Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes?
Quote | Reply
I've had a couple of ankle surgeries, I overpronate, and I use custom orthotics to control pronation (to some degree). Recently, I saw my podiatrist (excellent surgeon, has saved the careers of some multi-million dollar athletes) about a posterior tib issue, and I asked him if he wanted to see my gait. To my surprise, he said (paraphrasing here) "No. Current research suggests that pronation isn't necessarily bad and we could end up doing more harm than good by trying to eliminate it." But thing is, when I go to a specialty running store, they watch me run and recommend shoes based on how much pronation there is in the slow-motion video. Question is, how should I be evaluating shoes in light of this new info? The last thing I want is to buy a pair of shoes only to find myself injured 50mi later.
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [bigmatt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Simple answer....comfort. The weight of the shoe may interest you. But, the "technology" shoe companies (thus shoe stores) push won't and will never reduce injuries. And yes, your podiatrist is right..Pronation is not a good predictor of injury and too often runners are told they "over-pronate"...I've seen all types of runners with all types of feet in all types of shoes injured....rarely if ever is it the shoe.

Our feet are super adaptable. Picking a shoe that simply "feels right" is really your best bet.

CB
Physical Therapist/Endurance Coach
http://www.cadencept.net
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [PTinAZ] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
How long does it take to "feel" the shoe? A few striders down the block? Or do you need to rack up some miles? The latter of course would require a shoe store with a really flexible return policy.
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [bigmatt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Most local running stores around my area allow a return if you aren't happy with the shoe.....within reason. I tell my patients/athletes to try on a bunch, be picky, run on the treadmill if the store has one. Then go for a couple runs outdoors after you purchase, you'll know by that point.

CB
Physical Therapist/Endurance Coach
http://www.cadencept.net
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [bigmatt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Purely on fit and comfort.

Generally I say stick to the brand or brands you’ve worn that you really liked. Generally it means the shape of their shoes matches your foot well. From there you should be able to find 3-4 shoes that fit you well and you take the one that is most comfortable. You should know that instantly when you put it on.

Since you wear orthotics there is no need to have someone in a running story evaluate your gait on a treadmill.
You are the runner, they are your feet and legs and only you know how it feels to run. Don’t pay attention to what everyone else is wearing and don’t give into the hype of the “Super” Shoes. Simply find one that fits and feels great the second you put it on.

Dave Jewell
Free Run Speed
Running Shoe Insight

Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [SDJ] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks for the feedback! Does the same approach apply to orthotics as well? For example, last time I bought shoes, I tried a pair of shoes with some less beefy over-the-counter inserts and I found them comfortable, but ultimately went with my rigid custom orthotics and different shoes because of the pronation control.
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [bigmatt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
bigmatt wrote:
I've had a couple of ankle surgeries, I overpronate, and I use custom orthotics to control pronation (to some degree). Recently, I saw my podiatrist (excellent surgeon, has saved the careers of some multi-million dollar athletes) about a posterior tib issue, and I asked him if he wanted to see my gait. To my surprise, he said (paraphrasing here) "No. Current research suggests that pronation isn't necessarily bad and we could end up doing more harm than good by trying to eliminate it." But thing is, when I go to a specialty running store, they watch me run and recommend shoes based on how much pronation there is in the slow-motion video. Question is, how should I be evaluating shoes in light of this new info? The last thing I want is to buy a pair of shoes only to find myself injured 50mi later.

pronation is not bad. overpronation is bad. or, to put it another way, it's not bad, it just needs to be addressed.

i was forced to evacuate my home because of a wildfire at the beginning of this month. and i shit you not, no hyperbole - my wife was witness to this - here was the order of importance of stuff that i had a very short time to collect: 1. anything with a heartbeat; 2. deeds, cash, and about 1 cubic foot of the most important financial records. 3. orthotics. then, #4, 5 and beyond.

