This post is about what I don't like about ChiRunning. I really want to like it, I understand the tai chi philosophy of energy use, even if I don't buy chi as a mysterious energy force. Much of what Danny Dreyer does is clearly motivated by the best of intentions, and his system clearly does work for some people. Despite all of that I'm still not sure about it. Reading the website you cannot really get an idea of what its all about, so I spent £9 on the book. It must be said I was underwhelmed and felt that I'd been fleeced.
Dryer starts out with some fine observations, that kids runs naturally and effortlessly, and that we often appear to lose that ability as we age. My first irritation is his rationalisation for why. All the arguments seem fundamentally right at their core, but are compressed and simplified just too far to be compelling any more. Adults have lots of stresses and responsibilities that mean they lose touch with their childish freedom - true, but there are also societal pressures (certainly in the West) that emphasise not running and all sorts of other equally valid reasons why people don't progress directly from child-like activity through into adulthood.
Dryer has clearly worked with and coached many people - he says he has and I have no reason to doubt him at all, so I'll grant he has much more direct experience of helping others than me. However, he concludes from his experience that - he emphasises this point - running does not hurt your body, its the way you do it. Well, OK, another gross simplification. I've run most of my life and lost the childishness through coaching and the club focus on winning over enjoyment (fun was for the rubbish runners at the back of the pack, serious runners don't mess about). I've never found that running hurt, but it does make you very tired and you do pick up niggles and pulls, especially if you run a lot - discomfort is not pain. A system that guarantees running without injury just seems unrealistic to me.
He also treats the current running "paradigm" too simplistically in order to make his point and emphasise his difference. I totally agree with him that "power" this and "power" that is overemphasised in all sorts of Western sport, even in yoga now, but I reject his assertion that "power running" is solely about leg strength and that his system uniquely adds balance to this distorted approach. Dreyers approach has much merit, but the difference is not that black and white.
At heart, Dreyer's method conjours with the mystery of "chi" and the awesome power of his tai chi master, but the techniques are all captured at Running Barefoot or in McDougall's "Born to Run" without the chi stuff. They come down to relax, slow down your haste to progress, work out what feels best, go easy, run smooth, speed will come as ability and efficiency develop.
Throughout his book, Dreyer illustrates his 'techniques' with anecdotal comments from people who have told him how great the ideas are. This makes it all look sound, but is actually selective use of evidence. He doesn't comment on how many people told him his training is fun but made no difference - self-selection of evidence in action. His technique, that I paid money to discover, is basically land midfoot, lean in so your foot strikes under you rather than in front, keep your back straight and breath deep.
I cannot fault anything that he advises people to do, and I'm certain that people have improved under his assistance. What pains me is that he has taken a free human human activity, reduced it to a set of rules and techniques, over claimed to make it sound cooler, thrown in some trendy mysticism to make it sound different, and then charged to tell you what you already know. It's the running equivalent of a self-help book - you can't knock the advice but you feel somehow cheated because you've heard it all before and you've just been suckered into paying again.
I'm going to go out for a run tonight, and I'll do many of the things that he advises. But not because he advises it. I don't reckon my chi will be improved from centring and flowing and eating my greens, and I don't reckon that I'll always run without effort or without injury. But I will enjoy it, and I will smile, and I promise not to write a book about my self-invented training technique that you can all benefit from if you pay me cash.
I've picked on ChiRunning here because I bought the book and felt cheated. I think exactly the same about POSE too, but having read the website I thought "keep that, I'm not paying". I would point out that I spent the same amount on "Born to Run" and enjoyed it and extracted much more helpful information that even had research behind it to show why it was useful.
Yes I agree with you, I too read the Chi-running book, but it did lead me on to find greater inspiration in the world of barefoot running.
ReplyDeleteAs a fell runner I completely disagree with Dreyers climbing and descending techniques, He is trying to stretch his theory on gravity assisted running too far. Climbing in his crab like fashion looks painful and I would never ever attempt this, descending with a heel first landing is also plain ludicrous.
I don't feel like I would especially benefit from a bath after each run either. I don't really have time for this anyway, but then I'm not making an easy living writing new age pseudo science waffle.
I do however like some of his warm-up's (or as he calls them, his "openers") and still use them now and then, but then this is exactly what I learnt when I did Tai-chi in a class, so again is nothing new.
You are right, he does say some good things, and his advice is generally OK. I also found his book a key part of my introduction to barefoot running, but like you found some of the advice more an extension of his ideas than based on practical and tested method - it all seems a bit 'one size fits all' as well.
ReplyDeleteSitting in a bath is also current training wisdom, certainly at elite levels where a cold (freezing) bath is intended to stimulate blood flow through the cooled limbs, therefy flushing metabolic waste products from your legs. Yet another example of standard practice wrapped in 'special method'.
I guess the main message we might take from all this is to take the bits that you like, ditch the rest and ignore the ideological framework all together.
How do you find fell running by the way - can you do some of it barefoot? I've run the SLMM and KIMM/OMM, but only in fell shoes. I was going to walk barefoot in Wales earlier this year but freakishly we got unexpected snow so I kept my boots on.
Hi Al,
ReplyDeleteCurrently I run on fells and XC with inov-8 X- talons which are absolutely fantastic. There is a rumour that inov-8 are about to embrace the barefoot revolution, we will wait and see...
I try and run my local hills, the Malverns, in Vibrams where possible but am finding stone bruising a hindrance, I may go back to pure barefoot for a while to see if it helps...
Nick, I've had a quick look at inov-8's website and they do have a philosophy that recognises that barefoot is best and to allow the foot to move as naturally as possible.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.inov-8.com/Philosophy.asp?L=26
I used to run in the Adidas “lightfoot” which was much less shoe than the current “swoop”, but typically they discontinued it several years ago. I’m currently testing a butchered swoop, in which I’ve cut out the tongue and much of the hard plastic heal mould from within the shoe. I’ve also taken out the innersole. It’s much lighter, but still heavier that VFF, but looks extremely manky so I’m not to proud of my efforts. I might try cutting the studded outersole off and attaching it to some VFFs when they are nearing death to see if it works – I note that Vibram are starting to make more rugged VFFs now, so maybe they’ll release a studded one – I might even suggest it too them.
On the Inov-8 barefoot tech bit – their structure is supposed to “duplicate” foot movement and fascia-band action in dynamic response but may ultimately risk degrading foot action just like any other shoe by reducing natural work loading – possibly better that full immobilisation of foot, but uncertain how much is real effect and how much is marketing hype. For example, just because tension increases across the shoe, just like in the foot, does not mean it helps as the shoe is not mechanically connected to the rest of the body like the foot is, so the tension might just get dissipated unhelpfully.
http://www.inov-8.com/Fascia-Band.asp?L=26
I like the look of the X-talon 212, but even that looks like it has a heal on it. I may give it a go for fell and XC.
http://www.inov-8.com/Products-Detail.asp?PG=PG1&L=26&TID=15&P=5050973028
I'm running on the North Downs and am going to start mixing in running in fell shoes. I'd dropped anything other than VFF or barefoot altogether but its a pain when its been raining as I slip all over the place, especially on steep descents on grass.