Running Myths

Testosterscone

Not everyone is gonna agree with these (and that is what I am hoping #bringbackdebate) but some of the biggest running myths IMO

1. LSR stands for Long Slow Run

2. "If the fire is hot enough it will burn anything"/ Runners can eat what ever as long as they are training hard enough

3. Static stretching is of no benefit

4. You will eventually adapt to pace if you run it enough

5. RICE (Rest Ice Compress Elevate) is the best course of action if you pick up an injury

Rather than elaborate I will leave these open for discussion in the hope that it might start a debate going.

Sheep1978

I'll leave the overall discussion and merits of each point to other more experienced and knowledgeable runners - but what the hell does LSR stand for then!!!!

RayCun

I'll bite on one...

Testosterscone wrote: »

1. LSR stands for Long Slow Run

Long runs are valuable, even at an easy pace.

Most of your weekly mileage should be at an easy pace.

When you are increasing your mileage, the increase should be in easy miles.

"Long, easy run" is a contradiction in terms, when each week's long run is the longest run ever.

When relative beginners go too fast on their long runs, it is often at the cost of missing other runs, neglecting sessions with actual fast running, or getting injured.

So, for a lot of people, calling it a 'slow' run reinforces the message that it should be easy, and time on feet is the goal.

Of course, after a while, 15 or 20 miles is a smaller chunk of your week's training, and always running those miles at an easy pace will have less of a training effect, so instead of the 'LSR' you just talk about your 'long run', which is sometimes easy, sometimes progressive, sometimes incorporates faster intervals...

average_runner

Testosterscone wrote: »

Not everyone is gonna agree with these (and that is what I am hoping #bringbackdebate) but some of the biggest running myths IMO

1. LSR stands for Long Slow Run

2. "If the fire is hot enough it will burn anything"/ Runners can eat what ever as long as they are training hard enough

3. Static stretching is of no benefit

4. You will eventually adapt to pace if you run it enough

5. RICE (Rest Ice Compress Elevate) is the best course of action if you pick up an injury

Rather than elaborate I will leave these open for discussion in the hope that it might start a debate going.

Ok I will bite.

1. What does LSR stand for ?

3. This is too vague

5.Again too vague, but for niggles it can be the best place to start. We don't want everyone going to the physio asap like they do for ER and doctors:)

TFBubendorfer

I'll bite as well. #3 is not a myth. In fact, static stretching has more disadvantages than advantages. All purely IMHO, obviously.

aquinn

What, it doesn't?

LSR stands for Long Slow Run.

Oh noes.

HelenAnne

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

I'll bite as well. #3 is not a myth. In fact, static stretching has more disadvantages than advantages. All purely IMHO, obviously.

I’ll bite too!! I love static stretching & don’t get injured very often 😀

Testosterscone

aquinn wrote: »

What, it doesn't?

LSR stands for Long Slow Run.

Oh noes.

Sheep1978 wrote: »

I'll leave the overall discussion and merits of each point to other more experienced and knowledgeable runners - but what the hell does LSR stand for then!!!!

RayCun wrote: »

I'll bite on one...



Long runs are valuable, even at an easy pace.

Most of your weekly mileage should be at an easy pace.

When you are increasing your mileage, the increase should be in easy miles.

"Long, easy run" is a contradiction in terms, when each week's long run is the longest run ever.

When relative beginners go too fast on their long runs, it is often at the cost of missing other runs, neglecting sessions with actual fast running, or getting injured.

So, for a lot of people, calling it a 'slow' run reinforces the message that it should be easy, and time on feet is the goal.

Of course, after a while, 15 or 20 miles is a smaller chunk of your week's training, and always running those miles at an easy pace will have less of a training effect, so instead of the 'LSR' you just talk about your 'long run', which is sometimes easy, sometimes progressive, sometimes incorporates faster intervals...

FWIW I don’t disagree with anything you said there Ray.

