Dan asked me to post this in response to his recent review of running shoes -
Dan,
Have to disagree with your evaluation of the limitations of racing flats.
After years of trying various shoes, I found flats (in my case, New Balance 150) to be the best things out there. Unfortunately, they're only good for about 100 miles, but that's another problem.
I'm 42 years old and weigh about 165lbs. The occasional knee and ankle
problem has come and gone over the years, so pretty average on that score. While I wouldn't call myself a particularly efficient runner, I'm a sight better since switching from normal (10+ ounces) shoes, for three reasons.
First, lighter shoes mean less fatigue and better form for longer. Second,
running shoe soles are a pillow of foam; they're not especially stable,
which means your feet and legs are doing the work as you float from heel to toe. Third, the cushioning that absorbs ground impact also absorbs the force generated to push off and move forward: more sole requires more energy to drive the shoes. And in my case, being insulated from the ground meant I wasn't aware of generally poor form and a habit of banging my heels on impact and pulling myself forward using my quads. Heavily cushioned shoes hide - even encourage - bad form. Running
in racing flats, my legs do less work and my knees feel less fatigued.
Racing flats aren't the solution for all ills. But up to 10km, they have
enough cushioning. They are also much more stable and feedback your real running motion. Like any other physical motion, it can be observed,
assessed and improved. I tried the Pose Method - and hated it. All I got
was big blisters half way down the side of my foot and calves that screamed for days. But I have to agree with Dr. Romanov that running in the lightest shoes is the best way. For most people, my guess is that means alternating running in a racing flats and a lightweight shoe, with the latter used for anything beyond 10kms.
Regards,
Paul Finn
Dan,
Have to disagree with your evaluation of the limitations of racing flats.
After years of trying various shoes, I found flats (in my case, New Balance 150) to be the best things out there. Unfortunately, they're only good for about 100 miles, but that's another problem.
I'm 42 years old and weigh about 165lbs. The occasional knee and ankle
problem has come and gone over the years, so pretty average on that score. While I wouldn't call myself a particularly efficient runner, I'm a sight better since switching from normal (10+ ounces) shoes, for three reasons.
First, lighter shoes mean less fatigue and better form for longer. Second,
running shoe soles are a pillow of foam; they're not especially stable,
which means your feet and legs are doing the work as you float from heel to toe. Third, the cushioning that absorbs ground impact also absorbs the force generated to push off and move forward: more sole requires more energy to drive the shoes. And in my case, being insulated from the ground meant I wasn't aware of generally poor form and a habit of banging my heels on impact and pulling myself forward using my quads. Heavily cushioned shoes hide - even encourage - bad form. Running
in racing flats, my legs do less work and my knees feel less fatigued.
Racing flats aren't the solution for all ills. But up to 10km, they have
enough cushioning. They are also much more stable and feedback your real running motion. Like any other physical motion, it can be observed,
assessed and improved. I tried the Pose Method - and hated it. All I got
was big blisters half way down the side of my foot and calves that screamed for days. But I have to agree with Dr. Romanov that running in the lightest shoes is the best way. For most people, my guess is that means alternating running in a racing flats and a lightweight shoe, with the latter used for anything beyond 10kms.
Regards,
Paul Finn