A few days ago the New York Times carried an article about new research showing Usain Bolt has unusually asymmetrical gait for a world-class sprinter. How do we square this with his extraordinary performance and what does it mean for you and me?
The article reports that analysis by researchers at SMU shows his right leg generates 13% more peak force and his left foot is on the ground 14% longer. By comparison, most elite sprinters have between 0-7% difference.
I did a lot of googling after reading the article, and found among other things a post by a mommyblogger in the scoliosis community about telling her son that Bolt has scoliosis, just like him. The child’s eyes lit up with wonder and hope.
Now following this NYT article, I think asymmetrical runners around the world may have a similar spark in their eyes.
It’s widely known that Bolt has scoliosis and thus it seems hardly surprising that his gait may reflect this even though he trains diligently to prevent the back pain that’s been a major vulnerability.
When asked if Bolt might actually run faster if he trained his legs to function more symmetrically, the researchers at SMU rejected the idea, suggesting instead that the asymmetry is likely a necessary adaptation Bolt has made.
It’s Not Just About Sprinting
If you’re a longtime reader of this blog, you’ve probably already guessed where I’m going with this: Bolt‘s asymmetry is consistent with what I’ve seen over and over in distance runners.
I first aired the idea in my analysis of Eliud Kipchoge’s insole malfunction in the 2015 Berlin marathon, and most recently I wrote about it in my analysis of the Breaking 2 Project.
The three runners in the Breaking 2 Project all shortened from shoulder to hip on the right as they fatigued. As a matter of fact, runners commonly shorten on the right.
As the Times article reports, Bolt‘s scoliosis means his lumbar spine bends to the right, making him a bit shorter on the right side. It then curves back the other way in his thoracic spine. This pic of him shows the overall shortening of his right side from hip to shoulder.
A trunk that bends or shortens to the right should produce longer ground contact time on the left foot and greater impact on the right–exactly what the SMU researchers found. A shorter right leg, which Bolt also has, should further intensify this phenomenon.
The researchers and the journalists who’ve reported on the study have framed the findings as a matter of asymmetrical legs, but it’s much more accurate to say it’s a matter of asymmetricality overall. The legs do not produce force on their own.
So the analysis of Bolt‘s gait maps reasonably well onto his scoliosis and suggests what a similar analysis of other runners bending rightwards might show.
And that’s a lot of runners. In my 15 years of professional practice with distance runners, if I had a nickel for every distance runner whose right foot makes a louder sound than the left or hits the ground harder and a left foot that stays on the ground longer I’d be a wealthy woman.
However if I had a nickel only for the runners who evidenced the exact opposite, and you and I met up for coffee to discuss it, you’d be the one buying. I wouldn’t have two nickels to rub together.
The more I investigate this phenomenon the more body systems I find that introduce this asymmetry into our apparently symmetrical form, including universal right ear dominance and asymmetrical organ weight.
So it appears Bolt is yet another exemplar of what I think of as the Baryshnikov phenomenon.
I once heard a story about the great ballet dancer Mikhail Baryshnikov being queried about the significant differences between his two sides, and how he handled that when he had to switch choreography over to the other side (a common task for dancers).
His answer? “Well, I do it differently.”
The Larger Significance of Symmetry
If I had any sense at all I’d end the blog post here, but reading the Bolt study sent me hunting for the Jamaican Symmetry Project, a longitudinal research project following rural Jamaican children that I’d meant to keep closer track of.
That recast the fairly simple, consistent pattern I’ve been seeing into something with many more factors and sent me down into a rabbit hole I’ve barely clawed my way back out of to write this post.
One paper generated by that study was this one showing a positive correlation between knee and ankle symmetry and sprinting performance in elite Jamaican sprinters. Another paper showed children with more symmetrical knees and ankles at age 8 performed better in sprinting 14 years later.
However in both studies foot and trunk symmetry were not correlated with sprint performance.
