The BEST work-out!!!

[proteus]

my legs are definitely getting more proportionate as well with all the squats and deadlifts and such..they were like sticks even just this past spring.

Looking forward to being tanned and booking it bearfoot down a beach.

my calves never responded to anything i put them through in the gym, especially not to calf exercises.  i did get some benefit for my calves from shrugs and deadlifts when used as stabilizer muscles - but never got any benefit from trying to hit calves directly.

i was 100% certain my calves were hopeless, but as soon as i tried running barefoot they got WASTED.  i couldn't even walk.

same for abs - no amount of crunches etc got them sore ( some burning, but no real soreness ).  but some good sprints running or a couple minutes worth of dolphin kicks in the pool and i am getting cramps in them.

moral of the story - real exercise is better than gym.  it took me 15 years of working out in the gyms to figure this out.  it's pretty embarrassing really - but better late than never.

[KD]

same for abs - no amount of crunches etc got them sore ( some burning, but no real soreness ).  but some good sprints running or a couple minutes worth of dolphin kicks in the pool and i am getting cramps in them.

moral of the story - real exercise is better than gym.  it took me 15 years of working out in the gyms to figure this out.  it's pretty embarrassing really - but better late than never.

ah, the old natural vs 'artificial' debate.

its interesting because
- the cf guys will slam the 'bodybuilding' guys on their nautilus machines and isolated movements.
- the powerlifting guys will slam the cf guys because although they do powerlifts..they do too much other crap and too many reps
- the bodyweight guys will slam both those guys, saying bodyweight exercises can accommodate all the muscle groups particulary when scaled or weighted.
- the natural movement guys will slam all the other stuff, either saying theirs is best, or just the most natural, so therefore better.

ultimately the answer is that none are correct, if one feels 100% hardcore about any one of them.

If one wants to look like a bodybuilder, thats certainly just as feasible a goal as being a good golfer or something. You arn't going to get there just whacking sticks in the woods. Its a skill in addition to a movement. If you want to get stronger in some serious capacity, likely you are going to have to lift very heavy weights incrementally, so the bw and natural stuff is hard to fabricate in that way.

of course, I pick the cf/powerbuilding mix, as that makes sense to me, gives better results in comparison to years of bodyweight and oither kind of random bodybuilding. There is a strong emphasis there on natural movement, but obviously done with artificial circumstances and time periods that -if one times them right - will give better results then someone just hanging out in nature or working active lifting into their job or routine.

now, in the future, if I was very involved in my natural environment and being highly motivated to do the range of activities necessary that would trump the kinds of movements done in a room with a heavy barbell, I would probably do so. The trick there would be motivation to go out and deadlift rocks and drag heavy things and so on...which in a way becomes just as artificial to me, albeit perhaps a bit different weight distribution. Certainly many things can be seen as healthier when they are closer to nature and natural movement, but this isn't going to be the same as most effective for every goal.

[proteus]

ah, the old natural vs 'artificial' debate.

its interesting because
- the cf guys will slam the 'bodybuilding' guys on their nautilus machines and isolated movements.
- the powerlifting guys will slam the cf guys because although they do powerlifts..they do too much other crap and too many reps
- the bodyweight guys will slam both those guys, saying bodyweight exercises can accommodate all the muscle groups particulary when scaled or weighted.
- the natural movement guys will slam all the other stuff, either saying theirs is best, or just the most natural, so therefore better.

ultimately the answer is that none are correct, if one feels 100% hardcore about any one of them.

