches up to the leg faster. So for a slow amateur this can almost be under the body but for a pro sprinter it will be further out because they are moving faster and so their body is catching up to the leg faster..
The point where the body produces the most force into the ground is right under the center of mass. This point is what we simply call the landing point. Our feet spend some time on the ground and swing during ground contacts.
Accordingly the ignition timing is set before the piston reaches top dead center, because it takes time for the compressed gas mixture to inflame and expand, so the max power is generated shortly after top dead. The runner also needs to compress first and load is diagonally downwards directed kinetical energy into his muscles and tendons to redirect it diagonally upwards again, and he is partially bouncing on his feed with s.c. isometric contraction to apply spring forces whilst putting his legs and feet in the proper position for that and also adding an amount of concentric contraction in the push off and also the momentum of the legs of course. There is active power (pushing off) and reactive power (pulling up knees), and with the best body mechanics you reduce the reactive part to the least and with well trained tendons and muscles you generate the max spring forces.
@@theslingmethod People talk a lot about cadence and how to raise it. But to me cadence is a result of technique and not other way around. Protein folding is the result of the arrangement of amino acids and not is the arrangement of a.a. the result of the protein structure. Therefore I didn't even try to change my cadence, but I found some crucial aspects of running mechanics which also have great influence on it. F.e. only straightening my lower back by tilting my pelvis a little more forth increased my cadence from 160 to 170. Last week during warm up I tried only running by hip rolling and left my legs as passive as possible. On the contrary I left my pelvis passive and ran only by leg scissoring. Both I can use as a running drill. But during my run I played with these both aspects an when I engaged more hip momentum, suddenly my cadence went from 170 to 180. I still run slow with 6 to 5:30/km. But my run became really smooth. Another crucial thing also changed with more hip momentum: my heels came up a little higher just by itself. Before it wouldn't have made sense to try to raise them, because I would have wasted energy working against my tense quads. With more hip engagement the quads are relaxed immediately after kick off, so the heels swing up higher. Before I was running like skipping from leg to leg and my pelvis followed by rolling and so my shoulders contrawise. But now my pelvis is leading and my legs are following, so there is less strain in my whole system. I guess, that the whole upper body work must also work like a energy saving system. The first thing I changed this season was to change the timing of the kick off by skipping faster into it, so I don't bend my leg that much after ground contact and my kickoff became much harder and the running much more stiff in positive terms. When letting myself falling forth slightly, my legs are like running faster by itself. But the hip rolling movement and it's effects was most exciting!
@@theslingmethod hi, today I discovered another running magic! Try running like sb. is holding you from behind and try running as if sb. is pushing you forth by your back. The effect of this is phenomenal. These both aspects must be trained and harmonized. The first will lead to leg scissoring and application of the pulling forces, the second will lead to hip domination which let the legs get very relaxed. If both aspects are dispensed in the right proportion, the technique will get perfect. And this perfection is not visible and can't be learned by looking at how you are running.
Another thing I always hear is that we should sprint completely vertically which is actually impossible. Even when walking we have a forward lean or we couldn't move forward.
@@honkymonkey9568 Michael Johnson and a few others would disagree with that. However, on the flip side of that, more forward lean does not = faster running. Research has shown that economy decreases with a forward lean.
Landing nearer to centre off mass is far better than overstride. Thats the key. Why justin gatlin and Bolt looks like their foot are not landing right under the hip but slightly further is becos....during landing the Knee need to bent a little bit.
@theslingmethod he has a clear valid point which is completely understandable. There's a difference between over striding and slightly steping in front of the hip/COM. Its simply a no brainer, I'm confused on why you need him to define it?
I was wondering about this, I tried running where I took the longest strides I could as fast as I could and then I tried running with my feet landing under my center of mass and I felt like I was missing out on the potential for better stride length. Also I'm more comfortable landing slightly in front anyway
I'm sure it felt like you were stutter-stepping, stuck in 2nd gear, and persistently about to fall on your face. That's how it felt for me whenever I tried this. You're not only pushing off when you are in contact with the ground; you are also absorbing the shock of contacting the ground before you can push off. But this narrator never talks about the knee bend occurring to absorb the shock until COM is attained, when the knee straightens and the push-off begins. If the knee was never bent, you would have a braking effect. But that's not what happens.
