Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

A controlled Newton experiment
Quote | Reply
OK, I bought the Newtons. The men's cushion trainer, size 12.5. For those that followed my running challenge posts, I've been running a lot, in the range of 200-250 miles per month since September. I took a break for some reconstructive facial surgery in January. I am more than back up to speed. I am lighter and faster than ever in my life. Will do a 5k in low 17's or so. I am very aware of my pacing, heartrate, etc. I am in tune with my running. So on to the 'experiment'.

Actually first come my impressions, Received the shoes May 1st and have logged about 120 miles in them as of this post. I liked them immediately. I was a forefoot striker already and had very little transition to speak of. First day I ran 10 miles with a little to moderate calf soreness the following day. 4 days and 30 miles into the shoes, it was like I had been running in them my whole life. They felt good, they felt fast. But so what, right? I agree. Also noticed that if I slowed down significantly and dropped backed to my heels at all, it felt like running over a speedbump. Heel strikers will definately need time to get used to these shoes.

So I have been running half mile repeats on a track for 8 weeks now. I've built up from 3 to 10 over this time. I ran this simple experiment on the last week of halves. The week of 10. Ths would be my toughest workout before tapering for a 5 mile race this Sunday. I have progressed from running these at 2:55 with 3:00 rest the first week, to running them in the 2:40-2:45 range with rest of 2:30. This is active recovery, meaning half walking, half jogging, drinking water if needed. I use a heartrate monitor and my range once past the first 2 is always 163-168 bpm. I hold this range very accurately. I also hold my times very accurately at this point. Usually have a discrepancy of no more than 3 seconds over the set.

So what I did was alternate shoes on each repeat. Switched between my previous favorite Brooks Racer ST's and the Newtons. Used bungee laces so the switch was very fast, less than 10 seconds and did not affect my recovery. I was very careful while running these repeats to keep my heartrate and perceived effort constant, meaning I did not try to run faster in either shoe. I really wanted accurate results.

The results were as follows:
Beginning with the Brooks for repeat 1
1 - 2:44 hr 162 Brooks
2 - 2:43 hr 164 Newtons
3 - 2:45 hr 166 Brooks
4 - 2:42 hr 165 Newtons
5 - 2:45 hr 166 Brooks
6 - 2:41 hr 165 Newtons
7 - 2:46 hr 167 Brooks
8 - 2:41 hr 166 Newtons
9 - 2:44 hr 168 Brooks
10 - 2:40 hr 169 Newtons

So what does this prove. Well yes, one could certainly conclude, Not a goddamn thing, and be absolutely right. However what it leads me to believe is my initial impressions are pretty much true. Which were, I was slightly faster in the Newtons. Nothing dramatic. It may be the increased cushioing and energy return. What I really felt, particularly on the last half of the set was a much easier toe-off and the ability to almost kick myself in the ass the last 400 meters. I mean when I was really cranked up and pushing, this effect was for me, to profound to be in my head. My foot could be described as almost jumping off the ground whereas with the Brooks I had to noticeably concentrate on it to get the nice quick and high kick. This effect in itself probably could account for the performance differences. Anyway that's really all I did.

I really like these shoes and I personally conclude that they help me to kick myself in the ass better and seem to improve speed in the 3-6 second/mile range. So 15 seconds in a 5K?!? I think that is reasonable. And I'll take it. I really liked these shoes before this test, but I really liked my Brooks at a third the price. I ordered a pair of the racers and should have them for my races this weekend. Further impressions to come.

So what do you think of these results and my 'testing protocols'? Any feedback appreciated as I will probably do this again in the future and would love to further tweak my protocols. Thanks for reading and have a swell day.

-Soulswimmer
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [soulswimmer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That is pretty interesting. I think many will thank you for alternating the brooks with newton's. Although n still equals 1 :)

So would you think that a heel striker would have a bigger improvement overall after he/she gets used to them (you had mentioned you were a forefoot striker)?

15s in a 5K - noone would be unhappy with that.
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [klorene] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
There still could be some variation from repeat to repeat.

Next time, put the Brooks shoe on your left foot and the Newton on your right, then tell us which crosses the finishing line first each repeat.

Seriously though, these are interesting data. I'm looking forward to seeing someone who's a pronounced heel striker do the same experiment.

