Intriguing response by a major shoe manufacturer on barefoot running.
http://bit.ly/4H8iPk
Well, I’ll never get that time back.
It seems pretty basic to me, and not a very good engagement. They’re arguing that most people, due to basic biomechanics and past injuries, can never really run right, so most all of us need big, guiding, modern shoes.
They emphasize ‘barefoot running’ rather than what most are doing (I think): running in minimalist shoes or Vibrams.
Also some red herrings here–wearing shoes for protection (most do) and it’s not right for everyone (probably the case for barefoot advocates as well, who would only steer others to it who are willing to actively think about form and who have had bad luck with the robust shoe regime).
Anyone who’s made the switch probably knows as much as in the Brooks paper–no need to waste time with it.
It’s a pretty predictable response from a shoe company.
We like the newfound attention to our sport blah blah blah. Barefoot running hasn’t been proven to reduce injury blah blah blah. Most people would still be better served to wear shoes blah blah blah.
I mean, I agree with it, but I expected the response to have more teeth. Like, “hey we realize the neanderthals ran around without shoes and that’s great, but they also didn’t run on surfaces even close to as unforgiving as pavement.”
Well, I’ll never get that time back.
…–no need to waste time with it.
thanks for taking one for the team.
I will say this for it, though. There’s a reasonable point of nuance that doesn’t come from all the barefoot floggers (eg Pose or what have you) that it really does depend on the person. I think those on the performance end of things forget tehre are a lot of people who might do an occasional 5k, run a coupla times a week, maybe have done a marathon, but in the 5ish hour range, or whatever, and they need shoes too. And they’re not going to learn ‘how to run right’ and these people buy most of the shoes.
Of course, they are the ones making the money off these people.
Brooks Trance 9 - 153.99 (though they can be had for less - $139 - at Zappos) at Shoebuy.com
Vibram FiveFingers KSO - $84.99 (though also can be found for less)
Same reason companies don’t want you to buy their racing flats - “only okay for 5k through half marathon!” Most big shoe companies make shoes that are good to run in. They just are usually cheaper than they ones they want to sell you.
I thought I’d add this “safe” article into the mix. It was written by the marathoner Mark Plaatjes.
Debate may still be out, but I feel the average person is till probably good in some type of shoe for actual running, but I’m also just a bike fitter.
Ryan Ignatz, MS
F.I.S.T and Serotta Certified Bike Fit Specialist and SBCU Masters BG Fitter
Colorado Multisport
2705A Spruce St
Boulder, CO 80302
303-324-5954
ryan@coloradomultisport.com
www.coloradomultisport.com
Where Triathlon Lives
good article, the barefoot minimalist are so in denial.
i always laugh at the people i see with newtons, vibrams, or barefoot. you know why? theyre slow as hell. you can worry about going minimal or getting faster. i chose the later.
saying brooks presented this b/c theyre a major shoe company is a logical fallacy. their business lies on great products and customer service. they have the money and access to the top podiatrist and orthopedist. minimalist runners as a whole have a horrible understanding of the physics, biomechanics, and physiology of the human body. minimalists have a strange obsession with their footwear/lack of. how many pics of the watersocks does “ipull400watts” have in his blog?
i takes a lot of huevos to come out and kill the sales of people who want to spend their money on shit. wouldnt it be easier to make a barefoot model?
edit: look at rroofs posts, everyone asks him for help but ignore his advice!
Barefoot running = fad. Idiots will return to the fold. You need to see what level of support you need, but one thing is for sure - you don’t see too many major marathons won in bare feet these days.
Riiiight, but I think the point is that brooks is missing the main arguments-few are actually running in bare feet, just in minimalist footwear. And almost all marathons are won in pretty minimalist footwear, so far as I can tell.
Can you name a major marathon that was won in a heavy ‘support’ shoe? They may be out there, but I can’t think of any.
its because its a race?
how many swimmers use drag suits in practice with no caps?
minimalist runners logic is impeccable.
Post: its because its a race?
how many swimmers use drag suits in practice with no caps?
minimalist runners logic is impeccable
What about minimalist punctuators?