If one wants to look like a bodybuilder, thats certainly just as feasible a goal as being a good golfer or something. You arn't going to get there just whacking sticks in the woods. Its a skill in addition to a movement. If you want to get stronger in some serious capacity, likely you are going to have to lift very heavy weights incrementally, so the bw and natural stuff is hard to fabricate in that way.

of course, I pick the cf/powerbuilding mix, as that makes sense to me, gives better results in comparison to years of bodyweight and oither kind of random bodybuilding. There is a strong emphasis there on natural movement, but obviously done with artificial circumstances and time periods that -if one times them right - will give better results then someone just hanging out in nature or working active lifting into their job or routine.

now, in the future, if I was very involved in my natural environment and being highly motivated to do the range of activities necessary that would trump the kinds of movements done in a room with a heavy barbell, I would probably do so. The trick there would be motivation to go out and deadlift rocks and drag heavy things and so on...which in a way becomes just as artificial to me, albeit perhaps a bit different weight distribution. Certainly many things can be seen as healthier when they are closer to nature and natural movement, but this isn't going to be the same as most effective for every goal.

wrong.

how do you know you're fit ?  if you met another man in a natural environment how would you prove to him that you are more fit ?  would you out-bench him ?

there are only so many possibilities here:

1 - you could beat the **** out of him ( martial arts )
2 - you could outrun him ( running )
3 - you could outswim him ( swimming )
4 - you could outclimb him ( hiking, climbing )

but you certainly couldn't use any WEIGHTS let alone MACHINES ( nautilus etc ) to do it.

now if your goal is to be proficient at running lets say you would have to be a complete retard to train for it by NOT running.  same goes for the other 3 bullet points.

now since weights and machines aren't the proper way to prepare for any of those ... why do them at all ?

you think the pentagon can afford million dollar missiles and billion dollar stealth bombers but they couldn't afford a bunch of nautilus machines ?  you think that's why they make marines run and swim all the time ? 

NO

[proteus]

dips are a garbage exercise by the way - my condolences to those of you who perform them.

chinup is the best exercise that you can do in the gym - they make you do chin ups in any army.

deadlift isn't bad, but you have to not go overboard with deadlifting.  your leg workout must be about 90% running and 10% deadlifts, not more.

i was in the gym today.  i had the same workout i always do ( when i am in the gym that is, which is about once a week ).  first i ran on the treadmill ( it is raining outside ) for about half a mile at 9 mph.  then i did some power cleans, some chin ups, some standing presses ( with dumbbells ) and some cable crossovers ( flys ) for chest.

i do cable crossover in place of push ups.  push up of course is of course a staple exercise in the military ( along with running, swimming and chinups ) but between bench press, pushups and dips for me i always had best results with cable crossovers because unlike most people i actually know how to do them.

anyway i apologize for posting all this in the wrong thread - it just kinda happened this way.  

[KD]

wrong.

how do you know you're fit ?  if you met another man in a natural environment how would you prove to him that you are more fit ?  would you out-bench him ?

you think the pentagon can afford million dollar missiles and billion dollar stealth bombers but they couldn't afford a bunch of nautilus machines ?  you think that's why they make marines run and swim all the time ?  

NO

dips are a garbage exercise by the way - my condolences to those of you who perform them.

chinup is the best exercise that you can do in the gym - they make you do chin ups in any army.

deadlift isn't bad, but you have to not go overboard with deadlifting.  your leg workout must be about 90% running and 10% deadlifts, not more.

unlike most people i actually know how to do them.

hehe, ok man. so I see now you have the holy grail of working out that applies to everyone.

this idea that the situations of nature completely dictate our health decisions or exercises decisions just proves to be false over and over in regards to various factors for modern people. Its a big yawn to me, but can prove pretty destructive in other circumstances, so I point it out often.

You can't pick and choose what defines fitness. If one never lifts weights (speaking of a contemporary person and not a caveman) I'm pretty confident in saying they will never deadlift 900 lbs. Whether this has any usefulness or health benefits is a completely different conversation as people are free to have whatever goals they want. Your ratio of running to lifting I can also say quite confidently has little to do with meeting everyone's personal exercise goal, so the idea that it is a 'must' seems to throw you somewhere in my original breakdown of people who's 'mama's meatballs taste the best' program trumps all others by setting the very criteria for which it is judged.

