PRO Sprinters do NOT land under their Center of Mass!!! 

@@jonahwantenaar2652 the last thing I would want anyone to do is get false information, otherwise known as misinformation. How someone interprets a fact that we have shared here is not the point. This is a scientifically proven thing and not a theory. Notice how we did not tell anyone what to do or how to do it, we simply stated a known mathematical fact that runners do not land under their CoM/CoG. Anything other than this is not what we are covering and we are simply refuting the misinformation that social media influencers are getting wrong. We are not giving cues to land in front of CoM/CoG, simply stating that anything other than the facts is not true. Nothing more. Thanks for your comment.

@@theslingmethod You’re right. You didn’t give any instruction and you’re not responsible for what people do with this info. So I take that part of what I said back it’s not fair to hold you to that. But I do notice that you’re using centre mass and centre of gravity as if they’re the same thing when they aren’t. They can happen to be located in the same place if an object is stationary or spinning in place but when in motion like running they are actually located in different places. Athletes do not land under their centre mass because they are landing under their centre of gravity. The faster an athlete runs the more in front of them their centre of gravity is and thus the further they will need to land in front of themselves. Therefore it is not scientifically accurate to say that athletes land both in front of their centre mass and centre of gravity as if they are the same thing they are not.

@@jonahwantenaar2652 sure, they’re not the same, and I didn’t say they were, however, landing under “either” CoM or CoG never occurs.

100% correct! 👍

Point 1) many coaches actually don’t know it’s not possible to land under our hips/CoM/CoG and blindly say it is possible. Point 2) “touch down” IS the “landing” as per the actual research and force plate analysis of runners. Pre mid-stance can I licit over 500lbs of force in sprinters and a little less in endurance runners. Point 3) “under the hips is under the hips” it’s either under the hips or it isn’t, and it isn’t. 👍

⁠@@theslingmethodpoint1) at the speeds that these athletes are going at it’s completely impossible to differentiate between and inch of where your landing. Point 2) they are TRYING to strike under their center of mass and they don’t only because it’s not physically possible. It’s not a literal meaning it’s a cue (a very good one I might add) to get people to minimize breaking forces. Point 3) you seem to have very limited idea of these methods so please do not act so annoying.

@@justsomenapalm5067 you seem to not have an understanding of slow motion video capture and force plate analysis we use in the laboratory to assess runners….in light of that ignorance, please don’t act so annoying! 🙄

@@theslingmethod ???? Are you not seeing my point? It’s not a factual statement it’s a coaching and mental cue that helps athletes sprint tall and have a forceful foot strike.

@@justsomenapalm5067I’m not missing anything. Indeed, that’s the point, many use it as a factual statement in all distances. 👍

Nowhere ever was that insinuated, nowhere!

I think coaches give that queue to fix sprinters who are over striding but in actuality you are not landing underneath your hip. Because if you say land a bit in front of the hip they start tippy toeing, reaching which is not good. Good stuff brother

@@osamaalshareef491 after speaking with hundreds of coaches about this, the vast majority actually do believe they can land under their body and that it is beneficial. The sad part also is that most don’t even understand or accept the fact that the faster we run, the further away we land from our CoM. They, for some reason believe that the faster we run the closer to CoM we land.

@@grtheredroad9923 what did the video show you?

Hahaha

@@theslingmethod LOL!!! I'm glad you found this funny. 😆 I wanted to lighten the mood in the comments section. 😊

@@Fire_soul1796 thanks, it’s needed. 🤣🥳

The point is the point…stick to the point and you won’t think the point is moot by arguing something completely different to THE point. 👍

Mostly stupid comments that miss the point…just like this one! 🙄

@@cooliamcool06 I’m thinking that most people who comment are either clueless or suffer from cognitive dissonance 🤣🤣🤣

@theslingmethod do you run track?

@@cooliamcool06 I think you missed the point of the video.

@theslingmethod Your just not right

@@cooliamcool06 the video proves that I am!

