28/04/2026
Here’s the post with hashtags added:
⸻
When dealing with pelvic weakness—particularly poor glute med function—runners often develop compensatory strategies that can look very different on the surface.
One common pattern is a narrow step width, where the foot crosses toward or over the midline. At first glance, this runner may appear relatively stable, even maintaining what looks like a level pelvis. However, this is a deceptive compensation. By reducing the lateral distance between foot placements, the body effectively lowers the demand on the hip abductors. It’s a strategy that trades optimal alignment for control—masking the underlying weakness rather than exposing it.
In contrast, another runner may demonstrate a more appropriate step width, placing the foot where we’d typically want it for efficient load transfer. But here’s the catch: this position increases the demand on the glute med to stabilise the pelvis in single-leg stance. If that capacity isn’t there, the weakness becomes obvious—often presenting as a contralateral pelvic drop. In this case, the runner isn’t compensating to hide the problem; they’re moving in a way that reveals it.
So while the first runner “looks better,” they may actually be avoiding load, whereas the second runner, despite showing a visible pelvic tilt, is operating closer to a more functional movement strategy—just without the strength to support it yet.
⸻