It'll also be interesting in about 6-8 months to have a thread where Newton users post their improvements for the season to compare to non-Newton users.
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [I am the walrus] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I am a heel striker and would be willing to sacrifice my body for the will of science if someone would like to donate a pair of Newton's to me. :)
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [soulswimmer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Nice experiment - but that's all it was.
A "controlled experiment" implies that there was an experimental group and a control group - yours lacked the latter. Thus causality cannot properly be determined.

Still impressive results... whatever the cause:-)

#######
My Blog
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [soulswimmer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
good stuff. I keep meaning to do the same experiment myself but I'm not in a regular track routine at the moment to have my pacing as finely tuned as you have...now i don't need to bother ;)

-----------------------------------------------
www.true-motion.com Triathlete Casual Wear since 2007
(Twitter/FB)
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [soulswimmer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ok, since you did the hard part...here's a regression analysis--the average time you saved wearing Newtons vs. Brooks, controlling for HR, was 3.4 seconds. This is essentially what you get without controlling for HR, because the HR varied so little, it really wasn't a significant factor. The shoe difference, however, was large and consistent, and meets conventional levels of 'statistical significance' in that there's only about a one in a thousand chance you'd get results like that just at random.

The model:
Time (in seconds) = 187.16 seconds - (.135 seconds * HR(bpm)) - 3.4 seconds if wearing Newtons instead of Brooks.

The hairy details:
Coefficient/Std Error/Sig Value

shoe -3.4 / 0.65 / .001
hr -.135 / .17 / .458

note: a previous poster points out that n=1. This is only partly true. One person, yes, but ten trials. Which means, there's not much evidence here that what works for soulswimmer would work for anyone else. But there is some pretty good evidence that the shoes work for soulswimmer. However, whether the gains really extend with increased distance will be interesting to see.

One thing that might impress experimental designers even more next time--instead of just alternating, you could flip a coin each time to decide which shoes to wear. Or at least reverse the order, so it's newtons/brooks instead of brooks/newtons.
Last edited by: tri_philly: May 21, 07 6:55
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [soulswimmer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Awesome, thanks for doing this! That is pretty cool.
Also, from your progression, it looks like in a few weeks you will be doing these in 2:40. Congratulations on your progress, that is awesome.
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [try2tri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 It is a controlled experiment. His (I'm assuming soulswimmer is a He based on the men's size 12.5; forgive me if you're an athena) control is the Brooks flats. His experiment doesn't target the question 'do the Newtons work for everyone', it asks, 'do the Newtons work for me.' The answer is--for soulswimmer, they seem to work better than the Brooks.
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [klorene] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I thought the great improvements in this shoe were the help it gives you to become a midfoot striker? How can this shoe improve your times if you are already a midfoot striker? As for running 400's or 800's isn't it more likely every runner is more likely to midfoot strike at these distances and more likely to need help keeping this form past 2-3 miles?

I really appreciate the op's test and hope everybody keeps reporting their findings but these are the questions that keep going through my head, and it can be quite thick.



-----------------------------------------------------------
Pain or damage don't end the world, or despair, or beatings. The world ends when you're dead, until then you're due for more punishment. Stand it like a man. And give some back.
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [soulswimmer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thank you for your thoughtful post. I recently got a pair and after two short training jogs I ran a 10K with very good results. I think that overall I will likely do well with these shoes, however it will take some time for these things to prove themselves (like how well they really last in the field and if people start reporting all kinds of injuries from them). I would like to hear more from people who actually have these shoes and are therefore in a position to legitmately post an opinion about them. Thanks again for your detailed post about these shoes. Tim
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [soulswimmer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Can I ask you why you bought them?

While the biggest impression I get is that most people seem to want them to change them to a mid-foot striker from a heel striker, it seems that the company's main literature is about the energy-return mechanism in the sole.

Which did you buy it for and what is your impression of the value of the shoe?
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [coecoe13] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think that absolutely the greatest gain from these shoes is that they would 'force' heel strikers to become mid/forefoot strikers. Most likely for an average heel striker the greatest gains would be realized by just moving the strike forward, regardless of shoe. However after running this test, I am convinced that there is some noticeable gain from the increased absorption and return of energy as well as the more flexible forefoot area. As was mentioned and I entirely agree with, the Newton's work better than the Brooks for soulswimmer. Your results will certainly vary. Seriously though, if you have questions running around in your head that won't go away...buy them, try them, if you no like, return them. I did not mention in my original post, the Brooks are roughly 2 ounces lighter.

-soulswimmer
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [soulswimmer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
How about a comparo of the racing shoes vs your Brooks flat?