@@hektor6766 we didn’t talk about the knee bend because this video isn’t about that. We stick to the point and keep it to the point. We’ve written books on biomechanics and developed an entire 9 week course on the subject, knee bend, pronation, internal rotation, are things we talk about a lot, but not here in this video because that wasn’t the subject. Last thing, in gait the knee doesn’t straighten. 👍
@@victorynn3208 it’s a weird one isn’t it. Guess the people saying it have never seen slow motion footage or they’re misunderstanding it. Thanks for commenting. Make sure to check out my other videos and maybe hit the subscribe button. 👍
@@theslingmethod As a marathon runner, Eliud Kipchoge does not land with his feet infront. My theory is that you can save some energy by landing under your center of mass. While this can save a lot of energy during a marathon, sprinters might not care about this. I think they even can run faster when their ground time is longer.
@@frizeii you may be unpleasantly surprised to hear that Eliud Kipchoge doesn’t land anywhere near his CoM. I have another video on my channel showing and debunking this too. 👍
where is the most power generated while it is on the ground...there has been a diagram of the force created and it was very lil force created when the foot strike was a bit in front him and the most force was created when the foot was under the hip...your arguing a moot point
I noticed the toe is forward of center mass but the ankle is close! The best coaches are preaching no reaching and pawing back. And the force is generated from the glutes and extension and pushing.
@@dennisrobinson8008 both the toes and the ankle are way in front. Remember though that hundreds (up to 1000) of Lbs of force occur before mid stance during elite sprinting. Most force is generated by the hamstrings and adductors, and Soleus not glutes. 👍
@@theslingmethod Hi. There are differing schools of thoughts concerning this. I follow and ascribe to the coaches which say the glutes are the primary mover and the hamstrings are a supporting muscle. You can run in a way where the glutes aren't really activated but it's asking for injury. The glutes are the strongest muscles in the human body and a primary mover in sports where you have to move and sprint. In many athletes the glutes aren't fully activated limiting performance, a young athlete might have completely in active or nearly inactive glutes due to how they are moving life changes once they get their glutes activated...
u should testing force created from ground strike and where the foot is when the most force is created... its tough to generate ground force when your extremeties are farthest from the body... throw a punch with ur elbow tucked at ur side using ur hip... throw a punch with ur arm extended using ur hip...which one generates more power... makes sense theres only 34 comments...
Hahahahaha so you think the slower runners have better technique? Or is it the injured runners with the better technique? Imagine how the rest of the world could benefit if they stopped imagining fairy tales and unicorn stories! 🤣🤣🤣
@@theslingmethodyo one more thing, you know that the center of mass can shift depending on how you position your body? You can’t just say that the hips are the center of mass because the actual center of mass keeps shifting when you’re sprinting, anyways good video!
@@PythagorasFormula sure, can you identify where the CoM is 100% exactly? I expect probably not. As we know the CoM doesn’t move all that much in a “ContraLateral Reciprocal” movement such as running where a mostly vertical posture is seen, we know it doesn’t shift much at all. 👍
@@theslingmethod yes it doesn’t shift much but it still shifts, depending on how good your technique is. Btw I really liked your video, it would be amazing if you could also make technique videos
@@PythagorasFormula if you scroll through my videos you’ll see some posted here. Different to what some people do as The Sling Method focuses on biomechanics. Thanks for your comment. 👍
@@theslingmethod no. But to illustrate how much forward the center of gravity is on different body positions. When the body leans forward the COM is not in the hips as your draw over suggest.
@@markusgptake a look at the biomechanics research, it’s clear. This video is a visual representation showing that no runners land under CoM. Did the fastest person to ever run the 100m land under his CoM? No.
@@TheMsyZa the evidence is in the video and in the scientific literature and is not at all cherry picked. It seems you’re here only to argue and be disrespectful. People seem to want to ignore facts and scream “cherry picked” because they disagree but without ever putting forth evidence to the contrary. So basically arguing for the sake of just arguing.
