"All running shoes are badly designed"
Well, almost. I've been at the physios today and he picked up the trainers that I'd gone in - although they're not ones that I currently run in. He reckons that most running shoes are badly designed due to having too much support in the arch.
To prove this he did a balance test on me barefoot, then in shoes, then in shoes without the insoles, and finally with shoes with the insoles that had the arch chopped out. You could tell the difference in my balance quite significantly. (I've always had rubbish balance anyway - which is probably why I can't run downhill.)
Interestingly when I got home and looked at my Walsh PB Trainers they don't have an arch support. So, did Norman Walsh really get his shoes right first time, which justifies not changing the design for a very long time? Or is it Norman who's wrong and Asics et al who are right? ...or am I just clutching at straws after 3 month out injured?
Thoughts, views, comments, opinions, verbal abuse?