Has anybody ever done this? How long did it take?
I’m a pretty severe over-pronator. Its not because I have flat feet, I suppose I just have some weak ankles/lax ligaments. My right ankle is definitely worse than my left. I’ve sprained it a few times over the years (nothing worse than a grade I), and it just caves in if I run in a neutral shoe. I’ve been doing a lot of exercises to strengthen the muscles in my medial arch and ankle, but I was curious if anyone else has done this before?
I did. Severe over-pronator and dead flat feet. Ran a lot of years in stability shoes like Asics 20x0/Saucony Omni without problems. Then I started to have knee pain, sometimes enough that I had to stop running for weeks or more. Switched to motion control shoes, which I didn’t like. Decided to go low heel drop/stability and use scaphoid pads, still had some issues. First Saucony Cortana, then Newton. Tried a Hoka Bondi 2, hated it. Liked the cushioning in the Newton, and knee issues seemed to die down. Started with the Motion, then Gravity then finally Distance/Elite, which is really neutral. For me, the best shoes ever. I can run in these until my legs give out, have done several 18 - 20 mile runs. For >15, I need to change out the insole for one with just a little more cushion. But the transition through Motion, Gravity and Distance/Elite was over a period of more than a year.
What got me to try neutral was others’ experiences here on Slowtwitch, there are other threads about it. It really worked for me, but it hasn’t for others. Try one pair just for your shorter runs to start and see what happens.
Don’t focus just on exercises for the weak ankle, you need to focus on the whole chain. Often a floppy or tight ankle is a symptom of a weakness up the chain and is the body’s way of dealing with things. So strengthen the hips/glutes, hamstrings, abs, lower back. That will make the transition much easier. As with anything it is more weeks, not days to transition. It takes weeks for the body to adapt properly to a new stress.
I transitioned from stability running shoes to neutral running shoes.
However the neutral shoes I moved to were also minimalist and that was the bigger part of the change. I was not a serious runner at the time (4-5 years ago). I over-pronated and used stability shoes. I’d had some recurring knee problems and was unable to run pain free for several months. I’d stopped running as a result and switched entirely to the bike. I thought I had bad technique and muscle imbalances and it seemed a bad idea to me to attempt to fix this with aids (cushioning, stability control, orthotics and tape) without getting to the root cause. So I bought some minimalist shoes and re-taught myself to run. I started with tiny distances and built them up gradually. Within 3-4 months I was running faster and more comfortably than I ever had before and I’ve had no persistent running injuries since. I think the absence of cushioning gives you much better control of your foot placement, weight distribution and ankle movement. It also forces you to strengthen your lower legs and feet. I now use very light cushioning for most runs but occasionally go back to none for shorter runs.
I believe the low rise of the sole hugely reduces the likelihood of going over on your ankle. Also since you’re more aware of foot placement and your foot and ankle are more engaged, this reduces the risk too.
My guess is that your “real” issue is located much further up the kinetic chain in the hip region.
I suppose the question I would have is: does running in a stability shoe work well for you? And if it does, why are you trying to change things? If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it until it is.
I have but I think it’s individual.
Started with the Brooks Beast, moved to the Asics 20xx series, Kayano, DS Trainer for a few years, then to the Mizuno Rider, Saucony Fastwitch for a few years, then Asics DS racer, Saucony Type A4, then to the Asics Hyper Tri. I still wear the Riders for an every-day shoe.
I have a problem with Stability shoes like the Fastwitch now if I tie them too tight, the arch support hurts the inside of my feet. I have completely flat feet by the way.
You are right about the “real” issue to an extent. The full story is that I have an anatomical short leg and require a 20 mm lift on the left side to balance my pelvis. So that throws its own set of wrenches into things that I’ve been working through. Currently I have a 10 mm lift on the outside of my shoe that tapers to 5 mm in the toe box, and a 10 mm heel lift inside the shoe. I’ve wondered how this would affect things especially as it relates to running in a zero drop shoe, since only one shoe would actually be zero drop. I didn’t want to open pandora’s box just yet on this forum, but oh well. I brought the original question up because stability/motion control shoes/orthotics are just kind of a crutch and wanted to address the real issue.
