POSE METHOD® OF RUNNING
The structured model of human running in terrestrial gravity
The Pose Method defines running as a sequence of Pose, Fall, and Pull governed by gravity.
Many of today’s common running cues — lean forward, run on your forefoot, avoid overstriding, increase cadence — originated within the Pose Method. Developed in 1977 by Dr. Nicholas Romanov and introduced globally in 1993, it established a structured model for understanding and teaching running technique.
What Is the Running Pose?
The Running Pose is the mid-stance configuration of the body during running in which the body is vertically aligned over the support foot within the constant condition of terrestrial gravity. In this configuration the shoulders, hips, and ankle form a straight line while balance is maintained on the ball of the foot.
This configuration defines how the human body organizes in terrestrial gravity during locomotion.
Start Here
If you’ve tried the cues but still aren’t sure how they fit together, start with the Beginner’s Guide.
- Step-by-step instruction
- Video demonstrations
- Clear movement guidance
- Self-paced access
One-time payment. Immediate access.
Technique is the foundation of speed and endurance.
– Dr Nicholas Romanov
The key body position in running. Single-leg balance. Elastic alignment. Potential energy.
Forward movement allowed by gravity. The body falls from the pose.
The only voluntary action in running. Pull the foot under the hips. Less is more.
This simple sequence of movements: the fall and the pull, while staying in the pose, is the essence of running technique.
Using the Running Pose for animation, robotics, or modeling?
See how the Running Pose applies beyond sport →
Common Questions About Running Technique
Does running technique prevent injury?
Running injuries are influenced by multiple factors, but how a runner moves – how the body stays aligned and moves under load – is the primary determinant of how repeated impact is experienced and how the body responds over time.
Research shows that modifying running technique can change how forces are distributed in the body, especially when the change involves whole-body alignment rather than isolated elements like foot strike. For example, studies examining Pose Method–based instruction have reported substantial reductions in eccentric loading at the knee (Arendse et al., 2004).
Technique – how you move under the constant condition of gravity – is ground zero for how impact is experienced in the body and how injury risk develops over time.
Is there scientific evidence for running technique changes?
Research on running technique shows that changes in how people move alter measurable variables such as joint loading, force distribution, and muscle activity. When technique changes are applied, measurable biomechanical changes occur.
Differences in outcomes across studies are expected. Running is a learned motor skill, and results depend on how the technique is applied, how it is taught, and how long it is practiced. Many studies do not account for how consistently the movement change is applied or allow sufficient time for adaptation.
The absence of consistent large-scale findings does not mean there is no effect. It reflects the difficulty of measuring skill-based movement within controlled study conditions.
How should research on running technique be interpreted?
Research findings are often based on averaged outcomes across participants, without verifying how consistently the movement change was actually applied or how individuals responded over time.
Running technique is a skill. Like learning a tennis serve or a golf swing, results depend not only on how the movement is taught and practiced, but also on individual perception, coordination, prior experience, and the ability to apply the change consistently.
This differs from experiments where conditions can be closely replicated and repeated with similar results. In human movement, each person starts from a different baseline and adapts at a different rate, which affects how outcomes appear when results are combined.
In this context, statements like “no evidence” often reflect the limits of how skill-based movement is studied, not the absence of measurable effects.
FIND A SPECIALIST
