06/14/2026
https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=1439930781506501&set=a.400566972109559
Why is Rearfoot-Striking the Preferred Footstrike Pattern for Over 90% of Runners?
Why do 90+% of runners choose to rearfoot-strike? Could it be that there is increased metabolic efficiency with rearfoot-striking running and, as a result, the central nervous system chooses a rearfoot-striking gait pattern to reduce the metabolic energy expenditure of running?
17 years ago, an interesting computer simulation study from Dr. Joe Hamill and his research group showed that rearfoot- striking running was more energy efficient than midfoot-striking running at a 6:42/mile pace (Miller RH, Russell, EM, Gruber AH, Hamill J. Foot-strike pattern selection to minimize muscle energy expenditure during running: a computer simulation study. Proceedings of the American Society of Biomechanics Annual Conference. State College (PA); 2009).
In addition, in a 2014 study, rearfoot-striking runners were found to be more metabolically economical than midfoot-striking runneers (Ogueta-Alday AN, Rodríguez-Marroyo JA, García-López J. Rearfoot striking runners are more economical than midfoot strikers. Medicine & science in sports & exercise. 2014 Mar;46(3):580-5).
These scientific studies directly contradict the barefoot running, minimalist running shoe and anti-rearfoot-striking zealots who, for years, have promoted midfoot or forefoot-striking running patterns for all runners to be more "natural" or "more efficient" or "more proper". If you heel-strike when running, don't worry about what the self-proclaimed "running-form experts" have been telling you for the past 15 years that, somehow, if you heel-strike, you have "improper" or "bad" running form. Rather, your central nervous system has chosen that rearfoot footstrike pattern in order for you to be more metabolically-efficient during your running activities.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Rearfoot Striking Runners are More Economical Than Midfoot Strikers
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to analyze the influence of foot strike pattern on running economy and biomechanical characteristics in subelite runners with a similar performance level.
Methods: Twenty subelite long-distance runners participated and were divided into two groups according to their foot strike pattern: rearfoot (RF, n = 10) and midfoot (MF, n = 10) strikers. Anthropometric characteristics were measured (height, body mass, body mass index, skinfolds, circumferences, and lengths); physiological (VO2max, anaerobic threshold, and running economy) and biomechanical characteristics (contact and flight times, step rate, and step length) were registered during both incremental and submaximal tests on a treadmill.
Results: There were no significant intergroup differences in anthropometrics, VO2max, or anaerobic threshold measures. RF strikers were 5.4%, 9.3%, and 5.0% more economical than MF at submaximal speeds (11, 13, and 15 km·h respectively, although the difference was not significant at 15 km·h, P = 0.07). Step rate and step length were not different between groups, but RF showed longer contact time (P < 0.01) and shorter flight time (P < 0.01) than MF at all running speeds.
Conclusions: The present study showed that habitually rearfoot striking runners are more economical than midfoot strikers. Foot strike pattern affected both contact and flight times, which may explain the differences in running economy.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