As a general observation with some other posts. its better to try have a conversation then to throw down a bunch of definitive ideas when one is trying to learn. Particularly in this thread there are people doing all kinds of different routines to good success (at least in their impressions). Theres a difference between suggesting certain routines as being more efficient or healthier long term..and suggesting other things are 'garbage'.

People in the military are not bodybuilders or strength trainers or even the best MMA guys, so I'm not sure what this means and again their training is likely tailored to the type of fitness they want..which probably includes endurance as a major component. Some people care less about such things, again its just a matter of preference. For the average person in this day and age, the need to deadlift a huge piece of concrete off a friend seems just as likely as needing to ever run away or fight somebody.

Theres a bunch of rangers that go to my cf gym. These particular guys say the training there is far superior to their military training, and although they are pretty dam impressive physically, they arn't necessarily the best competitors. Now the powerlifters as I say will say this is all shit..and the bodyweight guys and so on....

[proteus]

People in the military are not bodybuilders or strength trainers or even the best MMA guys, so I'm not sure what this means

military men are the modern day hunter-gatherers.  a hunter-gatherer must primarily be able to walk large distances and occasionally sprint, climb and fight.  a soldier is trained to do all that.  an MMA fighter is only trained to fight, and a powerlifter isn't trained to do ANY of those things.

For the average person in this day and age, the need to deadlift a huge piece of concrete off a friend seems just as likely as needing to ever run away or fight somebody.

nobody needs to lift concrete blocks but everybody needs to run sometimes, and most men have needed to fight at some point in their life.

i will grant you this - sometimes you need to carry another human - and this will be a challenge to somebody who doesn't have lifting as part of his routine.  one ( 1 ) time we had to carry a girl a hundred yards or two from the beach where we got drunk to where the car was parked.  it started to get pretty difficult by the time we got to the car even though she was on the smaller side of average.  i carried her about 80% of the way and her boyfriend the other 20% to give me some rest.

on several occasions i was moving furniture ( either my own or helping somebody ) that involved some physical exertion.  but i didn't HAVE to do it.  i could have said i was busy and not come to help, or when it was my own furniture i could have paid some movers to do it for me.

on the other hand when you have to run or fight you rarely have such luxury of delegating the business to somebody else.

you know that strongman competition event when they have to carry a rock some distance ?  i think if you replaced that rock with a 150 pound bag of sand that would be EXCELLENT exercise to simulate carrying a human body.  i would do it regularly if my gym was equipped for that, but i go to a regular gym.

that said my gym is overpriced ( new york sports clubs ) and i rarely go there and i don't use 90% of their equipment so maybe i could try some of that crossfit stuff instead ?  is there any in Brooklyn ?

[pioneer]

dips are a garbage exercise by the way - my condolences to those of you who perform them.

chinup is the best exercise that you can do in the gym - they make you do chin ups in any army.

deadlift isn't bad, but you have to not go overboard with deadlifting.  your leg workout must be about 90% running and 10% deadlifts, not more.

i was in the gym today.  i had the same workout i always do ( when i am in the gym that is, which is about once a week ).  first i ran on the treadmill ( it is raining outside ) for about half a mile at 9 mph.  then i did some power cleans, some chin ups, some standing presses ( with dumbbells ) and some cable crossovers ( flys ) for chest.

i do cable crossover in place of push ups.  push up of course is of course a staple exercise in the military ( along with running, swimming and chinups ) but between bench press, pushups and dips for me i always had best results with cable crossovers because unlike most people i actually know how to do them.

anyway i apologize for posting all this in the wrong thread - it just kinda happened this way.  

You are just rudely giving us your conjecture with no scientific evidence to back up anything you say. You're doing bodybuilder chest flyes and talking shit on dips? I must say I agree with a lot of your points. Specifically your strong love for chin ups, but hold the personal views on exercises. If somebody wants to be a bodybuilder on this forum, who the hell cares? This is just us logging our workout information. I basically use this as a journal.

