Economy of Motion

On Oct 12, 1:21 pm, Andrzej Rosa <bakt...m> wrote:
>
>
> Did any of you guys actually *read* at least the quotes? Experienced
> trainers were proved to not be able to tell if you are economical or
> not. You have to make scientific test. Awful looking form often
> happens to be very economical and improved form often means loss of
> economy.

I do know that when I'm trying to impress some girls at the track I
will revert to "classic form," which slows me down, actually...I'm
actually faster doing my unimpressive looking modest steps, modest
width strides, and steady little squirrel's cadence...it takes a lot
of energy to do that classic running form when I want to show off, and
it takes even more energy to actually make that form work well in
terms of speed-up or speed maintenance for all of a few yards!

Ditto for cycling, too, with its classic "hunched-back" form....

> C'mon. It's not so hard to actually read several quotes, is it?

I think they simply disagreed with the conclusions nonetheless, based
on personal observations. (Of course, the article was talking
precisely about how personal observations seemed so lacking.)

> --
> Andrzej Rosa 1127R