To a previous poster, I’ve done a lot of glute work and can at least perform un-supported single leg pistol squats on each leg a few times. So the hip stability isn’t horrible. It could always be better though. Just not sure if my body will allow me to run half marathon/marathon distances.
I mean, addressing the real issue would be adding 20mm worth of length to your legs. But seeing as that’s out of the question…
I think we’d look to separate out the orthotic/lift debate versus the stability/motion control shoe bit. All a pronation rate device on a shoe (e.g., Brooks Beast) is attempting to slow pronation rate down, as it can’t actually “stop” pronation from happening (nor do we want that to happen). Orthotics, lifts, etc. address the anatomical issues more effectively.
It is my experience that we would look to put an orthotic/lift combination into the best vehicle to allow them to “do their job,” so to speak. And in that context, I would look more to a flat lasted neutral shoe, such as the Brooks Dyad, or the old Saucony Echelon; shoes that let the orthotic work and otherwise get out of the way.
I’ve also seen success utilizing shoes with other wide-based platforms working well, like a lot of the Hoka line-up. Dan has written pretty extensively about how well his orthotics have worked in his Bondi’s. YRMV.
Have you had any gait analysis with a PT or kinesiologist? I had one done last year due to some chronic problems. It included several tests, but slow motion video analysis was the main part. It was really informative and I walked away with useful, helpful, and effective information. I implemented the key recommendations and started getting better almost immediately. We talked about shoe choice, strength, and range of motion. It turned out my shoe choice wasn’t a problem. It wasn’t cheap, but I paid for it out of my health savings account, so that helped.
The full story is that I have an anatomical short leg and require a 20 mm lift on the left side to balance my pelvis
Was this an ortho/podiatrist that evaluated from x-ray, or someone else that took some measurements on an exam table? Most people have discrepancies L/R, which is neither good or bad- just the way biology builds us. Many try to search for an answer with “balancing” things out but it’s actually more of a red herring…getting things balanced and highly specific actually makes it worse in the long term. Sure, there are always exceptions and some who do have a clinically dx’ed L/R balance. With biomechanics, highly specific/cyclic movement patterns are often precursors to injury. This is why very severe motion control shoes “work” in theory, but in practice cause more stress for some.
because stability/motion control shoes/orthotics are just kind of a crutch and wanted to address the real issue
It’s good to think this way in order to not over-correct an issue or problem, but focusing on “balance” of L/R is not getting at the real issue either- when people talk about making significant changes on one side or the other, as others have said the real issue is often somewhere else. Likewise, don’t get caught up in step rates, strength training, or where to strike with the foot at impact.
For some odd phenomenon runners/triathletes get it into their heads that using a shoe with even the smallest amount of stability is a sign of poor ability or weakness…but the funny thing is the majority of “cushioned” shoes provide an element of stability. Some just need a little more than others. Don’t get wrapped around the axle spending the time determining how to transition from a stability shoe to a neutral shoe. Spend the time training. Appropriate programming is just as important as run mechanics (probably more so), and the shoe type is such a small part of the run mechanics equation the juice isn’t worth the squeeze in this case.
This is basically my life story, but here we go, further down the rabbit hole:
A chiropractor diagnosed me when I was in junior high trying to play sports with severe low back pain. I suppose it was due to that and the impact it had on me that I now too am a chiropractor (just graduated in December). He told me the correct amount needed to level my pelvis, but for years I would only wear a heel lift and not modify my shoe because I was so paranoid of being made fun of (don’t you just love high school?). I started to run recreationally in college. Had never done it for fun (because running in high school baseball was punishment, not fun) and started out in a pair of cross trainers. After a couple of months I developed some knee and ankle pain, so I talked to my biomechanics professor and learned I was in the wrong shoe. So I bought a pair of Asics Gt 1000’s and the knee and ankle pain disappeared. But I still felt aches and pains in my back, and really a limit to what my body could handle as I ran, stuff that someone in their low 20’s shouldn’t be feeling.