LSR was originally coined as long steady run as opposed to what many know today as long slow run. These days for many they are one in the same and are being correctly applied as such as most people are coming from a low base mileage to the point where the distance does have a bearing on the intensity. Slow and steady are one in the same for many marathoners

career move

Testosterscone wrote: »

Not everyone is gonna agree with these (and that is what I am hoping #bringbackdebate) but some of the biggest running myths IMO

According to Google, a myth is a traditional story or a widely held but false belief or idea. I think that some of the points you've mentioned below while not strictly false, they can be grey areas.

Testosterscone wrote: »

1. LSR stands for Long Slow Run

This is not my remit anymore

Testosterscone wrote: »

2. "If the fire is hot enough it will burn anything"/ Runners can eat what ever as long as they are training hard enough

This is an interesting one and I guess it depends on what you're overall objective is and how you define training hard. I can train as hard as I am physically able to but if I don't have a good diet, I'll still gain weight, recover less quickly and have less energy.
My focus is on performing as well as I can, winning races if I can and trying to get my times faster. I know at the moment that if I lost body fat and became leaner I would run faster for less effort.
First of all I need to focus on calories in v's calories out. This is not a simple equation because not all calories are made equal but for my purposes I'm looking to have a calorie deficit on non training days and on training days I'll increase intake to ensure I have enough nutrients to train and recover.
The second thing I'm focused on is macro's and specifically my protein intake because when my diet has more protein I find I recover quicker and I feel fuller so I don't eat as much crap like sweets and chocolate
Lastly then I'm looking at nutrient timing. I've only lately become a convert to this but I find if I do a hard session in the gym or on the track and I have a protein shake straight after, then I recover way quicker. I'm less sore the next day and I'm not as fatigued.
Basically, what I'm saying is you can't outrun a bad diet

Testosterscone wrote: »

3. Static stretching is of no benefit

Many forms of yoga involve holding static stretches so I don't think you can say that it is of no benefit. I think stretching is a very individual thing though and
you have to find what works for you. I've found if my muscles are sore, I'm better off not stretching them.

Testosterscone wrote: »

4. You will eventually adapt to pace if you run it enough

I can run about 450 metres at Kipchoge's average marathon world record pace (69.19sec/400m)
If I ran that pace enough would I eventually adapt?? It wouldn't be possible for me to run that pace enough because physiologically my body couldn't cope.

Interestingly Kipchoge's average pace for 5k was 14:24.9 and the women's world record for 5k is 14:11.15 which makes me wonder what are the limitations to adaptation.

Testosterscone wrote: »

5. RICE (Rest Ice Compress Elevate) is the best course of action if you pick up an injury.

I think it depends on the injury. In my experience ice is good for joints but heat is better for soft tissue.

Testosterscone

HelenAnne wrote: »

I’ll bite too!! I love static stretching & don’t get injured very often 😀

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

I'll bite as well. #3 is not a myth. In fact, static stretching has more disadvantages than advantages. All purely IMHO, obviously.

Thought you might alright 😋

While it is true that most of the science doesn’t support injury prevention benefits of static stretching and that elongated muscles will lose power and stability the thing that is overlooked is

a) the role of antagonistic muscle in biomechanics influence
b) the fact that most of us don’t have optimal range of motion in our running gait

Muscle contractions are dependent on fchange of orce or length so loss of optimal length is gonna mean power is compromised so it will have an decrease in power output and performance

Ceepo

career move wrote: »

Many forms of yoga involve holding static stretches so I don't think you can say that it is of no benefit. I think stretching is a very individual thing though and
you have to find what works for you. I've found if my muscles are sore, I'm better off not stretching them.

Many people who do yoga have the most disconnected movement and find it hard to integrate their body,

HelenAnne wrote: »

I’ll bite too!! I love static stretching & don’t get injured very often ��

Pretty sure there's a lot who do no stretching can say the same

Ceepo

Testosterscone wrote: »

5. RICE (Rest Ice Compress Elevate) is the best course of action if you pick up an injury

Pretty sure that this has been debunked years ago,
Alas unfortunately it is still thought on 1st aid and a lot of other course's.