I am digressing, but anyway I agree that military training is some of the best functional training that can be done and very useful. However, military training is not necessarily the best training and is not based on science. The common man would not want to participate in military training in full extent and if you do I commend you. Reason being is that the catabolic hormone cortisol is drammatically risen with all that excessive training and lowers male androgens (opposite of what you want). How many times have you seen a muscular guy come back from boot camp scrawny? I've seen this plenty of times in my life, and sure it may be as a result of functional training, but is it really optimal, is it really healthy to lose your muscle mass and sex drive as a result of excess cortisol levels?


Don't talk shit on dips unless you know what you are talking about. In physiology it was proven by scientists that you only need 2 exercises to work the entire body. Chin ups with shoulder width grip was the first, which works 70% and dips was the other, which works the other 30%. If you do those 2 exercises, you will work your whole torso.

How can you talk smack on dips and not even realize their absolutely applicable functionality? Think about it, if you are in somebody else's guard (in jiu jitsu or in real life) you can easily do a guard pass with the help of dip strength. Doing heavy weighted dips helped me pass people's guard with ease in my jiu jitsu classes, and that is absolutely functional.

As long as everybody works the two largest muscle groups (legs and back) you'll be okay.

[KD]

military men are the modern day hunter-gatherers.  a hunter-gatherer must primarily be able to walk large distances and occasionally sprint, climb and fight.  a soldier is trained to do all that.  an MMA fighter is only trained to fight, and a powerlifter isn't trained to do ANY of those things.

nobody needs to lift concrete blocks but everybody needs to run sometimes, and most men have needed to fight at some point in their life.

you know that strongman competition event when they have to carry a rock some distance ?  i think if you replaced that rock with a 150 pound bag of sand that would be EXCELLENT exercise to simulate carrying a human body.  i would do it regularly if my gym was equipped for that, but i go to a regular gym.

that said my gym is overpriced ( new york sports clubs ) and i rarely go there and i don't use 90% of their equipment so maybe i could try some of that crossfit stuff instead ?  is there any in Brooklyn ?

there is a few cross-fit places in Brooklyn I have scoped out. One is over in Williamsburg and a few others near downtown I think. cross-fit is pretty overpriced as well unfortunately.

The point is there is no standard of what is right for individual goals even if some things can be basically 'proven' to probably yield better results, or perhaps are safer. Like diet there is plenty of 'science' that will tell you this or that is bad in exercise. In many ways, alot of the 'paleo' crowd actually comes down pretty hard on running as opposed to true strength training. That is sort of take it or leave it stuff. but some of the things you mention just happen to not be right in any sense. People that train for speed for running DON'T actually just run or likely even 90, 80, 70 % of their routine is running. Odds are many of the people train for better of worse with leg press and other 'modern' exercises. Even if one isn't doing modern exercises, if they want serious results they are going to have to do artificial things like do the same thing over and over in a set period of time. I've mentioned in this thread or elsewhere about folks like Bode Miller who is pretty conscious about natural movements stuff, and to accomplish this..he actually builds his own 'machines' to do some pretty freakish stuff that has very little to do with cave activities - or skiing.

Strongmen as with military guys will lift weights and will do alot of the sandbag and sleds and other weird stuff. They have those at cf. The thing is, why wouldn't the elite ranger guys be the absolute most fit people at the gym if they are uniquely there to begin with compared to their unit to improve on their workouts..doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Turns out the most fit people there are the people that do it pretty religiously, same as the people who are really specific about bodybuilding generally will have the best builds even over the strength guys or cross-fit guys or yoga guys or paleo guys who mock them.