Now we have to acknowledge that we can’t compare this info to the recent Bolt asymmetry findings because the Jamaican Symmetry Project researchers are looking at structural symmetry–literally measuring the width of bones–while the SMU researchers are looking at how Bolt moves. It’s apples and oranges (or rather, apples and aeroplanes).
But we can contemplate some interesting questions:
- Are Bolt‘s knees and ankles are structurally symmetrical?
- Do sprinters with symmetrical knees and ankles but asymmetrical trunks and/or feet produce asymmetrical force like Bolt does?
In the paper I linked to above on elite Jamaican sprinters, Trivers et. al. write,
In this paper we show that elite athletes have markedly more symmetrical knees than countryside controls and also more symmetrical ankles, while symmetry of feet does not differ between the two. We further demonstrate that within elite sprinters, performance shows striking and consistent positive associations with both knee and ankle symmetry…Considering only the 100 m sprinters (n = 32) we find positive correlations between degree of knee and ankle symmetry and world performance. It also seems noteworthy that overall symmetry decreases among those who run 200 m, 400 m or 800 m races, as if adapted to or caused by frequent left-hand turns.
So for folks wondering about the effect of Bolt’s 200m running on his structural symmetry, there’s a possible factor.
But it’s the more basic questions that are most pressing to those of us whose job it is to help runners of all levels run healthy, enjoyably, and up to their potential.
The right-side-short asymmetry I’ve seen in distance runners, and that seems also to be present to exaggerated degree in Usain Bolt, appears to be so common it’s tempting to call it “natural.”
But it causes problems. Bolt has struggled with his back, and many distance runners’ injuries also map onto this asymmetry, including the prevalence of runners’ knee on the right, piriformis syndrome on the right, plantar fasciosis on the left, IT band problems on the left, and so on.
So is it part of the human heritage, a vulnerability we’ve always had to struggle with? That’s hard to believe if indeed evolutionarily we are running animals.
Or does symmetricality research suggest another possible explanation? Trivers et. al. also write in the same paper:
…it has been known since the 1950’s from experimental work on Drosophilathat stress during early development is associated with greater adult bodily asymmetry, as is genetic inability to deal with the stress (e.g., inbred vs. outbred). This led to the notion that fluctuating asymmetry (FA) – deviations from bilateral symmetry in paired traits, randomly distributed to the left and right side – is a measure of developmental instability, i.e., the inability of an organism genetically to buffer the system against stressors to achieve the optimal state, namely symmetry itself . The key is that if a population shows true FA then it can be presumed to be attempting to be symmetrical, so that failure to do so is a measure of failure to reach–in the face of developmental perturbations–the phenotype that the genotype is aiming for.
Based on this, if the right-side-short asymmetry I’ve been seeing is widespread then it would seem it isn’t subject to fluctuating asymmetry because one never sees the opposite.
So I’m still left without an answer for my trunk symmetry question. Luckily my arsenal of methods to deal with it continues to improve–here’s one of my best (for asymmetry as well as footstrike).
I’m still optimistic that someday I’ll find a big picture explanation for it that makes sense and empowers us all to run healthier and better. The answer is out there.
12 thoughts on “Usain Bolt, Symmetry, and Speed”
So nice to see something about our asymmetry after years of right-sided piriformis syndrome. Soooooo bothersome and painful. Seems like no end in sight. I do try to stretch my right side because it is definitely shorter/tighter! From driving to computers to everything I do, the right side is in a constant shortened state. I think some of it comes from locations that are hard to identify such as our mid to upper back, neck, etc. Stretching has not worked for me but I am quite aware of my asymmetry so I try to move around a lot during the day. I think we must think about our bodies in 3D. We can move around in most every direction and yet one direction always feels different than the opposite – especially the older we get and the more we sit and drive and even live life with various issues throughout our body. Very good post!