There is a place for ice but more for pain management in acute phase,
as for reducing inflammation, even if it does, is it only inhabiting the healing process?.

Ceepo

Testosterscone wrote: »

Thought you might alright ��

While it is true that most of the science doesn’t support injury prevention benefits of static stretching and that elongated muscles will lose power and stability the thing that is overlooked is

a) the role of antagonistic muscle in biomechanics influence
b) the fact that most of us don’t have optimal range of motion in our running gait

Muscle contractions are dependent on fchange of orce or length so loss of optimal length is gonna mean power is compromised so it will have an decrease in power output and performance

While there is no doubt that muscle restriction can cause dysfunctional movement, i'm not sure what impact static stretching will have,
a, releasing the restriction
B, correcting the dysfunction.

In my own experience I have seen areas of muscle restriction, with NO change in the area of restriction, but with an increase in the range of joint motion after static and dynamic stretching.

career move

Ceepo wrote: »

Many people who do yoga have the most disconnected movement and find it hard to integrate their body,

Many people who do yoga have the most coordinated range of motion and are both super dextrous and highly flexible

Ceepo

career move wrote: »

Many people who do yoga have the most coordinated range of motion and are both super dextrous and highly flexible

All depends on who is analyzing :D

IvoryTower

I wonder how many people can barely touch their knees since people started saying static stretching is bad! would swear by it myself. If you're worried it's bad before a race just do it every other day! Thats if you need it of course, I've one leg longer than the other and it causes tightness in a couple of places. Worth getting assessed imo

5 years running and no injuries of note

The rice thing is a funny one. I spoke to a physical therapist about this and she agreed that ice may not be the best thing to do but said if she didn't apply it to a footballer injured in a match she'd be worried about her job afterwards when they give out!

Personally I think if the swelling is bad it gives some relief, similar to ibprofen. I imagine the delay in healing is minimal. If it's not too bad just let it heal.

Ceepo

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/doSearch?AllField=impact+of+stretching+on+the+performance

Here is some of what the research says regarding stretching.

Testosterscone

Ceepo wrote: »

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/doSearch?AllField=impact+of+stretching+on+the+performance

Here is some of what the research says regarding stretching.

The big issue with a lot of that research is that it is referring to acute impact on muscles.

This is why I believe that the myth gets perpetuated because the research is misinterpreted rather than the research being incorrect it becomes a case of confirmation bias.

Ceepo

IvoryTower wrote: »

The rice thing is a funny one. I spoke to a physical therapist about this and she agreed that ice may not be the best thing to do but said if she didn't apply it to a footballer injured in a match she'd be worried about her job afterwards when they give out!

And this right there is why a myth like this continues,
Maybe if the physical therapist told them, that as a trained professional they were keeping up to date with the most relevant information to aid the recovery of the injury, this might change their (employer) point of view.

This is from the guy who coined the RICE term
www.drmirkin.com/fitness/why-ice-delays-recovery.html

Testosterscone

IvoryTower wrote: »

The rice thing is a funny one. I spoke to a physical therapist about this and she agreed that ice may not be the best thing to do but said if she didn't apply it to a footballer injured in a match she'd be worried about her job afterwards when they give out!

Personally I think if the swelling is bad it gives some relief, similar to ibprofen. I imagine the delay in healing is minimal. If it's not too bad just let it heal.

Ironically in that situation it could be an appropriate treatment modality if the goal is to restore range of motion hampered through acute swelling

Ceepo

Testosterscone wrote: »

The big issue with a lot of that research is that it is referring to acute impact on muscles.

This is why I believe that the myth gets perpetuated because the research is misinterpreted rather than the research being incorrect it becomes a case of confirmation bias.

This unfortunately is the problem with a lot of research,
research by its nature is carried out academically and is very one dimensional.