It’s important to remember that when talking about athletes in motion, centre of gravity is a better term to you use rather than centre mass. When running your centre of gravity is actually in front of you so these athletes are in fact landing directly under their centre of gravity which happens to be in front of their centre mass; simply because they are in motion. Center mass is really only relevant to discuss if we’re taking about stationary rotational movements. But when running jumping or flipping it’s all in relation to centre of gravity as that is what is necessary to keep an object/athlete in motion.
You’re right that athletes don’t land directly under themselves when you view them on touchdown on a freeze frame but it’s important to remember that to the athlete it feels as if they are landing directly under themselves because their centre of gravity is actually quite far in front of them. The last thing you’d want is for young athletes to watch this video and their takeaway is to try and cue themselves to land in front of their “centre mass” because when you freeze frame elite athletes on touch down their foot makes contact slightly in front of them.
@@jonahwantenaar2652 the last thing I would want anyone to do is get false information, otherwise known as misinformation. How someone interprets a fact that we have shared here is not the point. This is a scientifically proven thing and not a theory. Notice how we did not tell anyone what to do or how to do it, we simply stated a known mathematical fact that runners do not land under their CoM/CoG. Anything other than this is not what we are covering and we are simply refuting the misinformation that social media influencers are getting wrong. We are not giving cues to land in front of CoM/CoG, simply stating that anything other than the facts is not true. Nothing more. Thanks for your comment.
@@theslingmethod You’re right. You didn’t give any instruction and you’re not responsible for what people do with this info. So I take that part of what I said back it’s not fair to hold you to that. But I do notice that you’re using centre mass and centre of gravity as if they’re the same thing when they aren’t. They can happen to be located in the same place if an object is stationary or spinning in place but when in motion like running they are actually located in different places. Athletes do not land under their centre mass because they are landing under their centre of gravity. The faster an athlete runs the more in front of them their centre of gravity is and thus the further they will need to land in front of themselves. Therefore it is not scientifically accurate to say that athletes land both in front of their centre mass and centre of gravity as if they are the same thing they are not.
@@jonahwantenaar2652 sure, they’re not the same, and I didn’t say they were, however, landing under “either” CoM or CoG never occurs.
I’ve heard that too. You land a bit in front of your center of mass. But that doesn’t mean the more in front the better
Nowhere ever was that insinuated, nowhere!
I think coaches give that queue to fix sprinters who are over striding but in actuality you are not landing underneath your hip. Because if you say land a bit in front of the hip they start tippy toeing, reaching which is not good. Good stuff brother
@@osamaalshareef491 after speaking with hundreds of coaches about this, the vast majority actually do believe they can land under their body and that it is beneficial. The sad part also is that most don’t even understand or accept the fact that the faster we run, the further away we land from our CoM. They, for some reason believe that the faster we run the closer to CoM we land.
Correct it’s never been like that nobody can strike directly under them theirs just not enough time to produce the force it’s like the high knee queue it’s an exaggeration
100% correct! 👍
Point 1) "Landing under your hips" is a coaching cue to prevent the athlete from over reaching too far in front of hips. Over reaching is a common problem of people trying to increase their stride length and the term 'land under your hips' gives a proper mental image for the athlete to follow to prevent the over stride.
Point 2) In those videos, the foot is touching very slightly in front of the hips, but the actual landing or absorption of impact IS directly under the hips instead of out front. If absorption of impact/the actual landing was in front of the hips, those sprinters would be watching the races instead of participating.
Point 3) 'Under the hips' is relative and not exact.
Point 1) many coaches actually don’t know it’s not possible to land under our hips/CoM/CoG and blindly say it is possible.
Point 2) “touch down” IS the “landing” as per the actual research and force plate analysis of runners. Pre mid-stance can I licit over 500lbs of force in sprinters and a little less in endurance runners.
Point 3) “under the hips is under the hips” it’s either under the hips or it isn’t, and it isn’t. 👍
@@theslingmethodpoint1) at the speeds that these athletes are going at it’s completely impossible to differentiate between and inch of where your landing.
Point 2) they are TRYING to strike under their center of mass and they don’t only because it’s not physically possible. It’s not a literal meaning it’s a cue (a very good one I might add) to get people to minimize breaking forces.