Running happens to be pointless to me. I consider that to be an opinion based on a few 'facts' and experience. When I don't run and do something condensed like box jumps and jump rope, I raise my heart rate just as easily or more so in less time and my running goes up without any practice at all. I can whip through 1 k runs and stuff where I could hardly finish before at a brisk pace. If I could run 10 miles in 1 hour, without strain on energy, it might be somewhat useful in terms of getting around town, but until then a bicycle trumps any kind of running needs I might have and requires no other energy and probably less strain (arguably) on the joints and so forth. Many things can be improved with technologies, it just so happens that most technologies are misused. I happen to find most machines to be unnecessary at this point, but then again i'm not a bodybuilder.

[pioneer]

1 - you could beat the **** out of him ( martial arts )
2 - you could outrun him ( running )
3 - you could outswim him ( swimming )
4 - you could outclimb him ( hiking, climbing )

but you certainly couldn't use any WEIGHTS let alone MACHINES ( nautilus etc ) to do it.

I think I missed the part where you said that you absolutely need strength and muscle mass to be proficient in any of the above mentioned. The stronger, bigger martial artist is the better martial artist. The stronger climber is the better climber, etc... And so you think strength training and increasing muscle mass plays no part in kicking someones ass or climbing a mountain? I have personal experience in this because I always get my ass kicked by brown belts in jiu jitsu, until a weak, scrawny brown belt went against me, and I annhialated him. I am only a white belt and this guy was almost my weight, but weak and scrawny and I out "strengthed" him in every situation as a result of years of lifting. This strength is not applicable to real life?

We're not talking about using weights or machines in real life, where did you get that notion? Weights and good eating are always going to be the best way to increase muscle mass, period.

[proteus]

How many times have you seen a muscular guy come back from boot camp scrawny?

that is true.  a bodybuilder friend of mine came back at 125 pounds. 

but that's because military training is not intended to get you into shape so much as to make you drop out of the program altogether.  they overtrain people like crazy and give them little to no food, rest or sleep - what did you expect ?

a bodybuilder must eat and sleep all day, and only do some light exercise to get a pump.

personally i mix up different philosophies both in training and nutrition. 

Don't talk shit on dips unless you know what you are talking about. In physiology it was proven by scientists that you only need 2 exercises to work the entire body. Chin ups with shoulder width grip was the first, which works 70% and dips was the other, which works the other 30%. If you do those 2 exercises, you will work your whole torso.

How can you talk smack on dips and not even realize their absolutely applicable functionality? Think about it, if you are in somebody else's guard (in jiu jitsu or in real life) you can easily do a guard pass with the help of dip strength. Doing heavy weighted dips helped me pass people's guard with ease in my jiu jitsu classes, and that is absolutely functional.

the range of motion is wrong.  just because it hits the right muscles doesn't mean it takes them through the right range of motion.  you don't get full contraction ( in chest and shoulders ) on the top and you overstretch ( risking injury ) on the bottom.  with cables i can adjust the range of motion until its just right depending on how i do them.

[proteus]

I think I missed the part where you said that you absolutely need strength and muscle mass to be proficient in any of the above mentioned. The stronger, bigger martial artist is the better martial artist. The stronger climber is the better climber, etc... And so you think strength training and increasing muscle mass plays no part in kicking someones ass or climbing a mountain? I have personal experience in this because I always get my ass kicked by brown belts in jiu jitsu, until a weak, scrawny brown belt went against me, and I annhialated him. I am only a white belt and this guy was almost my weight, but weak and scrawny and I out "strengthed" him in every situation as a result of years of lifting. This strength is not applicable to real life?

We're not talking about using weights or machines in real life, where did you get that notion? Weights and good eating are always going to be the best way to increase muscle mass, period.

if you're not getting enough strength training for jiu jitsu from just doing jiu jitsu that means your jiu jitsu training is not sufficiently intelligent.  same for a runner who does leg presses or a swimmer who does chin ups.

i get ALL the training i need for swimming BY swimming.  i get ALL the training i need for running BY running.  i do this by varying intensity and rest periods.

to be fair for an "intelligent" jiu jitsu training you would need an intelligent partner(s) which may be beyond your control.  this is why i do "solo" sports.