Lazare

Ceepo wrote: »

And this right there is why a myth like this continues,
Maybe if the physical therapist told them, that as a trained professional they were keeping up to date with the most relevant information to aid the recovery of the injury, this might change their (employer) point of view.

This is from the guy who coined the RICE term
www.drmirkin.com/fitness/why-ice-delays-recovery.html

Mad.
Was actually thinking this two weeks ago with an ice pack on my ankle. Why am I trying to reduce inflammation if it's my body creating it.

Was thinking of posting a thread questioning RICE but thought I'd be laughed at.

Wish I did now.

Testosterscone

Ceepo wrote: »

This unfortunately is the problem with a lot of research,
research by its nature is carried out academically and is very one dimensional.

Funny enough was reading a good blog post dealing with this only yesterday

http://newsportfuture.com/sports-science/?fbclid=IwAR3dwUCat3L87ljqUdm_sIanRiozVoGDwla5cKUtIHKozcPs4RZ0qLA2J9A

Ceepo

Testosterscone wrote: »

Ironically in that situation it could be an appropriate treatment modality if the goal is to restore range of motion hampered through acute swelling

Maybe the acute swelling is the body trying to tell you NOT to move it in case you cause further damage;););)..

Testosterscone

Ceepo wrote: »

Maybe the acute swelling is the body trying to tell you NOT to move it in case you cause further damage;););)..

Not always the therapists call to make. I do agree with you though there are times (albeit rare) that movement is not advisable however active movement with pain as a guide can actually be more beneficial (this actually ties in with the second facet of RICE that is myth in respect to active and passive rest)

Ceepo

Testosterscone wrote: »

Funny enough was reading a good blog post dealing with this only yesterday

http://newsportfuture.com/sports-science/?fbclid=IwAR3dwUCat3L87ljqUdm_sIanRiozVoGDwla5cKUtIHKozcPs4RZ0qLA2J9A

Some great and relevant point's raised on that article.
Unfortunately I can't see it changing much.:(

Turkeys don't vote for xmas you know

Enduro

Testosterscone wrote: »

Not everyone is gonna agree with these (and that is what I am hoping #bringbackdebate) but some of the biggest running myths IMO

1. LSR stands for Long Slow Run

2. "If the fire is hot enough it will burn anything"/ Runners can eat what ever as long as they are training hard enough

3. Static stretching is of no benefit

4. You will eventually adapt to pace if you run it enough

5. RICE (Rest Ice Compress Elevate) is the best course of action if you pick up an injury

Rather than elaborate I will leave these open for discussion in the hope that it might start a debate going.

Great idea for thread... and there are so many more myths to follow on with as well

FWIW, Definitely agree 2,4 and 5 are myths, big style. I've spent years arguing with people about RICE, so I'm glad to see the old orthodoxy starting to crumble there.

Even though I've personally been stretch skeptic forever from an athletic POV, I still think 3 is far too broad a statement, so a myth as phrased. When you can observe a lot species stretching in the wild, it would seem that there is some fundamental biological benefit for a behavior that has evolved to be instinctive.

LSR is an interesting one. I've heard both definitions. Emphasising the slow part is probably good for runners who are inclined to to run all their training runs to the max, and haven't fully grasped the concept of running hard runs hard and easy runs easy in training. On the other hand if a runner is inclined to overly relax a key training session then a little mental cue of calling it a steady run might help (I've moved from the former to the latter over the years). But then I was doing the training long before I even picked up the term (probably here!).

average_runner

IvoryTower wrote: »

I wonder how many people can barely touch their knees since people started saying static stretching is bad! would swear by it myself. If you're worried it's bad before a race just do it every other day! Thats if you need it of course, I've one leg longer than the other and it causes tightness in a couple of places. Worth getting assessed imo

5 years running and no injuries of note

The rice thing is a funny one. I spoke to a physical therapist about this and she agreed that ice may not be the best thing to do but said if she didn't apply it to a footballer injured in a match she'd be worried about her job afterwards when they give out!

