Worst twisted ankle I've had was in Roclite 315 :p A big part of my deciding to move to 285s and Walshes ;)
Printable View
Worst twisted ankle I've had was in Roclite 315 :p A big part of my deciding to move to 285s and Walshes ;)
Am sorry to hear that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Derby Tup
Im sure most folks( no let's say everyone) will have experienced a twisted ankle when they start off-road/fellrunning.I don't know anyone who runs regular off-road who has never twisted their ankle at some point in their running career.
Weak ankles & built up shoes are part of the problem.
All our fell shoes are our lower 2 arrow midsole.
That's why lower & flexible is a better bet.
Think you're spot on with the built up shoes, weak ankles point there Insider ;)
Lower, yes, but not sure about flexibility yet :)
For anyone interested in trying barefoot running or looking for the perfect shoe, hunt down Running Fast and Injury Free by Gordon Pirie. Here's a little 'taster'.
"Unfortunately, the ideal running shoe is not offered by most major manufacturers. Your best hope is to get the lightest, most economically constructed shoes you can find, then machine them to the correct specifications. The perfect running shoe should be something like a heavy-duty ballet slipper - simply an extra layer of protective material around the foot, like a glove. If you run correctly, you will be able to wear such a shoe and never be injured. I once advised a 58-year-old marathon runner, Ed Schaeffer, whose best time had been 3:28, to change his technique and shoes, with the result that his time immediately dropped to 2:58. He told me later it had been “easy” to run 30 minutes faster! Another example was a 4:12.8 miler I retrained; he dropped his time to 4:02 in just three weeks. Now that you know what to do with your feet and legs, and understand how poorly designed running shoes contribute to both injury and slower running, how may we produce a shoe to fit your feet?
We shall do this by taking a typical pair of running shoes, and reconstructing them to the correct specifications. Firstly, the shoe should fit properly; the foot will slip and slide in a shoe that is not close-fitting, resulting in a loss of performance as well as friction-related injuries such as blisters, which can lead to subtle changes in the way you run, and predispose to more serious injuries. Ideally, the shoe should fit snugly “like a glove”. Secondly, it is essential to prevent the most common injury directly related to poor shoe design, namely that to the Achilles tendon. A very quick way to guarantee yourself an injury to this very vulnerable part of your body is to allow any part of your shoe to impinge on the tendon – all running shoes have a piece of material (either plastic or leather) that jams into the tendon when the foot is plantar-flexed (i.e. the toe is pointed down). Clearly, if you run many miles, you will put a great deal of jabbing pressure on the soft Achilles tendon on every step, mile after mile. With an Achilles “protector” on your shoe, discomfort or injury is guaranteed. The quickest remedy to this problem is to take a knife to the curved piece of shoe material and cut it off, so that the top of the shoe heel is level with the rest of the upper, and below the level of the soft tissue of the Achilles tendon. The top of the shoe heel must not be higher than the bony heel. Runners who come to me limping with very sore Achilles tendons are able to run away with their pain relieved after this surgery is performed on the shoe (with the shoe removed, of course). This “operation” will make the shoe about half a size larger than it was originally, so bear this in mind when purchasing shoes. Thus, if you buy your shoes a bit snug and remove the heel tag before you wear them, Achilles tendon problems should become a thing of the past. Another problem related to shoe design is the shape of the inside of the heel of the typical running shoe, which is different from that of the normal human heel, such that it only contacts the top of the heel bone. As a result, there is too much empty space around the base of the heel bone. This space needs to be filled in to provide a close fit around the entire heel. If left unfilled, the upper portion of the heel bone will receive excessive pressure because the shoe presses on the foot only on an area directly below the junction of the Achilles tendon with the heel bone. The result is severe blistering in the short term, and heel spurs and Achilles tendonitis in the long
term. To make the shoe conform to the shape of your heel, fill in the space with surgical padding, being very careful to ensure that the padding conforms exactly to the shape of your heel.
Clearly, this should be the job of the shoe manufacturers, and I discussed this problem with Adi Dassler, the late founder of Adidas, as early as 1959. He agreed with my evaluation of the shape of running shoe heels (but, sadly, I still find it necessary to customise Adidas shoes).