Point 3) you seem to have very limited idea of these methods so please do not act so annoying.
@@justsomenapalm5067 you seem to not have an understanding of slow motion video capture and force plate analysis we use in the laboratory to assess runners….in light of that ignorance, please don’t act so annoying! 🙄
@@theslingmethod ???? Are you not seeing my point? It’s not a factual statement it’s a coaching and mental cue that helps athletes sprint tall and have a forceful foot strike.
@@justsomenapalm5067I’m not missing anything. Indeed, that’s the point, many use it as a factual statement in all distances. 👍
It's the shin angle or more precisely the force vector is initially applied vertically. Notice in each instance the shin angle is perpendicular to the ground at initial contact. The point is to not "reach out". Short of someone missing half their foot, the initial contact point will always be in front of the COM. It's the direction of the applied force That should be under the COM. Sprinters are cued to "stomp roaches", "press into the ground", " hammer the ground". Yes back in the 80's and 90's we were told to reach out and "tear the track back." You can compare shin angles at the point of contact between Flojo and Julienne Alford to see the difference.
I’m by no means a pro sprinter, currently aiming for sub 11 but the general aim is when your front foot strikes the ground you want to have created a figure 4 like bolt has at 1:23
In Bolt’s case that occurs slightly after the landing point.
The most efficient point for your leg to "fire" is when the ground reaction force moves behind the hip joint. If the leg fires before this point the leg drives backwards as it fires, if you wait too long after this point you lose efficiency. The ideal is your leg to finish loading just as you hit this point so you can fire instantly. So the leg has to land in front of this point so it has time to load (the knee bending so you can then straighten it when firing). How far in front depends on how fast you are going. The faster you are going the more in front you will land as the body is moving faster and so catches up to the leg faster. So for a slow amateur this can almost be under the body but for a pro sprinter it will be further out because they are moving faster and so their body is catching up to the leg faster..
The point where the body produces the most force into the ground is right under the center of mass. This point is what we simply call the landing point. Our feet spend some time on the ground and swing during ground contacts.
@@user-pg7gs2oo2m indeed that was the point of the post to show that we do not “land” under our CoM. 👍
Accordingly the ignition timing is set before the piston reaches top dead center, because it takes time for the compressed gas mixture to inflame and expand, so the max power is generated shortly after top dead.
The runner also needs to compress first and load is diagonally downwards directed kinetical energy into his muscles and tendons to redirect it diagonally upwards again, and he is partially bouncing on his feed with s.c. isometric contraction to apply spring forces whilst putting his legs and feet in the proper position for that and also adding an amount of concentric contraction in the push off and also the momentum of the legs of course.
There is active power (pushing off) and reactive power (pulling up knees), and with the best body mechanics you reduce the reactive part to the least and with well trained tendons and muscles you generate the max spring forces.
@@Raucherbeinknacker 👍👍👍
@@theslingmethod People talk a lot about cadence and how to raise it. But to me cadence is a result of technique and not other way around.
Protein folding is the result of the arrangement of amino acids and not is the arrangement of a.a. the result of the protein structure.
Therefore I didn't even try to change my cadence, but I found some crucial aspects of running mechanics which also have great influence on it. F.e. only straightening my lower back by tilting my pelvis a little more forth increased my cadence from 160 to 170.
Last week during warm up I tried only running by hip rolling and left my legs as passive as possible. On the contrary I left my pelvis passive and ran only by leg scissoring. Both I can use as a running drill. But during my run I played with these both aspects an when I engaged more hip momentum, suddenly my cadence went from 170 to 180. I still run slow with 6 to 5:30/km. But my run became really smooth. Another crucial thing also changed with more hip momentum: my heels came up a little higher just by itself.
Before it wouldn't have made sense to try to raise them, because I would have wasted energy working against my tense quads.
With more hip engagement the quads are relaxed immediately after kick off, so the heels swing up higher.
Before I was running like skipping from leg to leg and my pelvis followed by rolling and so my shoulders contrawise. But now my pelvis is leading and my legs are following, so there is less strain in my whole system.
I guess, that the whole upper body work must also work like a energy saving system.