Personally I think if the swelling is bad it gives some relief, similar to ibprofen. I imagine the delay in healing is minimal. If it's not too bad just let it heal.

Could never touch my toes but my movement on a tennis court was class. My daughter is gymnastics can do the splits but not touch her toes while my son can do it easily.

Chivito550

Thomas Barr does static stretching. He’s done alright for himself.

https://www.sportsjoe.ie/amp/world-of-sport/irish-400m-hurdle-stars-thomas-and-jessie-barr-give-us-their-top-training-tips-2505

Ceepo

Chivito550 wrote: »

Thomas Barr does static stretching. He’s done alright for himself.

https://www.sportsjoe.ie/amp/world-of-sport/irish-400m-hurdle-stars-thomas-and-jessie-barr-give-us-their-top-training-tips-2505

He is also stuck in anterior pelvic tilt and has had an operation for a hip labrum tear

Lazare

Dynamic before, static after.

Myth?

Ceepo

average_runner wrote: »

Could never touch my toes but my movement on a tennis court was class. My daughter is gymnastics can do the splits but not touch her toes while my son can do it easily.

Yeah that's the thing.

Someone's ability to touch their toes has no bearing on the way you move.

Trampas

Not read through the thread but I presume static stretch is from cold muscles and not after a session. Cold muscles and static stretch is a receipt for a pull muscle injury type

Lazare

Ceepo wrote: »

Yeah that's the thing.

Someone's ability to touch their toes has no bearing on the way you move.

So I'm not really showing off after parkrun?

IvoryTower

Ceepo wrote: »

Yeah that's the thing.

Someone's ability to touch their toes has no bearing on the way you move.

I said knees.

If you have tight hamstrings, quads, calves I'm pretty sure that's not good for running form or preventing injuries. If there's a physio here I'm sure they could let us know!

Ceepo

IvoryTower wrote: »

I said knees.

If you have tight hamstrings, quads, calves I'm pretty sure that's not good for running form or preventing injuries. If there's a physio here I'm sure they could let us know!

Oops my bad.
For sure tight hamstrings will have an impact on your running.

The question is are they tight long or tight short.
If they are tight long, usually caused bybanterior pelvic tilt also there and point in making them longer. ?

Or are you just making this worse ?

IvoryTower

Get assessed by an expert is my opinion

Id wager most of us oul lads should be stretching regularly, especially those of us stuck at a desk all day. I also found my mobility improved when lifting weights as well so it sort of ticked both boxes although I still like to stretch anyway

Anymore myths for us to smash out of the park

TFBubendorfer

Testosterscone wrote: »

a) the role of antagonistic muscle in biomechanics influence
b) the fact that most of us don’t have optimal range of motion in our running gait

for point b): I don't see how static stretching will give anyone the optimal range of motion

for point a): sorry, I have no idea what you mean. I know what an antagonistic muscle is but don't get that statement. Would it be possible to explain in simple enough terms for me to understand?

For points raised later in the thread:

As for yoga, I did that for almost 3 years. I was awful at anything that involved bending over because my hamstrings were so tight but was top of the class at anything that involved balance or core strength. Also, my hamstrings were still as tight as ever after 3 years of yoga and my running did not improve during the time (in fact it got steadily worse, not that I blame the yoga).

As for injury, I have been injured exactly twice in the last 12 years, both times after doing something really stupid that had nothing to do with tight hamstrings, so I don't buy the "tight hamstrings cause injury" argument at all.

Murph_D

Ceepo wrote: »

This unfortunately is the problem with a lot of research,
research by its nature is carried out academically and is very one dimensional.

Not sure I follow the thrust of this. Research, surely, is carried out by researchers, not always in an academic setting but certainly designed and supervised by academics (who are professional researchers by training).