your podiatrist may well be an excellent podiatrist, for football players, or for somebody other than an endurance runner. but he doesn't sound like he's got good specific experience in this. i'm happy to give him my witness as an overpronating competitor runner in year-50 of that avocation. i'm a hard core science believer. but this would require a longitudinal study of identified, clinical, overpronators. if he knows where that study can be found, i'd love to read it.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [bigmatt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
let me go one step further (ba dum tsss), and present to you mark covert:




this is the overpronator who got the most out of his uncorrected overpronating feet. 45 years never missing a daily run. but if you forward to 3:30 into this video, you can see the feet he ended up with. and if you look at him while he's running, you can see what this did to him. he stopped his streak because it crippled him. at the end it was 1 mile a day. and then he couldn't even do that. not hips, or knees, but these feet.


i was on this run with him, his last run. i am now past the age he got to when he took his last run. he's riding a bike now. but this is the toll uncorrected overpronation took on his feet, and this guy was a 2:teen marathoner, a 28:xx or 29:xx 10k runner, and this was back in the early 1970s. he didn't get bad feet because he didn't know how to run. in my opinion he got bad feet because he didn't correct for overpronation.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Last edited by: Slowman: Oct 20, 20 10:34
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Very timely post as I am addressing my latest injury to the tendons in my right ankle. I overpronate and have suffered from various injuries such as posterior tibial tendon (inside of foot) and now peroneal tendon (outside of foot) over the history of my running - I came to sport later in life at age 30 as a smoker trying to quit. But my feet were always a source of pain even in my late teens and twenties when I worked manual labor in the horse racing industry.

I've gotten to the point in my running stride that I completely 'wing' out on the right foot and it acts somewhat like a useless appendage - it offers no "push off" and in fact I am unable to raise up on my toes on the right foot independently. But pushing the arches up with supports has not seemed to help my feet over the course of 40 years so I decided to try something new.


I literally just sent back a pair of beefed-up motion control shoes this afternoon after trying them out for 3 weeks. I have ordered a pair of the dreaded Vibrams five-fingers to try and work on strengthening my long, flexible, overpronating feet. My plan is to be able to go for walks in them and wear them when doing low-impact exercise in the park near my house. I've been doing barefoot exercises in my house during this period of working at home and hope to keep moving forward until I can at least walk straight and strong.
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So we know definitively that it was because of his uncorrected overpronation or maybe, just maybe, it was 45 years of running everyday?

Mark states that his feet were messed up at a young age. Was that a congenital issue? I respect your opinion but there are way too may unknowns to say that overpronation was THE problem. Any guy who can run for daily 45 years straight did something right for 45 years.
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If my house was burning down I'd make a grab for the orthotics too!. There is some pronation and then there are people who pronate way too much. If one pronates a bit and has no problems that okay I guess. We don't need to put a bunch of slight pronators in orthotics. But some people just obviously need help. The forces are just sheering things apart.

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Last edited by: spockwaslen: Oct 20, 20 11:34
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [Rideon77] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Rideon77 wrote:
So we know definitively that it was because of his uncorrected overpronation or maybe, just maybe, it was 45 years of running everyday?

Mark states that his feet were messed up at a young age. Was that a congenital issue? I respect your opinion but there are way too may unknowns to say that overpronation was THE problem. Any guy who can run for daily 45 years straight did something right for 45 years.

i spectated his running during his 45 years. i saw him wind down from 20 miles a day to 9 miles a day, to 5, to 3, to 1. this guy's feet were pretty well shot long before he ceased his running. the reason mark is no longer running is because of his feet, not because of a change of interest. i show mark because he's the best you can expect out of uncorrected overpronation like his (and mine). if you do better than just about anyone else; if your surpass all reasonable expectations; mark is what your future looks like, positive and negative.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
over pronation is the outcome of a kinematic failure elsewhere in the system: ankle mortise joint, tib/fib rotation, hip flexion.

A store will sell you shoes, that is all they do. This may be a band aid, and you can run, but as with anything add distance, time and heat to a body and there will be change.


https://www.thegaitguys.com/...?rq=over%20pronation

https://lermagazine.com/...-excessive-pronation

Anne Barnes
ABBikefit, Ltd
FIST/SICI/FIST DOWN DEEP
X/Y Coordinator
abbikefit@gmail.com
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [PattiPepper65] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
PattiPepper65 wrote:
Very timely post as I am addressing my latest injury to the tendons in my right ankle. I overpronate and have suffered from various injuries such as posterior tibial tendon (inside of foot) and now peroneal tendon (outside of foot) over the history of my running - I came to sport later in life at age 30 as a smoker trying to quit. But my feet were always a source of pain even in my late teens and twenties when I worked manual labor in the horse racing industry.

