Bolt principle vs TI

[Janos]

Was interested to read of Usain Bolt taking 41 strides per 100m compared to his competitors 45 or more. The comparison with TI theory is an obvious one, if we choose to ignore his height advantage. His ability to hold his technique through the race, and for his speed not to diminish, so he can maintain a constant maximum speed are central tenets of TI philosophy. An example that shows effort alone can only take us so far, and that some technique training based on sound scientific principles must be incorporated into our routines, if we are to compete with the best in our particular races.
What intrigued me more was a comment about Bolts' leg speed not being much faster than an average sprinter, and if that was the case, why could the writer not then run as fast as Bolt? The only logical conclusion is that the power must come from the stance phase. Which correlates with the catch phase in swimming. Which justifies working on a lower stroke count, and then trying to increase speed, like TI advocates...and elite athletes too! Any thoughts?

Regards to all

Janos

[tomoy]

Absolutely related.

I seem to recall participating in a similar thread a year or so back. Especially in distance running, there's a shift away from power running, to something else and I can't remember a good term for it.

Basically standing straight up and pushing forward with your legs requires muscle energy to drive you forward. But leaning forward requires no muscle energy for propulsion. Instead your muscles are used to prevent you from falling too far forward.

So entirely different muscles are in play - and there's a huge pile of evidence that that's a 'better' way to move. I'm sure some triathletes can jump in here too to fill out the thought.

[andyinnorway]

Originally Posted by tomoy

Absolutely related.

I seem to recall participating in a similar thread a year or so back. Especially in distance running, there's a shift away from power running, to something else and I can't remember a good term for it.

Basically standing straight up and pushing forward with your legs requires muscle energy to drive you forward. But leaning forward requires no muscle energy for propulsion. Instead your muscles are used to prevent you from falling too far forward.

So entirely different muscles are in play - and there's a huge pile of evidence that that's a 'better' way to move. I'm sure some triathletes can jump in here too to fill out the thought.

I think that's the main principle of Chi Running isn't it. Align the shoulders, hips and ankles then fall forward, controlling your speed with the angle of lean.

[Richardsk]

I believe Pose Running is basically similar.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvbhZKxAzPI

[Janos]

There is an interesting similarity between Romanovs' Pose technique theory, and the falling shoulder of TI freestyle, but they differ because the shoulder drop is releasing latent energy, whilst the stooped upper torso of Pose runners is exploiting gravity only. I am with Dr Yessis in my opinion on Pose running...he completely disregards it! :-)
The fewer amounts of strides Bolt takes, like the amount of strokes Shinji takes, is purely down to the quality of each stroke/stride as opposed to quantity. It raises an interesting point though. Is there an ultimate streamlining position in freestyle? After which, any gains can only be made by cultivating an even greater grip on the water?

Janos