|
|
DR.ROMANOV'S ARTICLES Dr.Romanov has written many articles. Easy to read and understand, these articles will help you understand Pose Method® better and will introduce you to a new approach to running and training.
POSETECH.COM (US)
Scientific Basis of Pose Method
by Dr. Nicholas Romanov
I would like to ask a simple question before going further into this
discussion. Is there scientific proof of any other style of running in the
world, including some of the styles which majority of coaches recommend
to their students? Maybe you have some scientific proof for heelstriking
running? I guess you don't.
To the best of my knowledge of the science of running, represented in one of
the best written books "Biomechanics of Distance Running," editor P.
Cavanagh (one of the highest authorities in this field), Human Kinetics,
1990, you can find a lot of science facts about running technique, but there
is no proof or even any recommendation on how to run properly.
This happened because at present time neither scientists, nor coaches, came
to any consensus as to what they consider a proper running technique. The
other world authority, Anderson (1996), highlights, "There is an intuitive
link between running mechanics and energy cost of running, but research to
this day has not established a clear mechanical profile of an economic
runner."
What we have in this field is a huge amount of research materials,
describing the running technique from different angles and aspects
(biomechanics, physiology, psychology and so on), but not a single proof
about some commonly accepted proper technique. That's why there exist so
many different running styles on an equal basis, which is ridiculous, just
from the common sense point of view, such as its relation with the gravity,
etc. If running with the heelstriking is good and accepted from the
scientific point of view, this "science" goes against Newton's mechanics.
The gravitational field doesn't allow us to be free too much, only within
certain limits . That's why we do not have human sizes getting out of a
certain frame (height, weight, number of bones and muscles). It's all
related to gravity requirements.
We have to understand a very important thing about science - it is not only
about practical experiments, when we collect data, calculate it,
statistically analyze it and draw conclusions. The last part is particularly
difficult to do considering the multitude of influences from other factors
which are mostly not under our control. Therefore, most science articles
avoid any direct conlcusions and their statements are very careful and
limited by the area of their research.
When we discuss such complicated systems as running technique, which
invloves so many factors that we can't even distinguish their influence, we
would be hard pressed to draw conclusions. Is there any possibility to solve
this problem? Yes, there is, but for that we have to move from descritptive
science to conceptual science.
Conceptual science existed since the beginning of human race. This kind of
science operates with lack of facts and experimental data, and could even be
controversial to all of them. Conceptual science is based on ideas,
intuitions, insights into opening new visions, connections, structures of
old problems. Mental exercise and experiments lay foundation for this
approach... Certainly, both parts are necessary for science, as they
complement each other, but descriptive science is sometimes way behind
conceptual science. You can find a lof of illustrations to it in the history
of mankind, if you want to.
The conceptual science has its own unique ways, and it was successfully
applied to practice as the method of trial and errors. Then later
descriptive science gets the proof of ideas and concepts. But we have to
understand that practical needs never wait for an approval from science,
because science itself is in the process of development. But on the other
hand, what could be a better proof in life than practical results
themselves? If I am running this way better without injuries, faster, and
with pleasure, without fear, what other proof do I need? Why do I have to
wait for some restricted scientific conlusion, if I have my run, my feelings
and performance all together? I have to be dumb to neglect this direct
evidence of what I am choosing.
Before the Pose Method was developed, there were no other methods of
teaching running technique, but only an eclectic and controversial field of
exercises, so called running drills. But nevertheless, some people (mostly
from the elite field still ran as Pose Method runners. We don't need to go
into too many details why it happened, but generally due to luck, talent
accident, intuition and so on, but not because of science or any method. The
technique existed only as a practical thing with a small portion of
descriptive knowledge without any theoretical, conceptual base. Therefore it
was almost impossible to reproduce the technique of elite for normal people
and recreational runners. It was lack of knowledge of what to teach or how
to teach the running technique.
A very important thing about the Pose Method is that it has both parts: what
to teach and how to teach. The first one is the conceptual base of running
technique, which proclaims the leading role of gravity, and the assisting
role of other forces pulling the runner's body forward in the Pose (because
only in the Pose the runner can fall forward).
The second part of the method is how to teach the runner to employ gravity
together with other forces in organic activity, as a system. Basically, this
is the psychological structure of running, or the system of understanding,
feelings, commands and so on ...
So far my practical experience of using the Pose Method for more than 25
years with normal, every day runners around the world (to tell nothing of
the elite athletes) confirms its merits. At the present time people need
practical guidance for their running life, not a confirmation from science
or scientists, who don't even want to bother themselves with running and
trying some of their recommendations for themselves. I know one thing about
voting in running - people vote with their legs, they just run with Pose
Method, and this is the highest proof for me.
Back to Top
|
|
|
|