Once I got into chiro school I re-assessed my situation and doubled my lift. Boom. I no longer woke up feeling achey but I had another problem. My shoe modification was 20 mm outside my shoe, nothing inside my shoe. That is really the ideal set up because a heel lift is going to cause chronic gastroc shortening due to the heel being higher than the forefoot - this is an exaggeration, but one of the reasons I preach against high heels to my female patients. Its also why there’s a zero drop boom going on right now with shoe companies. Its not the natural position of a bare foot on the ground when the heels are elevated. But the problem with that shoe set up for me was I couldn’t dream of running in it. The forefoot didn’t bend when I toed-off in my gait cycle. For about a year and a half I gave up on running. I had a professor that suggested I give it up altogether and strictly cycle. So that’s what I did. But recently I wasn’t pleased with that explanation and as a chiropractor I take exception to other chiro’s, PT’s, MD’s etc, telling patients that they should just not do X if it causes them pain. So I set out on my journey to find a way to run again. Currently I have 10 mm built up in the sole that tapers to 5 mm in the toe box so that it will be flexible enough. I have a 10 mm heel lift inside the shoe (not ideal, but better than nothing). I have just started getting back into running again and am doing about 5 miles/week right now over a couple days. Still cycling as well 50-60 miles/week.
Rob, I have to fundamentally disagree with you about not worrying about balancing things out though. I think it just depends on the situation. There are tons of leg length discrepancies out there, true, but most of them are miniscule, and what we call functional (the pelvis is rotated, there’s a muscular component shortening the leg, etc). In this instance, I would mostly agree with you. The body will compensate for that usually. But an anatomical discrepancy certainly must be addressed because asymmetries will cause injury over time. Here is a link to some new research that states just that: http://lermagazine.com/issues/march/test-for-lower-extremity-asymmetry-identifies-risk-in-recreational-runners. So my struggle has been how much asymmetry can my body handle that will still allow me to run long distances? With 20 mm my pelvis is level and my spine is straight. But my right leg is taking a pounding with every step that my left leg isn’t taking. That is going to take its toll (It’s also probably the reason my over-pronation is so much worse on the right side). With 10 mm my right leg takes less of a pounding but my pelvis is uneven and my spine has a bit of a curve. So this has been my conundrum. Fortunately I’ve never had a patient as complicated as myself. Sorry for the novel.
Iv dones this… but I did put in some of these footreviver insoles inside my new neutral running shoes so I dont know if that is cheating or what but I have seen a an increase in the strength of my feet and ankles as a result.
I did it. I have very flat but narrow feet. Started out at age 13 in Brooks Adrenaline (a brick). Started running more and more, and my gait changed as I got faster. Started landing on my midfoot (note - I did not actively attempt to make this happen - it was the result of a lot of running and a lot of hard/fast running). Switched to Brooks Ghost. Got a SF in my ankle, came back in the Adrenaline, had bad shin problems (chronic stress reaction) for ~1.5 years, decided “screw this, I’m trying something different” and chucked my stability trainers. Started splitting my time between Kinvaras and Adidas Energy Boost. Shin issues improved, my stride improved. Now almost 19, still flat foot, but much fewer injury issues, and I do most of my running in Kinvaras or Zealots (essentially a really padded Kinvara). My ankles and lower legs are pretty strong. Both 4mm drop.
Some suggestions - Keep doing strengthening exercises. They’re important. Practice standing on one foot (close your eyes when it gets easy), and do lots of single leg calf raises. Listen to your body - if something aches, back off. Do lots of fast striders after easy runs to improve your form. Keep a pair of really padded trainers around for when your legs are trashed. I still have a pair of Energy Boost that I go to on recovery days.
I wouldn’t go below 4mm drop w/your background. That’s minimal enough to get the gist of running in a low drop. I haven’t tried zero and I have no intention of doing so.