i am SO no expert…
but, firstly, I'd ask what you think is "efficient"
Say that you're right, and you haven't screwed proprioception. Say you're right and reaching more and having a bigger stride, manages to get you farther or something. How long can you manage that? How much longer (or not longer) could you manage on a shorter stride that has less reaching and …pulling (for lack of a better way to describe it) you along? Which would let you over time cover more ground less exhausted and thereby more efficient?
I donno, I'm just sorta wondering on the idea of what one deems efficient or how one is considering efficiency. Driving faster uses more gas but saves more time. Maybe you get a similar effect when dealing with running. Certainly, when you think about it, for most people, walking can be done ad nauseam therefore …
not to say that my thinking isn't completely wrong… and I'd venture that part of you feeling it's less efficient is because even if you haven't screwed proprioception you are doing something new and there's weirdness there…
plus, I have a q-angle people are amazed at so I'm SO not a runner…
Just thinking
|