[proteus]

why wouldn't the elite ranger guys be the absolute most fit people at the gym

matter of economics.  the army doesn't care if a soldier lives or dies, let alone if he achieves his full potential.  their goal is to get a certain number of bodies that meet a certain performance threshold.  to do this they know they have to recruit a certain number of young people and then weed out a certain percentage of them in the boot camp.  people are expendable to them - they aren't going to waste their time to nurture your talents.

a champion athlete is a result of 10 years of consistent and optimal training.  optimal means personal supervision of a professional who can use his experience and scientific knowledge to prevent you from overtraining and order to you to stop training sometimes even as you want to train harder.  for example Ronnie Coleman's trainer forced him to cut the amount of cardio he did in half.

this doesn't happen in the army.  in the army they just want to see how hard they can overtrain people until half of them drop out altogether.  they are not interested in letting your body recover at all - they just want to break it.

but the exercises they use to break you are very legit exercises.  they need to break you in a relevant way because they are specifically interested in your ability to accomplish the mission - not in your ability to impress girls on the beach or other juiceheads by the squat rack.

[pioneer]

the range of motion is wrong.  just because it hits the right muscles doesn't mean it takes them through the right range of motion.  you don't get full contraction ( in chest and shoulders ) on the top and you overstretch ( risking injury ) on the bottom.  with cables i can adjust the range of motion until its just right depending on how i do them.

I def agree with you that some of the range of motion is wrong in dips, but that is why intelligent people do them correctly. Only go down to where the back of your triceps are parallel with the floor and you wont risk injury. I think dips is a great exercise, but def not the best.

[proteus]

150 calf raises

calf raises are a waste of time.  they don't even hit calves half as hard as other gym type exercises like heavy shrugs or stiff leg deadlifts.

the proper way to train calves is to run barefoot.  you don't have to literally be barefoot - i use nike free sneakers.  by barefoot i mean that you run without your heel touching the ground - the way animals and professional sprinters run.

what did you think you calf is for ?  its for running HELOOOOOO *waves*

the calf can either be trained by ECCENTRIC contraction which occurs ONLY when you run ( and i mean RUN, not jog ).  or they can be trained by continuous overload ( hours at a time ) like hiking some mountains for the entire day for example.  you can't build calves in the gym - not possible.  this is my own theory but i know i am right.

calf training 1:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21rkesYI8Co

calf training 2:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUJhnEmx8Do

[pioneer]

the calf can either be trained by ECCENTRIC contraction which occurs ONLY when you run ( and i mean RUN, not jog ).  or they can be trained by continuous overload ( hours at a time ) like hiking some mountains for the entire day for example.  you can't build calves in the gym - not possible.  this is my own theory but i know i am right.

You are absolutely right. Unless you are a bodybuilder taking steroids, but even then they still do a lot of incline treadmill walking. My favorite calf work is anything done barefoot. Primarily sprinting and walking barefoot up hills.

[miles]

the proper way to train calves is to run barefoot.  you don't have to literally be barefoot - i use nike free sneakers.  by barefoot i mean that you run without your heel touching the ground - the way animals and professional sprinters run.

lolwtf. We don't have hooves or paws, we have feet. Animals which have hooves or paws, their heel 1 3rd the way up their leg... When Humans run barefoot, their heel touches the ground...

[proteus]

When Humans run barefoot, their heel touches the ground...

speak for yourself

[miles]

speak for yourself

Ok. I was, talking for myself as well as anyone I've heard of before you.

So, why do you not put your heel to the ground?

Have you ever ran actually barefoot? Running in Nikes isn't running barefoot..