The article at the top of that earlier list is multidimensional by nature, as it is a review of the current (as of 2015) state of research into the effectiveness of different types of stretching in (a) performance enhancement and (b) injury prevention. It concludes that, for endurance runners, there is no evidence - based on existing research - that it does.

Seems clear enough. Certainly it seems like a decent evidence-based contribution to a discussion on running related mythologies.

Murph_D

Lazare wrote: »

Dynamic before, static after.

Myth?

See above!

Ceepo

Lazare wrote: »

Dynamic before, static after.

Myth?

For me now, it's a myth,
Historically we would have been told static before and after, then there was a shift to dynamic before and static after, of course some would still agree with this.
But should you really do a static stretch when you might have micro tears in the muscle?, you can answer this yourself.

The question I would ask is what are you trying to achieve when you stretch, are to trying to elongate the muscle?, release "knots"/ fascia adhesion?, or just because everyone else does it?


If I was to advise of some kinda of stretch it would have to include some reciprocal inhibition and or integration or retention of some sort.;)

Ceepo

Murph_D wrote: »

Not sure I follow the thrust of this. Research, surely, is carried out by researchers, not always in an academic setting but certainly designed and supervised by academics (who are professional researchers by training).

The article at the top of that earlier list is multidimensional by nature, as it is a review of the current (as of 2015) state of research into the effectiveness of different types of stretching in (a) performance enhancement and (b) injury prevention. It concludes that, for endurance runners, there is no evidence - based on existing research - that it does.

Seems clear enough. Certainly it seems like a decent evidence-based contribution to a discussion on running related mythologies.

I was the one who attached the original link.:rolleyes:
The part you quoted was in reply to testosterscone

MY BAD

Running is bad for your knees... Massive myth

Chivito550

Myth: That being flexible (being able to touch your toes) helps prevent injuries and makes you faster.

Eluid Kipchoge can't touch his toes, so there goes the "faster" myth.

http://www.sweatelite.co/training-eliud-kipchoge-5-things-suprised/

As for injury prevention, I can't touch my toes, not even close in fact, yet in 8 years of track athletics, I have never had an injury from sprinting (the only injury I got was from arsing around with long jump). Meanwhile, I know people way more flexible than me who seem to be frequently picking up niggles or injuries.

Murph_D

Ceepo wrote: »

I was the one who attached the original link.:rolleyes:
The part you quoted was in reply to testosterscone

I realise that, but you posted the list without expressing an opinion about the contents so I was unsure of what you were suggesting. The article referenced certainly suggests there’s good reason to classify stretching - whether acute, chronic, dynamic, or static - in the ‘myth’ category.

ultrapercy

LSR is more a misnomer than a myth. In physiological terms there is no such thing as slow, or fast either for that matter.
Training should be based on effort. Of course slow or easy has become common usage to describe a run at 75% of max which for myself is between 6.50 and 7.10 depending on several varibles. I dont consider that pace slow though I do often call the run as a lsr.
On static stretching I think it has benefits but the old footballer model of pulling your instep up to the back of your head has given it a bad name. If you perform static stretches gently and progressively I think they have benefit.
My own pet peeve myths at the moment are carb loading and over water consumption. Stuffing yourself with pasta and rice for 4 days before a race is not a good strategy same goes for flushing all sodium and minerals out of your system with gallons of water the body is unable to absorb.

HelenAnne

Ceepo wrote: »

career move wrote: »

Many forms of yoga involve holding static stretches so I don't think you can say that it is of no benefit. I think stretching is a very individual thing though and
you have to find what works for you. I've found if my muscles are sore, I'm better off not stretching them.

Many people who do yoga have the most disconnected movement and find it hard to integrate their body,





Pretty sure there's a lot who do no stretching can say the same

I know. I remember reading an article by someone - maybe Catherina McKiernan, maybe Sonia? - saying they’d been convinced to stop static stretching by the science, got injured, went back to their former stretching. They weren’t saying their way was objectively RIGHT, just that they were happy with it.

