← Blog

Is heel striking actually bad?

Where the foot lands matters enormously. Which part of it touches down first matters far less than the internet suggests.

This arrives every season, usually from a parent who has read something, and occasionally from an athlete who has just spent four weeks trying to land on their toes and now has sore calves and a slower 3k.

The question is asking about the wrong variable

Foot strike describes which part of the foot contacts the ground first. What actually costs a runner speed is where that contact happens relative to the hips, and how fast the foot is already travelling backwards when it lands. A foot that comes down well in front of the body brakes, every step, whichever part of it lands first.

Heel striking gets blamed because it travels with reaching. An athlete who throws the foot out in front will usually land heel-first, because that is the geometry of a straight leg swinging forward. The heel contact is the symptom. The reach is the fault. Fix the reach and the strike often changes on its own; chase the strike and you have coached a symptom.

It is also worth noticing that this is a distance-running question wearing a sprinting costume. Nobody is landing heel-first at top speed; the mechanics do not allow it. If somebody is worrying about foot strike in a 100, they are worrying about something that is not happening.

What actually changes when somebody switches

• Load moves rather than disappearing. Away from the knee, towards the calf and the achilles. That is a trade, not a cure, and a sudden one produces new soreness in a new place.
• Cadence usually rises, because a forefoot landing under the body is a shorter step.
• The stride shortens. This is the part actually doing the work, and it is available without changing anything about the foot.

What StatLap measures

The sprint and distance analysis reports overstride (how far the foot lands ahead of the hips) along with trunk lean against a 0 to 20 degree range, elbow angle against the usual 90, and knee fold and extension. It does not report foot strike, and that is a decision rather than an omission. A phone filming from the side at 30 or 60 frames a second cannot reliably separate a heel contact from a midfoot one at racing speed, and even when it could, the answer would not change what you coach on Tuesday.

The overstride number would. It is the one that tells you whether the athlete is braking, and it is measured against the hips, which is where the answer has always been.

What to do instead

A-march into A-skip, which teaches the foot to come down under the hip rather than reaching out in front. The wall drill, held still, which fixes the strike point with no speed to hide behind. Both are in the app's drill list under the overstride finding, and neither mentions the foot at all.

If there is pain rather than inefficiency, that is a conversation with a physio, not with a video app. A form change moves load around the body, and load that has moved is exactly the thing worth having a professional look at.

Related