The first thing I changed this season was to change the timing of the kick off by skipping faster into it, so I don't bend my leg that much after ground contact and my kickoff became much harder and the running much more stiff in positive terms. When letting myself falling forth slightly, my legs are like running faster by itself.
But the hip rolling movement and it's effects was most exciting!
@@Raucherbeinknacker have a watch of this video all about cadence.
ua-cam.com/video/LXNvdPAbL2g/v-deo.htmlsi=PxDj5D8HpOTRS-QE
@@theslingmethod hi, today I discovered another running magic! Try running like sb. is holding you from behind and try running as if sb. is pushing you forth by your back. The effect of this is phenomenal. These both aspects must be trained and harmonized. The first will lead to leg scissoring and application of the pulling forces, the second will lead to hip domination which let the legs get very relaxed. If both aspects are dispensed in the right proportion, the technique will get perfect. And this perfection is not visible and can't be learned by looking at how you are running.
@@Raucherbeinknacker What's "sb"?
That true your body is travel forward, you need something to counter for balance, if u land under your hip you would probably fall
@@doudleyJ 100% correct! 👍
Another thing I always hear is that we should sprint completely vertically which is actually impossible. Even when walking we have a forward lean or we couldn't move forward.
@@honkymonkey9568 Michael Johnson and a few others would disagree with that. However, on the flip side of that, more forward lean does not = faster running. Research has shown that economy decreases with a forward lean.
Landing nearer to centre off mass is far better than overstride.
Thats the key.
Why justin gatlin and Bolt looks like their foot are not landing right under the hip but slightly further is becos....during landing the Knee need to bent a little bit.
@@LanRazlan-q4hplease specifically define an over stride. Thanks
@theslingmethod he has a clear valid point which is completely understandable.
There's a difference between over striding and slightly steping in front of the hip/COM. Its simply a no brainer, I'm confused on why you need him to define it?
That ending got me😂😂
@@B1gBossMan 🤣🤣🤣
I was wondering about this, I tried running where I took the longest strides I could as fast as I could and then I tried running with my feet landing under my center of mass and I felt like I was missing out on the potential for better stride length. Also I'm more comfortable landing slightly in front anyway
I'm sure it felt like you were stutter-stepping, stuck in 2nd gear, and persistently about to fall on your face. That's how it felt for me whenever I tried this. You're not only pushing off when you are in contact with the ground; you are also absorbing the shock of contacting the ground before you can push off. But this narrator never talks about the knee bend occurring to absorb the shock until COM is attained, when the knee straightens and the push-off begins. If the knee was never bent, you would have a braking effect. But that's not what happens.
@@hektor6766 we didn’t talk about the knee bend because this video isn’t about that. We stick to the point and keep it to the point. We’ve written books on biomechanics and developed an entire 9 week course on the subject, knee bend, pronation, internal rotation, are things we talk about a lot, but not here in this video because that wasn’t the subject. Last thing, in gait the knee doesn’t straighten. 👍
So are you saying even at the start the leg lands in front?
@@grtheredroad9923 what did the video show you?
fascinating!
I land under my hip but my running cycle is different
You don’t, and it isn’t. 👍
I could never make sense of landing right underneath you
@@victorynn3208 it’s a weird one isn’t it. Guess the people saying it have never seen slow motion footage or they’re misunderstanding it. Thanks for commenting. Make sure to check out my other videos and maybe hit the subscribe button. 👍
Its is a difference between distance running and sprinting.
@@frizeii not sure what you mean?
@@theslingmethod As a marathon runner, Eliud Kipchoge does not land with his feet infront. My theory is that you can save some energy by landing under your center of mass. While this can save a lot of energy during a marathon, sprinters might not care about this. I think they even can run faster when their ground time is longer.
@@frizeii you may be unpleasantly surprised to hear that Eliud Kipchoge doesn’t land anywhere near his CoM. I have another video on my channel showing and debunking this too. 👍
where is the most power generated while it is on the ground...there has been a diagram of the force created and it was very lil force created when the foot strike was a bit in front him and the most force was created when the foot was under the hip...your arguing a moot point
The point is the point…stick to the point and you won’t think the point is moot by arguing something completely different to THE point. 👍
I land under my center of mass. But I'm a kangaroo. So, I don't think I count in this debate...