That’s kind of what I’m saying too - I know the current thinking about static stretching, I understand what Testosterscone is explaining, but I like it, and it doesn’t seem to be doing me any harm, so I’m going to keep it up, even if it’s a placebo

Lazare

Ceepo wrote: »

The question I would ask is what are you trying to achieve when you stretch, are to trying to elongate the muscle?, release "knots"/ fascia adhesion?, or just because everyone else does it?

With dynamic I feel I'm warming up, that's what I'm trying to achieve.

Static because everyone does it I suppose, but it does feel good, assumed I was breaking up fascia.

Have stretched during rest between reps and have always felt a benefit.

Testosterscone

Great to see this thread gaining momentum and plenty of people voicing opinions (some of my comments were a bit vague I will admit but was designed as jumping off points more than anything)

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

for point b): I don't see how static stretching will give anyone the optimal range of motion

for point a): sorry, I have no idea what you mean. I know what an antagonistic muscle is but don't get that statement. Would it be possible to explain in simple enough terms for me to understand?

These two points are actually related.

Every time a muscle breaks down it heals back in a slightly shorter range of motion (due muscle repair filling in the gaps so to speak) so the more work you do the tighter your muscles will get.

As distance runners we tend to be quad dominant as such they get worked regularly meaning that these will be primary area's of muscle breakdown and repair so in many of us quads will get tight. This does not present an injury risk as short muscles tend to be sturdier (so in that respect I agree with the premise that it doesn't influence injury risk) but as muscles work in tandem with each other (for example quad relaxes when hamstring contracts) the length of quad muscle does influence the ability for the hamstring to fully transfer power through contraction as it is fighting quad tension. This is IMO why we are a nation of shufflers to an extent with poor stride length.

Static Stretching does effect the ability of muscle contraction short term in the muscles so should not be done in around runs or activities but on a more developmental level I do feel can improve performance through running economy

UP made a good point about how to stretch which often gets overlooked. Most people's idea of pulling away at a muscles ala the aul one leg quad stretch is not only ineffective but also counter productive due to a thing called the golgi tendon organ which monitors speed of rate of change in tension in muscle fibers, think of it like a seat belt the more force put on it the stronger it acts so overstretching or fast moving stretches will actually cause this to tighten up the muscle to protect from damage of a tear (this is why many people have muscles in spasm post injury). Stretching should be gentle, progressive to the point of first stretch (quite subtle long before people feel the deep stretch the usually do) and breathing is important for oxegenation of cells within the muscle.

Full range of motion however does not mean the more the better it is individual to the person. I know Chivito mentioned Kipchoge and while that is true the thing people fail to acknowledge about that anecdote is that yes he couldn't touch his toes but he was still stretching like the rest of them

Stretching in my opinion is a two prong process;

1) Increasing initial length of muscle
2) Neural reprogramming to allow the new muscle pattern be efficient to ensure sufficient strength and stability

Ceepo

Testosterscone wrote: »

Great to see this thread gaining momentum and plenty of people voicing opinions (some of my comments were a bit vague I will admit but was designed as jumping off points more than anything)



These two points are actually related.

Every time a muscle breaks down it heals back in a slightly shorter range of motion (due muscle repair filling in the gaps so to speak) so the more work you do the tighter your muscles will get.

As distance runners we tend to be quad dominant as such they get worked regularly meaning that these will be primary area's of muscle breakdown and repair so in many of us quads will get tight. This does not present an injury risk as short muscles tend to be sturdier (so in that respect I agree with the premise that it doesn't influence injury risk) but as muscles work in tandem with each other (for example quad relaxes when hamstring contracts) the length of quad muscle does influence the ability for the hamstring to fully transfer power through contraction as it is fighting quad tension. This is IMO why we are a nation of shufflers to an extent with poor stride length.