To summarise, therefore, friction interference of running shoes with the soft tissue of the Achilles tendon and bursae of the heel bone/Achilles tendon junction causes injury. Consequently, all parts of the shoe that impinge on this area should be removed. Contrary to what the shoe companies would have you believe, the foot is supposed to twist and roll as it goes through each contact phase with the ground, and yet they continue to come up with new ways to prevent the foot from moving in this way. The amount of movement varies from person to person, and depends on the strength and development of the intrinsic muscles of the foot and foreleg, and whether you land correctly with each foot. Putting all sorts of excess materials and supposed clever ideas into running shoes (i.e. soles and uppers) has practically nothing to do with these foot movements. When the shoe is on the ground, it becomes a part of
the ground and the foot does its necessary rolling and twisting within the shoe. If a shoe is made to become a straight jacket to prevent the natural movement of the foot - for example a ski boot, or a stiff rubber gumboot - you cannot run, you hobble. You will only be able to carry out part of the physical movements, and apply only a fraction of the physical forces, that are essential to drive yourself forward at a fast running pace. This is easy to prove - go out and run in bare feet, then start adding material onto your feet. You will slow down. The same applies to shoes which interfere with the undersurface of the foot. Any change in the curvature of the sole of the foot caused by a shoe - for example, nylon pylons across the sole at the rear of the ball of the foot, lifted nylon rings around the spikes, and lumpy soles caused by
the cut-away under the toes of most jogger's shoes (thus presenting a ridge under the padded ball of the foot) - will interfere with your ability to run. The rolled up toes common to most jogging shoes are the cause of the sharp pains in and around the joints between the toes and the metatarsals familiar to most runners. Any departure from the natural shape of the foot will interfere with your ability to run, and lead to injury."
Terry
Thanks for this info I will look for the book.
Our thinking at inov-8 is very much along these lines.
What you currently see from us is going someway towards our ultimate "Barefoot" range.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terry the Tortoise
I just don't see how the fascia Band fits into that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Inov-8 Insider
On flexibility - it depends on the terrain you are running in.
Orienteering shoes are pretty stiff, and the terrain is the roughest form of running you'll encounter. I think the stiffness of O' shoes allows you to gain purchase on a very small piece of the ground / shoe when predicting contact point is almost impossible.
O' shoes are pretty unsophisticated but very robust, they have next to no cushioning - its not really needed, a low to the ground sole and good "feel" to the ground.
I always found walshes too flexible for orienteering and not enough protection from rocks, branches etc. knocking holes in your feet or bruising.
Twisted ankles is mainly to do with age, about 20, 21 - thats when it starts.
You can get the online version of Gordon Piries book here http://nwrunner.reachby.com/g2vds/go...free-free-book
Its says its free so I guess its out of copyright or was free in the first place. I have nothing to do with it so don't blame me just pointing people in the right direction ;)
I disagree flexibilty depends on the terrain.Quote:
Originally Posted by andy k
Your right about orienteering shoes being pretty unsophisticated but that doesn't mean they are right.
It's the case that all the O brands having been following the same model, no need to change or innovate if customers will put up with the same old because there is no competition.
But that is about to change:D
We have many orienteers wearing Mudclaws & X-Talons with some great results.
Having worked with some of the best orienteers in the World including Daniel Hubmann we have developed the Oroc range of shoes.
One of the main features being lightweight & flexible.
So as with most things there will be plenty of choice on the Market.
The GB Orienteering squad who we have been working with will be wearing the new inov-8 Oroc shoes:)
Interesting arguments. The only problem I have with the "scientists, doctors, podiatrist etc" who have joined the bf/minimalist debate and write these papers is that they don’t actually try it themselves. They base most of their arguments using data from scientific tests and current “understanding” of human biomechanics/biology etc. But history proves that scientific views change and that science isn’t always correct. Science cannot always prove everything. And why do we need “evidence” to say that bf/minimalist running is better or worse than shod running? There’s no real evidence to prove that running in shods prevents injury but they still sell in the millions.
So, everyone stop worrying about all this crap and go out and try it. Make your own decision. Wear shods, go barefoot, whatever! How cares. Just run happy and run free :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy Scott