There are tons of tutorials on YT about proper running form.

Can you recommend any particular video that you enjoy or is helpful?

I like this one: https://youtu.be/OIXVDdH3o6g?si=5zmNifE_Zzm4Rasb

Do squats and deadlifts. You can't hope to get anywhere near an ideal form without a whole lot of leg strength.

This will definitely make you faster

Best advice -- find a local running club that does track workouts. The group dynamics will be incredibly helpful as a baseline. Sprinting is big on strength low on endurance, that's why you see muscular sprinters and lean 5k+ runners.

IMHO the biggest factor at being fast is training fast and understanding this is a multi-year effort not a quick fix. Odds are you will need to change slightly your foot strike pattern, this is a long term project, not something that's done in a month.

Good luck.

As someone else mentioned, there’s plenty on YouTube to help re form. That said, I’m helping my elementary aged kids improve their middle distance running (I’m no sprinter, so I can’t help there) and the two basic tips I’ve been using to help them:

- practice barefoot occasionally, and pay attention to how your form changes. You’re more likely to just naturally land on your forefoot when you’ve no shoes on. Now try and maintain that when you put shoes on.

- move your legs faster. Seems simple and obvious, but most people when they try to run faster don’t actually move their legs faster. They extend their stride (more likely to increase heel strike) and try to drive more acceleration off each push. You’re training for power, not speed. Focus on a higher cadence, which will probably mean you need to make a conscious effort to take what feel like _smaller_ steps.

> practice barefoot occasionally

And make sure to ease yourself into it gradually. Easy to go into it full-pelt and do lasting damage to things like your Achilles and knees.

> practice barefoot occasionally

I would add that “barefoot” means, literally “barefoot”. I had convinced myself that “barefoot shoes” would be sufficiently the same because I was running outdoors and didn’t have the guts to do actual barefoot. I recently bought a new Assault AirRunner (curved motorless / manual treadmill) and run on it actually barefoot. The difference in my running form and sudden introduction of new muscle soreness makes clear how even barefoot shoes affect form.

Off-topic side note/rant: it is incredibly annoying how the Apple Watch becomes wildly inaccurate when on treadmills. GymKit has been out for years and has no - zero! - uptake among home treadmills and even shockingly low among commercial treadmills. And shame on Assault Fitness for creating an expensive, commercial level manual treadmills with an app that can see the data via Bluetooth from the treadmill, and failed to integrate HealthKit to sync the data. Wild decisions.

Apple Watch is probably < 1% of a market dominated by Garmin, Polar, and Suunto, so it doesn't make much financial sense to integrate with GymKit.

Apple falls to Garmin in two areas: battery life and software. Sleep affects recovery, so planting a watch on a charger every night is a non-starter. Garmin's performance analysis software is also years ahead of Apple's. Apple could fix both of those things but that would require investment which I'm not sure they are willing to make.

> Apple Watch is probably < 1% of a market dominated by Garmin, Polar, and Suunto, so it doesn't make much financial sense to integrate with GymKit.

Well, maybe (though I highly doubt it is 1% of the runner market) but it is by far the biggest player in smart watches generally now, and they are quickly eroding the feature advantage gap with those other brands. And most of the users of the brands you mentioned are serious runners whereas the average person walking into a gym bought their smart watch for a broader set of reasons than a serious runner buying a Garmin. It would make sense for a manufacturer of equipment to appeal to the average person walking into a gym.

> Apple falls to Garmin in two areas: battery life and software. Sleep affects recovery, so planting a watch on a charger every night is a non-starter. Garmin's performance analysis software is also years ahead of Apple's. Apple could fix both of those things but that would require investment which I'm not sure they are willing to make.

I wear mine all night and get the sleep info. I plop it on the charger while I shower and eat breakfast and it is full by the time I am ready to start my day.

Do you happen to know how Garmin compares to Fitbit in terms of performance analysis? Fitbit made some changes that I'm unhappy with and they refuse to offer us a way out. I'm thinking of talking to Santa Clause about this.

I’ve not used a Fitbit since the first version they released, I continue to be a huge Garmin fanboy though. I’m very happy with my Fenix 5, though I’m semi-regularly tempted to upgrade to a newer one for the “body battery” feature which uses training load, intensity, sleep, and other stuff to work out a more accurate recovery efficiency between activities. I also use a mix of Strava and Garmin Connect for various other analysis things. Which I guess is part of the appeal, they’re pretty open with the data integrations so you might be able to put your data into something else if you need more specific performance analysis.

