I think the best shoe for flat feet is the Brooks Beast. And, by a long shot. I just looked at the Hoka site and they really don't provide enough detail or selection criteria to pick a model for flat feet. Brooks does. I think most of the other good brands do also. But for dead flat feet, nothing beats the feel and performance of the Beast imhop. Its virtually perfect, and I wouldn't buy anything else. I did notice on the Hoka website that they offer a 30 day trial so my advice, send them back today.

The problem is that I usually run on neutral shoes, supportive really doesn't suits me.
I know the common wisdom is that flat feet implies over-pronation, but supportive shoes are not always the answer.

And the big problem with neutral is that very often they are not flat on the arc, so they hurt my poor foot.

I would look at insoles for arch support, not the shoe. I've not run with the insole that came in the shoe since 1980. Go insole shopping. Buy a variety of them. Just be sure that everyone you get has a soft heel. Nothing with a hard plastic or carbon fiber heel. Don't let anything you do with the arch support compromise the impact protection available under your heel. Play around with building up the arch on the insole. I use shoe goo, under the insole, to build up the arch. Some trial and error will get you to the point to where you have insoles of various types that all have the amount of arch support that you like. To remove arch material, the shoe goo, I use an angle grinder. Harbor Freight has them for $14. Get shoo goo on ebay. Get lots of it. The stuff is awesome. Every couple years I buy prob 10 tubes of the stuff.

With some experimenting you'll find arch supports that are heavy and durable....good for work and walking shoes. Arch supports that are light and not so durable, good for racing. And arch supports in the middle, good for training. For shoes with a board last you'll want a full length insole. For shoes with a slip last, you might get away with a 3/4 insole.

I put a 5-10mm strip of shoe goo prob 5mm thick under the plastic or carbon fiber arch.

---

Books @ Amazon
"If only he had used his genius for niceness, instead of Evil." M. Smart

You need a stable shoe designed for flat feet. Hence, the Brooks Beast.

I have the same issue. I ultimately went with the Saucony Freedom ISOs. That being said, amongst the Hokas, the Tracer is your best bet.

---

ECMGN Therapy Silicon Valley:
Depression, Neurocognitive problems, Dementias (Testing and Evaluation), Trauma and PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

Dear NealH, some years ago I started having soleus problem (I do triathlon since '95)... so after some years struggling with continuous injuries, I found a orthopedist specialist that made me a pair or orthopedic insoles and gave me the shoes to use (Asics GT-2000).
Magically all soleus pain was gone. Unfortunately, when the time for the second pair of insole came I started struggling with knees pain.
In the meantime I started have a serious look at my technique, so I was in a process to understand the way to run for me.
I'm not a light guy, 176 pounds when fit, for 5,9 tall, with very flat feet.

Results:
I can no longer run with insoles, because they are unsustainable for my knees.
I can no longer run with motion control or supportive shoes, I have the same problem with knees. And I have tried other support/motion control shoes. They just don't work for me anymore.

Now I can run whatever mileage per week with a simple Asics DS-trainer or the Brooks racer (very light supportive), with no injuries.

Conclusion: I run better with simpler shoes, without major injuries.

The only problem is that when I do the long session >30km on my shoes on asphalt I feel that the shoes I use are a bit to light.

I'm alway experimenting with new shoes, but again the problem is that lot of "neutral" shoes with a high stack have a supportive arch... that hurt my feet.

In conclusion, I will not adventure myself in a world I let behind. And for my perspective technique > shoes. But i know that fixing the run technique is kinda hard.

That is a great idea! Way smarter/cheaper/more adaptive than what I did, and you get to optimize your configuration based on what you're doing.

I found a chiropodist who worked with me to make a few different orthotics with different characteristics. I also went through a half dozen different shoes to finally figure out what works best for me.

I have tried the Beast (hated them), ran on Adrenalines for a long time, and this year finally ended up on Clifton 2 and I can't imagine going back. Which doesn't make sense on paper. But with the right orthotics it seems to work well for me.

I read an article recently that tried to debunk the whole methodology of prescribing specific types of shoes for specific types of problems. It said that we all have our own specific comfort path that we fall back on, and that we shouldn't pick a specific type of shoe to fight that. We should just let the body do what it wants to do, and we will have a much happier and less injury-prone body. It seems like that is what I inadvertently ended up with.

---

_____________________________________________________
George Dedopoulos | @geodee | geodee.com | Team Atomica | Toronto Triathlon Club

I have the Clifton 2 and did not like the feeling of the insole (too much arch)--took some out of an old pair of Saucony Iso Triumph 2... Voila: new favorite shoe.

I tried custom orthotics for a while, but they didn't work out. The outfit had me walk on some kind of pressure sensor in order to make the orthotics, but the result had way way too much arch support for me. There was a general expectation that maybe some material would have to be removed from the arch to "tune" the orthotics, but the arch in the orthotic was so high that it really couldn't be made tolerable. If the custom orthotic had had half as much arch, then we could have removed enough material to make it work. But with the monster arch, it was unworkable. That's when I got to the 2nd problem......The loss of all impact protection under the heel. I couldn't see a good way to fix that, so I walked away from the custom orthotics.

---

Books @ Amazon
"If only he had used his genius for niceness, instead of Evil." M. Smart

I did the opposite, I tend to a more neutral shoes, I AVOID orthotics and supportive shoes and rely completely on my ability to run well. It took me some time and some tendinitis, but now my technique allow me to run in quasi neutral shoes.
The problem that lot of neutral shoes with some cushioning have arch support (! why if they meant to be neutral?). From that arise my question, I'm looking for neutral shoes with cushioning but WITHOUT arc support.

One last thing, I visited lot of specialist and struggled with their solutions. They work only in a limited way. If you a serious about running avoid anything that modify too much you natural body position. You are overpronator? good just like me, find the proper way to run without injuries and do not rely too much on those expensive tools/complicated shoes the market is selling us. Sure, it's easy to buy motion control shoes than learn how to properly run.
It took me some years to realize that, and a couple to adjust my technique. But now I'm happy with my run.

One last thing, everybody has a limited mileage/week of running, don't overdo it. Always recover properly.

do neutral shoes have shock absorption in them? I been doing some research on different shoes today..and its like a minefield.
What would be wrong with just fitting a pair of shock absorbing insoles like these into my shoes instead?

Running shoe terminology is a bit of a mind field. Some manufacturers will call their 'neutral' shoes 'cushioned' or 'neutral/cushioned'. The way I've always read things is that 'neutral' really means it isn't intended to correct over pronantion. So they might have a 'motion control', 'support' and 'neutral' shoe depending on how much over pronantion it is designed to correct (most to least respectively).

So, technically, a shoe not intended to correct pronantion could have minimal or maximal cushioning. So it could have very little shock absorption or tons of it. Most neutral running shoes will be somewhere in between and probably a bit softer than an equivalent motion control or stability shoe but you shouldn't judge that just by the inclusion of the term 'neutral'.

I think the best way to do it is go to a retailer that will look at you running, listen to your concerns/history and let you try different shoes. If you can't do that maybe start your own thread and include all the relevant details?