@@doudleyJ 100% correct! 👍

For what, more evidence that no runners land under CoM? 🤣

@@Raucherbeinknacker 👍👍👍

@@theslingmethod People talk a lot about cadence and how to raise it. But to me cadence is a result of technique and not other way around. Protein folding is the result of the arrangement of amino acids and not is the arrangement of a.a. the result of the protein structure. Therefore I didn't even try to change my cadence, but I found some crucial aspects of running mechanics which also have great influence on it. F.e. only straightening my lower back by tilting my pelvis a little more forth increased my cadence from 160 to 170. Last week during warm up I tried only running by hip rolling and left my legs as passive as possible. On the contrary I left my pelvis passive and ran only by leg scissoring. Both I can use as a running drill. But during my run I played with these both aspects an when I engaged more hip momentum, suddenly my cadence went from 170 to 180. I still run slow with 6 to 5:30/km. But my run became really smooth. Another crucial thing also changed with more hip momentum: my heels came up a little higher just by itself. Before it wouldn't have made sense to try to raise them, because I would have wasted energy working against my tense quads. With more hip engagement the quads are relaxed immediately after kick off, so the heels swing up higher. Before I was running like skipping from leg to leg and my pelvis followed by rolling and so my shoulders contrawise. But now my pelvis is leading and my legs are following, so there is less strain in my whole system. I guess, that the whole upper body work must also work like a energy saving system. The first thing I changed this season was to change the timing of the kick off by skipping faster into it, so I don't bend my leg that much after ground contact and my kickoff became much harder and the running much more stiff in positive terms. When letting myself falling forth slightly, my legs are like running faster by itself. But the hip rolling movement and it's effects was most exciting!

@@Raucherbeinknacker have a watch of this video all about cadence. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-LXNvdPAbL2g.htmlsi=PxDj5D8HpOTRS-QE

​@@theslingmethod hi, today I discovered another running magic! Try running like sb. is holding you from behind and try running as if sb. is pushing you forth by your back. The effect of this is phenomenal. These both aspects must be trained and harmonized. The first will lead to leg scissoring and application of the pulling forces, the second will lead to hip domination which let the legs get very relaxed. If both aspects are dispensed in the right proportion, the technique will get perfect. And this perfection is not visible and can't be learned by looking at how you are running.

In Bolt’s case that occurs slightly after the landing point.

@@LanRazlan-q4hplease specifically define an over stride. Thanks

You don’t, and it isn’t. 👍

I'm sure it felt like you were stutter-stepping, stuck in 2nd gear, and persistently about to fall on your face. That's how it felt for me whenever I tried this. You're not only pushing off when you are in contact with the ground; you are also absorbing the shock of contacting the ground before you can push off. But this narrator never talks about the knee bend occurring to absorb the shock until COM is attained, when the knee straightens and the push-off begins. If the knee was never bent, you would have a braking effect. But that's not what happens.

@@hektor6766 we didn’t talk about the knee bend because this video isn’t about that. We stick to the point and keep it to the point. We’ve written books on biomechanics and developed an entire 9 week course on the subject, knee bend, pronation, internal rotation, are things we talk about a lot, but not here in this video because that wasn’t the subject. Last thing, in gait the knee doesn’t straighten. 👍

@@frizeii not sure what you mean?

​@@theslingmethod As a marathon runner, Eliud Kipchoge does not land with his feet infront. My theory is that you can save some energy by landing under your center of mass. While this can save a lot of energy during a marathon, sprinters might not care about this. I think they even can run faster when their ground time is longer.

@@frizeii you may be unpleasantly surprised to hear that Eliud Kipchoge doesn’t land anywhere near his CoM. I have another video on my channel showing and debunking this too. 👍

Hahahahaha so you think the slower runners have better technique? Or is it the injured runners with the better technique? Imagine how the rest of the world could benefit if they stopped imagining fairy tales and unicorn stories! 🤣🤣🤣

@@theslingmethodyo one more thing, you know that the center of mass can shift depending on how you position your body? You can’t just say that the hips are the center of mass because the actual center of mass keeps shifting when you’re sprinting, anyways good video!

@@PythagorasFormula sure, can you identify where the CoM is 100% exactly? I expect probably not. As we know the CoM doesn’t move all that much in a “ContraLateral Reciprocal” movement such as running where a mostly vertical posture is seen, we know it doesn’t shift much at all. 👍

@@theslingmethod yes it doesn’t shift much but it still shifts, depending on how good your technique is. Btw I really liked your video, it would be amazing if you could also make technique videos

@@PythagorasFormula if you scroll through my videos you’ll see some posted here. Different to what some people do as The Sling Method focuses on biomechanics. Thanks for your comment. 👍

You’re high right!!! 🙄

​@@theslingmethod With responses like that, it seems like you're not open to correction.

@@TheMsyZa the evidence is in the video and in the scientific literature and is not at all cherry picked. It seems you’re here only to argue and be disrespectful. People seem to want to ignore facts and scream “cherry picked” because they disagree but without ever putting forth evidence to the contrary. So basically arguing for the sake of just arguing.

still behind the point of contact ... at least in the examples he provided

@@joshuahoover7700 yes. But much less than the draw overs suggest

Did you really just compare a backflip to running…really?

@@theslingmethod no. But to illustrate how much forward the center of gravity is on different body positions. When the body leans forward the COM is not in the hips as your draw over suggest.

⁠@@markusgptake a look at the biomechanics research, it’s clear. This video is a visual representation showing that no runners land under CoM. Did the fastest person to ever run the 100m land under his CoM? No.