_________________
Dick

Take everything I say with a grain of salt. I know nothing.
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [soulswimmer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Good experiment, especially with limited resources. I would have to count a 2 ounce difference per shoe as also being significant (so your data is skewed to make the Newtons REALLY prove they're better). Ideally you would have someone else monitor your speed while you monitored your HR; ideally you wouldn't have expectations of which shoe would do what - but I think you have showed something - it's still up in the air (for me) which aspect of these shoes, or of the altered running style, is responsible for the greater speed efficiency, or if there is an additional panacea effect...



.

"I'm going to stick to my sardines" - Cassidy
"Others took their lemons and stood up and walked." - Kestrelkerri
"I will never know quite why I set out on the run. I guess because it was next." - Nachocheese
"No, just to people on the Forum. My athletes are the control group." - Paulo Sousa
" Actually, I am naturally an Asshole....not unlike the way you are naturally an idiot." IRONLOBO
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [tri_philly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
note: a previous poster points out that n=1. This is only partly true. One person, yes, but ten trials.

Yeah, but don't forget that the 10 trials aren't independent. The errors are correlated, so if that's an ordinarly least squares model you could have quite a bit of alpha error ;-)
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [Trey] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
fair enough. Do it right & get like p=.007.
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [soulswimmer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
OK, I bought the Newtons. The men's cushion trainer, size 12.5. For those that followed my running challenge posts, I've been running a lot, in the range of 200-250 miles per month since September. I took a break for some reconstructive facial surgery in January. I am more than back up to speed. I am lighter and faster than ever in my life. Will do a 5k in low 17's or so. I am very aware of my pacing, heartrate, etc. I am in tune with my running. So on to the 'experiment'.

Actually first come my impressions, Received the shoes May 1st and have logged about 120 miles in them as of this post. I liked them immediately. I was a forefoot striker already and had very little transition to speak of. First day I ran 10 miles with a little to moderate calf soreness the following day. 4 days and 30 miles into the shoes, it was like I had been running in them my whole life. They felt good, they felt fast. But so what, right? I agree. Also noticed that if I slowed down significantly and dropped backed to my heels at all, it felt like running over a speedbump. Heel strikers will definately need time to get used to these shoes.

So I have been running half mile repeats on a track for 8 weeks now. I've built up from 3 to 10 over this time. I ran this simple experiment on the last week of halves. The week of 10. Ths would be my toughest workout before tapering for a 5 mile race this Sunday. I have progressed from running these at 2:55 with 3:00 rest the first week, to running them in the 2:40-2:45 range with rest of 2:30. This is active recovery, meaning half walking, half jogging, drinking water if needed. I use a heartrate monitor and my range once past the first 2 is always 163-168 bpm. I hold this range very accurately. I also hold my times very accurately at this point. Usually have a discrepancy of no more than 3 seconds over the set.

So what I did was alternate shoes on each repeat. Switched between my previous favorite Brooks Racer ST's and the Newtons. Used bungee laces so the switch was very fast, less than 10 seconds and did not affect my recovery. I was very careful while running these repeats to keep my heartrate and perceived effort constant, meaning I did not try to run faster in either shoe. I really wanted accurate results.

The results were as follows:
Beginning with the Brooks for repeat 1
1 - 2:44 hr 162 Brooks
2 - 2:43 hr 164 Newtons
3 - 2:45 hr 166 Brooks
4 - 2:42 hr 165 Newtons
5 - 2:45 hr 166 Brooks
6 - 2:41 hr 165 Newtons
7 - 2:46 hr 167 Brooks
8 - 2:41 hr 166 Newtons
9 - 2:44 hr 168 Brooks
10 - 2:40 hr 169 Newtons

So what does this prove. Well yes, one could certainly conclude, Not a goddamn thing, and be absolutely right. However what it leads me to believe is my initial impressions are pretty much true. Which were, I was slightly faster in the Newtons. Nothing dramatic. It may be the increased cushioing and energy return. What I really felt, particularly on the last half of the set was a much easier toe-off and the ability to almost kick myself in the ass the last 400 meters. I mean when I was really cranked up and pushing, this effect was for me, to profound to be in my head. My foot could be described as almost jumping off the ground whereas with the Brooks I had to noticeably concentrate on it to get the nice quick and high kick. This effect in itself probably could account for the performance differences. Anyway that's really all I did.