[proteus]

Ok. I was, talking for myself as well as anyone I've heard of before you.

well then you have been living under a rock ...

when marion jones was asked how she did this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qx_-DpRDwIs

she said " i never let my heels touch the ground " ...

of course she was lying.  the real reason was she was doing steroids.  but that doesn't change the fact that the only way to run fast is to not let your heels touch the ground.  i posted the slow motion video of Usain Bolt for a reason - so that you can see for yourself that his heels do not touch the ground either.

So, why do you not put your heel to the ground?

because i don't like to suck.

you know the tip of the whip exceeds the speed of sound, which gives it the characteristic cracking sound of sonic boom.  if you run on the tip of your leg you use the full speed your leg is designed for, just as with the whip.  if you run on your heel you are doomed to be slow.  imagine if you had to throw a baseball not with your fingers but with the palm of your hand - do you think it would be very fast ?  

of course this is an oversimplification.  in reality you gain an even bigger advantage.  exactly why would be difficult to explain - but easy to feel when you try it.  

just make sure when you try it you either run barefoot or with proper shoes ( not regular running shoes ) and don't run very fast or for more than about half a minute the first time or you will end up hurt.

try running like this ( at this speed ) at first:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgIUE8BPw-c

can you tell how effortless it is ?  he isn't mashing the ground with his heels - he is essentially just floating in the air - which is how its supposed to be.

consider this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjHcu9B1jw4

its all about the spring action.  a guy with amputated legs would probably outrun you because he would be using spring action and you wouldn't be.  when you run properly ( like usain bolt ) you use your calf as a spring.  once you learn to do it right it looks comical to see people running the dumb way - they just look like a bunch of retards.

Have you ever ran actually barefoot? Running in Nikes isn't running barefoot..

no i haven't.  nike free is designed to simulate barefoot running - they are very light and flexible - probably lighter than vibram five fingers.  to me these shoes are perfect - i am not tempted to switch to either vibram or to actually running barefoot.  the point is nike free are designed to NOT provide any kind of "support" or "cushioning" that most other sneakers such as nike air are designed to provide.  basically you need to match shoes to your foot and your running style.

[miles]

nike free are designed to NOT provide any kind of "support" or "cushioning

^^ Nike Free

Quote from: miles on Today at 09:56:26 am
So, why do you not put your heel to the ground?

because i don't like to suck.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3j9JtpSbPNg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pp1bcSC__k

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jrnj-7YKZE&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0jf_2nhktE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8AdnwZB8Ww&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzjDIAKUZ9Q&feature=related

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgIUE8BPw-c&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nwbzpyterI

^^ Hey man, their heels all touch the ground, they must suck balls right?

[proteus]

^^ Hey man, their heels all touch the ground, they must suck balls right?

some of them suck.  the others who don't suck don't really touch.  with reference to the video you posted:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jrnj-7YKZE&feature=player_embedded

that touch sensitive surface video shows that with a barefoot runner there is massive pressure on the forefoot and just barely a momentary kiss on the heel.    

i told you it was all about the spring action.  what force curve do you think a spring would plot out if the amputated guy ran in that lab ?  it would plot out a symmetrical bell curve just as the barefoot runner plotted out.  this is the proper way to run and the way you achieve this spring-like behavior is by using mostly your calf as a spring.

if you don't use the calf and land on the heel you create that ugly spike which doesn't represent spring-like behavior.  you can think of that initial spike as energy loss.  the bell curve of a spring represents recycling of energy and the spike energy loss - the ERROR in your technique.

now since i am a perfectionist i don't touch with my heel at all, and neither does usain bolt in an all-out sprint wearing sprinter's shoes.  check it out:

http://www.shoeguide.co.uk/media/main/nike_zoom_aerofly.jpg

can you tell this shoe is not designed to make heel contact ?  check out the huge spikes on the forefoot and basically nothing on the heel.