But seriously, I didn’t say anything about racers until someone else brought it up. And if you read the whole thread, you’ll see I have a pretty nuanced position, actually. Be that as it may, the question here is about performance, and I don’t think there’s much evidence of the best runners running in major support shoes.
the question is about injuries. pretty much everyone uses as minimal of a shoe as they can for a race.
for instance, i got to see ryan hall running by the river in philadelphia in cumulus 10s. yet he races marathons/half marathons in hyperspeeds.
Sure. And the cumulus is a cushioning model, right?
yeah, but have you seen hall’s gait?
There in lies the fallacy. The ‘best’ runners don’t need support shoes - or they likely wouldn’t be the “best” runners. I have sever al pro level athletes as patients in the NFL, etc. and my lab made orthotics for Butch Reynolds (US Gold medal sprinter). Does he “sprint” in orthotics? Of course not - won’t fit in his shoes. Train in them, yes. I know precisely the shoes that the Eritrean/Ethiopean distance runners at Walsh College train in (not race in) and they are pretty “unimpressive” models (i.e. Adrenaline GTS, Asics 2140, etc.). They also run a LOT slower in training miles that one might think.
Also, Brooks makes some pretty minimalist shoes: the T5 racer, ST4 is nice, etc. Nike tried the Free with marketing. VFF is a great fad as well. Awesome stuff really and I love it! I personally do some barefoot running after a long training run and have some patients do it. Others, I slap in nasty motion control shoes. Deal with it. Humans are just too different to make these sweeping generalizations. I have one child that needed glasses, one doesn’t and so on.
Now, are many people in the wrong shoes? Absolutely. The shoe companies themselves don’t care since they can make whatever minimal, supportive, etc. shoe they want - and most do. No reason not to to maximize their revenue. Randomized, prospective, double blind, placebo controlled studies with this are obviously going to be impossible, but I can assure you that the shoe companies do pour over as much data as they can (esp Adidas lately) with a large team of PhDs re: new shoe design (and yes, they also have read McDougal’s book) 
The seminars with the eggheads are truly boring and impressive at the same time. They also have large marketing depts and see the trends (hence Brooks response) and often the marketing dept and engineering depts at major shoe companies do butt heads (Asics went through this recently).
OK, finished my lunch typing this … back at it Slowtwitch! Can’t wait to see the dialog on both sides here - it’s all good.
If you look at my earlier post, I agreed that lots of people do need some support. What I started by saying was that most barefoot people won’t find anything new here, not that the Brooks people aren’t right. It’s just that they’re not saying new.
Thanks for adding to the conversation, though. I’m more interested in the elites. What kind of paces are we talkin, here? And do you think it’s always a bad idea to change one’s stride?
If you look at my earlier post, I agreed that lots of people do need some support.
I’d be more interested about the ethiopians, though. What kind of paces are we talkin, here?
Sorry, not meant directed to you.
Well, my 60 year old Dad at the time was running with them on several occasions … ;0 My Grandfather was also a runner way before running was ever “popular”, so my family has been at this since the late 1920’s or so
To preface, he was a former 2:30ish marathoner though! About 7:30 - 8:00 pace for 10 miles or so on their easy/base runs. I only ran with a couple of them twice, once as above and easy, and on one of their interval days where I was dusted during mile repeats (but it was looped, so I “caught” back on). FTR, I did my mile repeats around 5:45 after a 2 mile wu and they pulled away surprisingly quickly Of interest to me was running with one of them and their mechanics (I was a new practitioner at the time). One did have on his “race” shoes and one his normal trainers during the intervals (I don’t remember the exact models, Adidas and Puma I think, but not an H street). Asking each why gave no real reasons at all other than personal preference. Both had been injured before (minor), both with near perfect run form that I could see. So … I learned essentially nothing from the right side of my brain, plenty from the left.
That’s pretty fascinating they were running that slowly. I know LSD gets advocated, but man, I run faster than that. That would be out the back end for Daniels’ training zones for those guys, right?
Any proof that big o’ control squishy shoes prevent injuries?