Static Stretching does effect the ability of muscle contraction short term in the muscles so should not be done in around runs or activities but on a more developmental level I do feel can improve performance through running economy

UP made a good point about how to stretch which often gets overlooked. Most people's idea of pulling away at a muscles ala the aul one leg quad stretch is not only ineffective but also counter productive due to a thing called the golgi tendon organ which monitors speed of rate of change in tension in muscle fibers, think of it like a seat belt the more force put on it the stronger it acts so overstretching or fast moving stretches will actually cause this to tighten up the muscle to protect from damage of a tear (this is why many people have muscles in spasm post injury). Stretching should be gentle, progressive to the point of first stretch (quite subtle long before people feel the deep stretch the usually do) and breathing is important for oxegenation of cells within the muscle.

Full range of motion however does not mean the more the better it is individual to the person. I know Chivito mentioned Kipchoge and while that is true the thing people fail to acknowledge about that anecdote is that yes he couldn't touch his toes but he was still stretching like the rest of them

Stretching in my opinion is a two prong process;

1) Increasing initial length of muscle
2) Neural reprogramming to allow the new muscle pattern be efficient to ensure sufficient strength and stability
[/B}

On point 1) Can you lengthen a muscle by stretching it?
Unless you are going to move the origin and insertion then your'e not going to lengthen it, what actually happens when you do stretch is you "relax" the muscle tissue and thus giving you a perceived ROM,
If you run the heal of your hand down your quad at the border of the ITB/VL, And see if you feel some "knot" there, apply some static stretch for how ever long you care to and see if you have removed the "knot", (pretty sure i know the answer) however you will feel more ROM in the hip. If you have tight muscle fiber there and lax further up or down the chain, which of these do to think will change 1st?

Point 2),
The problem with the above leads to point 2, unless you can reprogrammed the movement neurologically then you are just going to go back to your default gait cycle. AND AROUND THE ROUNDABOUT WE GO.

As runners we generally lack any ingratiation between our muscles in our movement, but then why would we when we don't do anything to integrate them. if you look at any of the S&C or stretching programs out there, are any of them designed for the gait cycle?
We move bipedal in unilateral stance and with a contralateral reciprocation rotation as we move, but there is not to many people out there working on this.

Testosterscone

Ceepo wrote: »

On point 1) Can you lengthen a muscle by stretching it?
Unless you are going to move the origin and insertion then your'e not going to lengthen it, what actually happens when you do stretch is you "relax" the muscle tissue and thus giving you a reprieved ROM,
If you run the heal of your hand down your quad at the border of the ITB/VL, And see if you feel some "knot" there, apply some static stretch for how ever long you care to and see if you have removed the "knot", (pretty sure i know the answer) however you will feel more ROM in the hip.

Point 2),
The problem with the above leads to point 2, unless you can reprogrammed the movement neurologically then you are just going to go back to your default gait cycle. AND AROUND THE ROUNDABOUT WE GO.

As runners we generally lack any ingratiation between our muscles in our movement, but then why would we when we don't do anything to integrate them. if you look at any of the S&C or stretching programs out there, are any of them designed for the gait cycle?
We move bipedal in unilateral stance and with a contralateral reciprocation rotation as we move, but there is not to many people out there working on this.

1) The wording is slightly off I will admit (was keeping it simple) but if you want to swap in muscle tension then it stands to reason that decreased muscle tension will also impact muscle relationships. Also Stretch tolerance can impact elsatic stability which can have an effect on performance.

To be fair with the knot you are describing more than likely this is a deep fat deposit under the ITB within the VL. The ITB is a non tensil tissue meaning that stretching will have very little impact.

The side of stretching is that the analgesic associated with stretching could well have a benefit in terms of cortisol levels which would impact recovery, weight loss, sleep etc.

2) You make a great point and I think this is where the myth element comes in somewhat, yes very few are trying to integrate and as such the science and experience tend to back up what ever a persons belief is as there is full/little to no buy in depending on your beliefs

I am not stating anything for certain as we are not delving into the realms of hypothesis and theortics but personally I am not of the believe the the science explains away the benefits which numerous runners at all levels have experienced over the years