but if you are running long distance your calf will be tired and you may compromise a bit by touching lightly with your heel but still landing forefoot.  its not a yes or no thing - it is gradual.  the better your technique, the more power your calves have and the faster you are running the more your weight is going to shift from the heel to the forefoot.  obviously when usain bolt is walking he does it using his heels.  but if he tried using his heels while running sub 10 second he'd break his legs.

it's difficult to avoid touching your heel if you are not running fast - that's why i don't run slow any more.  you need a certain speed to get a nice natural bounciness to your stride.  with my super-cushy nike air max 2010 shoes:

http://www.anpshoes.com/NewImage/2010/images/Boy%20Children%20Nike%20Air%20Max%202010%20Running%20Shoes%20(12).jpg

i can run anywhere from medium speed to very slow, and can walk very comfortably, but i can't run very fast in them.  on the other hand with my nike free 3.0 shoes:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_pEADhcSTYTU/S_34N5eyY4I/AAAAAAAAC0Q/kWc1HgEHfVQ/s400/Nike+Fee+3.0.JPG

i can run anywhere from medium to fast, but i can't run slow, and they aren't comfortable for walking.

fast forward the following video to 4.00 minute mark for slow motion:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0vRSuqMJlg

i like how when he runs you can't even tell that he makes contact with the ground at all.  looks more like he is pedaling in continuous circles mid-air than running.  you need to have this kind of smooth flow for maximum efficiency, and you simply can NOT have it if you smash your heels into the ground.

[proteus]

miles i just remembered that i have flat feet.  that kenyan runner:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3j9JtpSbPNg&feature=player_embedded

probably has a different kind of foot than i do.  i would never be able to run the way he does.  it is painful for me to even walk in a normal way unless i am wearing air max sneakers.  but i run relatively effortlessly when i don't touch my heel.

so i guess if you have a lot of springiness in the arch of your foot ( i have zero ) you could have a corresponding amount of heel contact and still maintain overall spring-like mechanics.

can also be a function of habit.  if you consciously focus on running a certain way it may become natural to you and vice versa.  maybe my foot is flat BECAUSE i have been wearing sneakers most of my life.  i have only started running properly a few months ago.

[miles]

...

I think you should go practise running rather than lecturing on it when you can barely do it yourself... You seem to be much more confident in yourself than you have any cause to be.

[proteus]

I think you should go practise running rather than lecturing on it when you can barely do it yourself... You seem to be much more confident in yourself than you have any cause to be.

i used to run when i was 16 - 20 or so - the retarded way.  then i got overweight and stopped.  then last year i lost enough weight to start running again.  at first i started to run the way i always used to but i started to get shin splints really bad - so bad i couldn't run.  i asked myself then why was i getting them ?  and then i realized its because i use heel strike.  i then switched to forefoot gradually over the course of 2 or 3 months ( that was too fast, i should have taken a year or more to switch ) and i like it MUCH more this way.

my mistake was to switch the style too quickly.  that lead to unnecessary injuries.  the other mistake was waiting till i was almost 30 to start running correctly - obviously harder to start essentially from scratch at that age.

as for your diatribe i will do both - i will keep practicing and keep lecturing.  and you - where are your legs in the picture ? is it because you're such an expert on running that you can't show them ?  and what about your back ?  you don't seem to have any.  have you ever tried doing chin ups lol ?  or do you exercise with dumbbells like a girl ?  

[proteus]

250 sit-ups

sit ups and crunches are a waste of time for people who get their training advice from infomercials.  i used to do hundreds when i was 10 years old.  haven't done any in many years and never will again.

paleos didn't do none of that BS.  

here are the abs you get from sprinting:

http://www.whudat.com/news/images/marion-jones-ripped-abs.jpg

and here are the abs you get from swimming butterfly:

http://mystuffspace.com/graphic/michael-phelps-abs.jpg

and here are the abs you get from situps and crunches:

http://gymidiots.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/fat_sit_ups.gif

---------------

olympic lifting is also very good for abs ( 10 times better than situps or crunches ), but it's not paleo so i don't insist you do it.