You are definitely not alone, Laura. Stretching doesn’t seem to help much–it’s not changing the way you organize your movement so it’s a losing battle. You’ll get more relief from starting by shortening your right side on purpose, for instance lying on your left side and doing sidebending crunches to the right. Then flip over and shorten your left side (which lengthens the right, but shhhh, let’s not say that too loudly and alert your nervous system to how we’re trying to trick it). This won’t solve your problem but it will be more helpful than stretching.
I love your work since you’re the only one on the internet who analyses the whole body structure. However, I wish you would make more videos to explain your blogs since it’s easier to understand.
Anyhow, let’s get back to this asymmetry problem. There are 2 interesting variables that I don’t think anybody discuss enough when we talk about balance :
1 – Dominant eye : Most people, if not all, would arrange their body parts according to what their eyes see. Sifan Hassan is a perfect exemple. She moves her head and her upper body to her left side. Keitany also does it on her right side.
2 – Inner ears. One of the most important parts that are responsible for our balance. I didn’t know until I had an incident that caused me some minor vertigo. If one side is weaker than the other, you would be unbalanced.
Aside from that, working on a computer for long hours would make your body shift towards your mouse, meaning your right side. This manifests itself while running, specially when you’re tired.
Thanks for your kind words, Nadir. Yes, eye dominance and the vestibular system are both involved, however neither explains why runners commonly shorten their right side but no runner I’ve ever seen does it on the left. As for the mouse, left handed people usually mouse with the left hand but again, this particular pattern doesn’t seem to be at all connected to handedness. It’s right side short even for left handed runners. (I also would add that which way people shift their weight in response to using a mouse depends on whether their chair has arms, where exactly they put the mouse, etc. Often people shift their weight away from the mouse hand to counterbalance the arm which is suspended in the air.) Let’s keep working on this!
I just watched a couple of 5k-10k olympic finals. It’s amazing how all these elite athletes would turn to their right side more than they turn to their left side. I wonder if subliminally they’re trying to stay away from the track limit on their left.
Anyhow, I would be interested if you did some tests with your runners where you would ask them to run with their dominant eye closed or both eyes closed. Check also when they’re just standing and talking\relaxing if they favour one side to the other.
We see this compensation all the time in our PT practice! Have you ever read about/taken classes in postural restoration? It fully explains this right side short pattern.
It’s nice to know that I’m not the only person who sees this. When you say postural restoration explains the right side short pattern, do you mean it explains the cause? Or does it simply describe it?
This reminds me of Huberman when he can’t totally explain how vision works after exploring all of its scientific parts.
To me it is clear that there is a spiritual component to running and seeing that is not explained by the sum of its scientific parts.
The Hebrew scriptures have a ton to say about posture, balance, the difference between right and left, and straight motion.
I’m learning that maybe the universal right lean has something to do with us all leaning on our own understanding and choosing the easy over the correct.
Hello dear Jae,
do you have any source or link for the mentioned study findings of Usain Bolts assymetrical Data, like the SMU findings ( the in the articles citated Authors Peter Weyand and AB Udofa did not publish any actual papers on these statements) ?
I am working as a biomechanical researcher in Germany and we want to build a Model for forward simulations of runningbehaviour. I am researching about actual Data but all i can find are loose ends. One Paper which comes close to generating useful Data does not prove the statement of Usain Bolts assymetrical Ground reaction forces and contact times:
Maybe you have something more useful.
Norman, I’m afraid all I have is the material in the New York Times article plus the Jamaican Symmetry Project research I linked to.
Why is the 400m always run in only one direction? Wouldn’t running both directions reduce repetitive motion injuries? If not in the races, at the very least in practices? Are there track programs who have explored this?
Anna, I don’t know why the direction isn’t ever reversed in competition, but it’s pretty common for runners to do some laps the opposite direction in training, even if just for warming up. Many coaches are conscious of trying to mitigate the asymmetries that running on a track promotes.