Hahaha
@@theslingmethod LOL!!! I'm glad you found this funny. 😆 I wanted to lighten the mood in the comments section. 😊
@@Fire_soul1796 thanks, it’s needed. 🤣🥳
I noticed the toe is forward of center mass but the ankle is close! The best coaches are preaching no reaching and pawing back. And the force is generated from the glutes and extension and pushing.
@@dennisrobinson8008 both the toes and the ankle are way in front. Remember though that hundreds (up to 1000) of Lbs of force occur before mid stance during elite sprinting. Most force is generated by the hamstrings and adductors, and Soleus not glutes. 👍
@@theslingmethod Hi. There are differing schools of thoughts concerning this. I follow and ascribe to the coaches which say the glutes are the primary mover and the hamstrings are a supporting muscle. You can run in a way where the glutes aren't really activated but it's asking for injury. The glutes are the strongest muscles in the human body and a primary mover in sports where you have to move and sprint. In many athletes the glutes aren't fully activated limiting performance, a young athlete might have completely in active or nearly inactive glutes due to how they are moving life changes once they get their glutes activated...
See Sha carry Richardson and Florence Griffinth Joyner,
For what, more evidence that no runners land under CoM? 🤣
u should testing force created from ground strike and where the foot is when the most force is created... its tough to generate ground force when your extremeties are farthest from the body... throw a punch with ur elbow tucked at ur side using ur hip... throw a punch with ur arm extended using ur hip...which one generates more power... makes sense theres only 34 comments...
Mostly stupid comments that miss the point…just like this one! 🙄
Thank you
Land under your head not com
No!
wow. imagine how fast they would run if they improved their technique
Hahahahaha so you think the slower runners have better technique? Or is it the injured runners with the better technique? Imagine how the rest of the world could benefit if they stopped imagining fairy tales and unicorn stories! 🤣🤣🤣
@@theslingmethodyo one more thing, you know that the center of mass can shift depending on how you position your body? You can’t just say that the hips are the center of mass because the actual center of mass keeps shifting when you’re sprinting, anyways good video!
@@PythagorasFormula sure, can you identify where the CoM is 100% exactly? I expect probably not. As we know the CoM doesn’t move all that much in a “ContraLateral Reciprocal” movement such as running where a mostly vertical posture is seen, we know it doesn’t shift much at all. 👍
@@theslingmethod yes it doesn’t shift much but it still shifts, depending on how good your technique is. Btw I really liked your video, it would be amazing if you could also make technique videos
@@PythagorasFormula if you scroll through my videos you’ll see some posted here. Different to what some people do as The Sling Method focuses on biomechanics. Thanks for your comment. 👍
Center of Mas is in front of the body in that current sprinting pose
ua-cam.com/video/HSW8gXmOazs/v-deo.html
still behind the point of contact ... at least in the examples he provided
@@joshuahoover7700 yes. But much less than the draw overs suggest
Did you really just compare a backflip to running…really?
@@theslingmethod no. But to illustrate how much forward the center of gravity is on different body positions. When the body leans forward the COM is not in the hips as your draw over suggest.
@@markusgptake a look at the biomechanics research, it’s clear. This video is a visual representation showing that no runners land under CoM. Did the fastest person to ever run the 100m land under his CoM? No.
This guy isn't thinking
@@cooliamcool06 I’m thinking that most people who comment are either clueless or suffer from cognitive dissonance 🤣🤣🤣
@theslingmethod do you run track?
@@cooliamcool06 I think you missed the point of the video.
@theslingmethod Your just not right
@@cooliamcool06 the video proves that I am!
Cherry-picked video result. Not even close to accurate.
You’re high right!!! 🙄
@@theslingmethod With responses like that, it seems like you're not open to correction.
@@TheMsyZa the evidence is in the video and in the scientific literature and is not at all cherry picked. It seems you’re here only to argue and be disrespectful. People seem to want to ignore facts and scream “cherry picked” because they disagree but without ever putting forth evidence to the contrary. So basically arguing for the sake of just arguing.