I really like these shoes and I personally conclude that they help me to kick myself in the ass better and seem to improve speed in the 3-6 second/mile range. So 15 seconds in a 5K?!? I think that is reasonable. And I'll take it. I really liked these shoes before this test, but I really liked my Brooks at a third the price. I ordered a pair of the racers and should have them for my races this weekend. Further impressions to come.

So what do you think of these results and my 'testing protocols'? Any feedback appreciated as I will probably do this again in the future and would love to further tweak my protocols. Thanks for reading and have a swell day.

-Soulswimmer

That is about as good an n=1 evaluation as I think one could do. The only change I would make would be to randomize the shoe change and to repeat the test many times.

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [Frank Day] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
To reply to a few posts...I bought the shoes because the technology seemed sound and logical in theory. I also assumed, quite correctly, that there would be a lot of hype, anecdotal evidence, outageous claims and whatnot when people started running in these shoes. I am the kind of guy that has to know for myself. I already had this test in mind when I ordered them. They are expensive but I also enjoy me some Kayanos in the past, not to mention a P3SL, powertap, Garmin forerunner, LAS aero helmet, Blackwell 100's, blah blah blah. I am not trying to brag just pointing out that myself and many others pay large sums for our gear. Regarding the shoe itself, they seem well made, and I am happy with the investment. Not to mention the quality socks and hat I recieved with my order. A $20 value or thereabouts. I hope to use them into the 350 mile range but that remains to be seen.

I will repeat this test down the road with the racers, probably not until late summer though. I will randomize the shoe changes as Mr. Day and others suggest. I really appreciate all the feedback...I was kinda worried about being flamed for some glaring inconsistency I overlooked.

-soulswimmer
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [soulswimmer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
One question i will ask is how old are the brooks vs. the newtons? you talk about return of energy, so if the brooks have more miles on them then this could lessen the return for them vs. the newer newtons.

thanks
bama
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [soulswimmer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
where are you located? (meaning what climate are you running in?).

I live in miami beach and whenever i run in my newton's my forefoot gets extremely hot and I feel like 5 or 6 miles is the limit or the major blisters will return. (I got huge blisters in my the run - an olympic tri, granted my feet we sandy at the time from the beach run to T1).

I bring out the newtons every monday lunchtime in the hope my feet will have gotten a little tougher. Each time I have a great run (time/HR wise) compared to my other shoes (ds-trainers and i ause a garmin forerunner with HRM for comparison purposes) but after about 3 miles the heat kicks in and i feel like i am running barefoot on hot ashes!

It really sucks because i LOVE the shoes but I am beginning to doubt i will ever be able to use them in a half or full ironman which are the races i am focused on....

-----------------------------------------------
www.true-motion.com Triathlete Casual Wear since 2007
(Twitter/FB)
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [bamaboy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Both pairs are within spitting distance of 100 miles. I've done 80% of my running in Newtons since purchasing and at this point I intend to stick with them. I just can't stomach mucking them up on some sandy/muddy trails I run 1-2 times weekly. Hey Newton, how bout some trail shoes!

-soulswimmer
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [soulswimmer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
To reply to a few posts...I bought the shoes because the technology seemed sound and logical in theory. I also assumed, quite correctly, that there would be a lot of hype, anecdotal evidence, outageous claims and whatnot when people started running in these shoes. I am the kind of guy that has to know for myself. I already had this test in mind when I ordered them. They are expensive but I also enjoy me some Kayanos in the past, not to mention a P3SL, powertap, Garmin forerunner, LAS aero helmet, Blackwell 100's, blah blah blah. I am not trying to brag just pointing out that myself and many others pay large sums for our gear. Regarding the shoe itself, they seem well made, and I am happy with the investment. Not to mention the quality socks and hat I recieved with my order. A $20 value or thereabouts. I hope to use them into the 350 mile range but that remains to be seen.

I will repeat this test down the road with the racers, probably not until late summer though. I will randomize the shoe changes as Mr. Day and others suggest. I really appreciate all the feedback...I was kinda worried about being flamed for some glaring inconsistency I overlooked.

-soulswimmer

You were only at risk of being flamed really badly if you had done this somewhat positive experiment on PowerCranks. :-)

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks
Last edited by: Frank Day: May 21, 07 18:45
Quote Reply
Re: A controlled Newton experiment [Frank Day] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I wanted to bump this because I like the shoes, put a lot of thought into what I did and I think others may not have seen it and may find this info more valuable than subjective impressions from other users and non-users. So yeah, tooting my own horn, so to speak.
Quote Reply