Honestly the only complaints I have with my Garmin is the best kind of complaint to have: they last so long. My previous forerunner I had for 12 years. This Fenix must be close to 5 already. I keep looking at these new ones and I just can’t justify it. Battery life is still many days, features are still great. It’s just an absolutely rock solid watch that doesn’t actually need to be upgraded. Which is ultimately why I chose a Garmin instead of an Apple Watch last time - I didn’t want another Apple device that might be on a 3 year upgrade cycle.

Excellent news- thank you for sharing.

My solution to the Apple Watch charging problem is to start charging it as the first step of my bedtime routine, and put it back on my wrist as the last step. This works because it takes about 45 minutes to charge.

I was a coach once. There are two mistakes where most people can benefit a lot if they fix them. They are somewhat connected.

1) Foot strike to far in the front as in [1] and [2]. This mostly happens because people want to run fast, and therefore take longer steps. It is very counterproductive though. A longer steps lowers your center of gravity, and because the foot strikes the ground very far in front of the COG, you need to lift your COG before you can do the next step. This is visible in the video of the article as well. The amateurs have a much larger vertical movement of their heads and torsos than the Freeze.

2) Insufficient leg extension at the end of the ground contact as in [3] and [4]. There are two reasons for that. The first one is connected to the point above. If you keep the COG very low, you are forced to bend the hip and the knee while you move your torso over your foot. It's very hard to extend hip and knee after that, so many people just lift the leg instead of pushing all the way through. The second reason is mobility. Sitting all day shortens the hip flexor muscles (M. iliopsoas). Stretching them helps a lot.

Many of the people in the video are also starting quite fast and get considerably slower over the course of those 160m. Tiredness might be an important factor there.

[1] Bolt, foot strike: https://imgur.com/a/QOQaEX2

[2] Amateur, foot strike: https://imgur.com/a/Pmiijgx

[3] Bolt, leg extension: https://imgur.com/a/mRCq7uc

[4] Amateur, leg extension: https://imgur.com/a/cxzMkEi

kudos using that guy who lost to The Freeze as an example

it seems link [3] with Bolt's extension is broken

Mo Farah for leg extension:

https://imgur.com/a/skGEN

Ed Whitlock in his 80s:

https://mindmotionmatter.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/ed-runn...

Those are really nice pictures. Even more so because those were probably taken during much longer and slower runs. But even there, they show incredible form.

1 rings super true to me - the most counter-intuitive thing to me in distance running was to take more steps to go faster. 180-190rpm is usually where I’m at for 2:55ish marathon times, whereas when I started, I thought I needed to be at like, 160, but with a longer stride distance.

It’s more interesting because I sprint “properly”, but my brain just flipped when I started going further.

You need a sprint specific coach. Most coaches and clubs you’ll find start at middle distance and go up in distances they train. While you’ll learn basic drills that sprinters also do, the details, cues, form etc will be different, and the training program will be very different. It will involve a lot more plyometrics, more drills, and shorter distances. So you’ll see improvements if you’ve never run before training for mid distance+, but to eke out maximal sprint performance from form, you’ll plateau and also have poor sprinting mechanics. Also, I see some advice about lifting weights. Great adjunct to sprinting, but you need to learn proper sprint mechanics and training to see carryover (see: the number of big number lifters who can’t sprint worth crap v. 14 y/os who can dust them and have never seen a weight but have trained formally).

Some good advice here. The marathon runner question is a potential enlightening one. Distance running, done well, is not about continuously producing thrust like some kind of human rocketship. It's just as much about learning to leak as little energy as possible, using techniques like those Lukas_Skywalker outlined. So you get up to speed and then just lose as little of it as possible for 26.2 miles.

As they say on other forums, DYEL bro? [do you even lift :)]

Squats, deadlifts, and cleans will help your explosive power a lot; for this, your probably want low reps, high weight, and long recoveries. If you can periodically go to a track and run 6-10x100m ‘all out’ w/ 4-5 mins rest, that would be good too.

For an example lifting plan: https://www.stack.com/a/sprinter-workout-program/