I've gotten to the point in my running stride that I completely 'wing' out on the right foot and it acts somewhat like a useless appendage - it offers no "push off" and in fact I am unable to raise up on my toes on the right foot independently. But pushing the arches up with supports has not seemed to help my feet over the course of 40 years so I decided to try something new.

I literally just sent back a pair of beefed-up motion control shoes this afternoon after trying them out for 3 weeks. I have ordered a pair of the dreaded Vibrams five-fingers to try and work on strengthening my long, flexible, overpronating feet. My plan is to be able to go for walks in them and wear them when doing low-impact exercise in the park near my house. I've been doing barefoot exercises in my house during this period of working at home and hope to keep moving forward until I can at least walk straight and strong.

i'm very much a critic of what i consider outdated nomenclature that describes shoes. i hate "motion control" shoes. but i love shoes that help me control my motion!

if you look at HOKAs - and i mean most of them - they have a feature they call the "active footframe." it's like your foot enters a "bucket seat" when it steps into the shoe. this architecture holds up my orthotic, that is, it keeps my orthotic from destroying the medial side of the shoe.

but here's the kicker: HOKA considers all these shoes to be "neutral." how can they be motion control and neutral at the same time? that's a topic for another thread. just, the thing is to figure out what's going to go inside your shoe: an orthotic? what kind? what are the imperatives of that footbed? what is the construction? then choose a shoe that accommodates the footbed.

i have a saucony endorphin shift on the way to me now. i have hopes this will do for me the same sort of thing that HOKAs shoes do. i'll report back. but this is the sort of underwriting process i go thru when choosing a shoe.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[quote Slowman

i'm very much a critic of what i consider outdated nomenclature that describes shoes. i hate "motion control" shoes. but i love shoes that help me control my motion!

if you look at HOKAs - and i mean most of them - they have a feature they call the "active footframe." it's like your foot enters a "bucket seat" when it steps into the shoe. this architecture holds up my orthotic, that is, it keeps my orthotic from destroying the medial side of the shoe.

but here's the kicker: HOKA considers all these shoes to be "neutral." how can they be motion control and neutral at the same time? that's a topic for another thread. just, the thing is to figure out what's going to go inside your shoe: an orthotic? what kind? what are the imperatives of that footbed? what is the construction? then choose a shoe that accommodates the footbed.

i have a saucony endorphin shift on the way to me now. i have hopes this will do for me the same sort of thing that HOKAs shoes do. i'll report back. but this is the sort of underwriting process i go thru when choosing a shoe.[/quote]
Agreed - it is difficult to decide on a shoe simply based on description online. I am a fan of HOKAs - I find the added cushion beneficial because at 55 I have lost some of the padding in my feet. I am constantly on the lookout for the next "better" shoe for my feet.
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [ABarnes] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm with Alice Barnes here. Over pronation is likely to be an issue somewhere in the chain.
It's possible to "correct" pronation with shoes or orthotics or through specific training.
Both have advantages. I've tried both and found stability shoes and orthotics lead me to twisting my ankles frequently.
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 

Slowman,
I wanted to chime in here as I'm a pronator, and trying to address it....

So like a lot of folks, I suffer from a lot of issues with post tib shin splints and/or post tib tendonitis. Any pushing of the mileage would tend to aggravate it. Its easy to say 'get orthotics' (and a lot of people say that!!) but it doesn't seem so simple.

Just in the past year alone, I've had:

1. Well respected podiatrist casted my feet for custom orthotics. Resulted in a very large orthotic that had such a big arch bump in it that my foot rocked back and forth on it while running, and didn't fix issues.

2. Chiro who used one of the laser mapping thingys you stand on to figure out your orthotic. Result - a $450 orthotic which was essentially flat with three little bumps under the heel, did nothing for the shin splints.

3. A well respected local physio claim I don't need orthotics, that I need to change my run gate to keep my legs from 'collapsing' inward. She demonstrated this by videotaping me running both with and without my orthotics, showing that my foot collapsed inward in both cases. Thus the assumption that the orthotics were doing nothing for me.

And after all that, and over the past few years trying NB Beacons, Saucony Endorphins, Hoka Cliftons, all with and without orthotics, the ones that feel best overall but still don't totally solve the issues, are Nike Vaporflys (without orthotics)...no idea why. I have no idea if I should try more orthotics or what shoes I should try next for training as I'd rather not need a $300 shoe for training....
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [SBRcanuck] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
well, first, what solves the problem is whatever solves the problem. whether it's shoes, gait change, orthotics. the proof of the pudding is in the running. if you can run, pain free, over the long haul, problem solved.

second, unfortunately, orthotic makers are like bike fitters. are like wealth managers. there's a very broad range, stretching from really good to really bad.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [bigmatt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
bigmatt wrote:
How long does it take to "feel" the shoe?

Was just having this convo with a bike brand owner today.

In the 1000's of people I've put in shoes very, very rarely does someone put on a pair of shoes, stand up say "ugh these don't feel good' then take them for a short test jog down the sidewalk and love the shoes. It happens maybe .01% of the time, maybe.

If you put them on your feet and walk to the front door of the store and think nope, turn around and try a different pair of shoes

Brian Stover
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta Twitter

Last edited by: desert dude: Oct 20, 20 14:43
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [desert dude] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
desert dude wrote:
bigmatt wrote:
How long does it take to "feel" the shoe?


Was just having this convo with a bike brand owner today.

In the 1000's of people I've put in shoes very, very rarely does someone put on a pair of shoes, stand up say "ugh these don't feel good' then take them for a short test jog down the sidewalk and love the shoes. It happens maybe .01% of the time, maybe.

If you put them on your feet and walk to the front door of the store and think nope, turn around and try a different pair of shoes

What about the reverse? ie, "these feel awesome" in the store...only to come back a week later (or whatever)?

Not trying to nit-pick....just curious how accurate the "walk to the front of the store" test is in both directions across the population.

I think I've returned ONE shoe that didn't work. That was because of a very tall heel-cup which dug into my Achilles and bruised it on my long run (20 years ago).
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [desert dude] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
desert dude wrote:
bigmatt wrote:
How long does it take to "feel" the shoe?


Was just having this convo with a bike brand owner today.

In the 1000's of people I've put in shoes very, very rarely does someone put on a pair of shoes, stand up say "ugh these don't feel good' then take them for a short test jog down the sidewalk and love the shoes. It happens maybe .01% of the time, maybe.

If you put them on your feet and walk to the front door of the store and think nope, turn around and try a different pair of shoes
What about with the new Nike shoes. The 4% feel horrible to walk in or at least very unusual. The next is somewhat more normal but I both you would certainly be putting back in the box and choosing another shoe. I do realise they may be the .01% shoes you are talking about and certainly not a friendly shoe for someone with pronation issues. Lucky they sell on the hype alone...
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [Tom_hampton] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Years ago I bought a pair of Kinvara 5’s without so much as trying them on. After a couple short runs, I decided I hated them and relegated them to a shoe I wore only to plyo class. I’m not sure why I decided to give them another try, but they ultimately became my favorite shoe for years until the VF came along. IMHO, running shoes are similar to saddles in that most people don’t use them long enough to get a true feel for if they will work for them or not. I get it though. Most people want something that works for them right away, especially at the prices we are paying for shoes these days.
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [bigmatt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Price and artificial scarcity. The most expensive shoes are always better...especially if they only last around 26 miles before they need to be replaced.
Also, if only the pros seem to have them, you def. need to spend 400-600 dollars on eBay for a pair, or else people will think you are slow.
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [FasterTwitch] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
FasterTwitch wrote:
Price and artificial scarcity. The most expensive shoes are always better...especially if they only last around 26 miles before they need to be replaced.
Also, if only the pros seem to have them, you def. need to spend 400-600 dollars on eBay for a pair, or else people will think you are slow.
In another post you're considered a cheater...
Quote Reply
Re: If pronation is no longer "bad", how does one evaluate runnings shoes? [bigmatt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Comfort, injury history, running style.
Quote Reply

Prev Next