:D Barefoot Running

[CL]

Not at all Derby, it won't be right for everyone.
I'm sure as you will of experienced in your own barefooting you will need some protection for your feet.
Can you imagine running round Borrowdale with no protection for your feet?
We believe that less is best, we believe in having neutral, very flexible, very light footwear.
We will continue to push our theory of letting the foot control the shoe not the shoe controlling the foot.
What you find with "barefooting" is that you need less cushioning, stiffners,gels, fancy air, reinforced pillars n posts as advocated by a lot of brands.

If you believed 'less was best' then you'd be out of business because everyone would be running bare foot. What you really believe in is making shoes with the precise amount of support and cushioning to get an athlete round his/her run without them getting injured.

If you'd like to hire me send me a PM.

[Inov-8 Insider]

If you believed 'less was best' then you'd be out of business because everyone would be running bare foot. What you really believe in is making shoes with the precise amount of support and cushioning to get an athlete round his/her run without them getting injured.

If you'd like to hire me send me a PM.

Why would we be out of business? As I said barefooting isnt for everyone.
Most people will need a transition from built up shoes to going fully barefoot.
We have believed in offering neutral, flexible shoes with varying levels of cushioning.
Cushioning = underfoot protection
A lot of injuries are caused by having built up shoes or high heel counters that bang or aggrevate the achilles.

[A.P.E Knott]

I love this thread.
The whole barefoot running natural hippy type thing makes me smile.
For some people less is more,but these people have always and will always be super efficient runners,
I have read many stories about the early marathon runners running in plimsoles and the legendary Bikila winning gold barefoot ,but come on,these people are not in the majority.
I think we need to take a step back and not get taken in by all the hype.
The fact is many thousands of runners are running today because of the improvement in modern running shoes.Yes i understand people still become injured ,I speak from experience here,but i am willing to bet they would have become injured even earlier running barefoot.
To quote Tim Noakes from "The Lore of Running" "We do not understand why modern running shoes help protect against injury , but they do".

[Inov-8 Insider]

I love this thread.
The whole barefoot running natural hippy type thing makes me smile.
For some people less is more,but these people have always and will always be super efficient runners

You sure?

HERE

HERE

[A.P.E Knott]

You sure?

HERE

HERE

Yet in this extract from his controversial new book, Christopher McDougall
Yes i am sure Chris McDougall V Tim Noakes.
No contest

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/mosl...#ixzz0P88bK1rd

[sjedwardz]

Rather than arguing which is best try running barefoot!! I try and do about 1-2 miles a week and really like it, it does make you adjust how you run. I'm really looking forward to what inov8 are planning, I have been thinking about some five Fingers but been put off first by the looks and second by the price!!

WHat sort of sole will they have ? and any ETA on when they will be available?

[Inov-8 Insider]

Rather than arguing which is best try running barefoot!! I try and do about 1-2 miles a week and really like it, it does make you adjust how you run. I'm really looking forward to what inov8 are planning, I have been thinking about some five Fingers but been put off first by the looks and second by the price!!

WHat sort of sole will they have ? and any ETA on when they will be available?

Your right, I was also very sceptical to the whole barefoot thing.
I have over the years had lots of different shoes, numerous injuries and several pairs of orthotics trying to right my knee, ahilles , IT Band and calf problems.
It was a physio friend who suggested that it may well be the orthotics and heavily posted road shoes that could be causing the problems.
I read lots on barefoot running on the web.
The thing to bear in mind is that it takes time to adjust to barefooting, I now run a couple of miles every day, very slow but concentrating on placing my feet and my posture.
My road runs are done in F-lite 230 which are very low profile shoes.
Fell runs are done in either X-Talon 212 minus the footbeds or Mudclaw 330.

I'm not advocating that everyone go from wearing shoes to barefoot in one swift move but there is a place for it.
Try it you may be suprised.

We are looking at a few different options

[nikalas]

I love this thread.
The whole barefoot running natural hippy type thing makes me smile.
For some people less is more,but these people have always and will always be super efficient runners,
I have read many stories about the early marathon runners running in plimsoles and the legendary Bikila winning gold barefoot ,but come on,these people are not in the majority.
I think we need to take a step back and not get taken in by all the hype.
The fact is many thousands of runners are running today because of the improvement in modern running shoes.Yes i understand people still become injured ,I speak from experience here,but i am willing to bet they would have become injured even earlier running barefoot.
To quote Tim Noakes from "The Lore of Running" "We do not understand why modern running shoes help protect against injury , but they do".

I'm afraid you're missing the key point Mr Knot. Modern cushioned/supported running shoes allow people to run badly. Without them you're forced develop a natural, more efficient and body friendly running style because you can't heel strike.

I can understand you citing Tim Noakes and The Lore of Running is rightly viewed as a classic but, like many classics, some of the thinking and ideas are out-dated.

Food for thought below:

1) There’s no evidence that running shoes are any help at all in injury prevention: Dr Craig Richards published a research paper in 2008 in the British Journal of Sports Medicine that revealed that there have been no evidence based studies that demonstrate that running shoes make you less prone to injury. He went so far as to issue an open challenge to running shoe manufacturers to back-up their claims with peer reviewed data and is still waiting for any replies.

2) The more you pay the more you’re likely to get injured: Dr Bernard Marti of the University of Bern analyzed 4358 runners in the Bern Grand Prix, a 9.6 mile road race. He studied every aspect of their training in the year building up to the race and found that 45% had been injured. The most common variable for the injured runners was the amount they’d spent on their running shoes. Runners in shoes that cost more than $95 were more than twice as likely to get hurt as runners in shoes that cost less than $40.

3) A half inch of rubber isn’t going to do jot: When you run, you can generate up to twelve times your body weight of force. A half inch of rubber, gel pad or air pocket isn’t going to absorb a significant amount of that energy. Also, studies have shown, that impact forces actually increase the more cushioning you have. Our feet instinctively seek stability so, if you put something soft and squishy underneath them, they’ll come down harder.

4) Pronation isn’t bad: Pronation has been demonized but it is just the natural movement of the foot. The foot is supposed to pronate. To see correct pronation in action kick off your shoes and run over a hard surface such as concrete. You’ll find yourself landing on the outside edge of your foot, then gently rolling from little toe over to big. That pronation is a natural shock absorbing twist that allows your arch to compress. The arch of our foot is a wonderful dynamic shock absorber so why cripple it’s natural movement by underpinning it with chocks of rubber? Dangerous over-pronation only occurs when you heel strike (see next point).

5) Heel striking is the problem: Imagine standing on a high bench in your bare feet and jumping off onto a hard surface. How would you land? Certainly not on your heels, yet this is what the majority of modern runners do every time they stride. Modern cushioned shoes allow us to heel strike and that is not how, from a biomechanical perspective, our bodies evolved to run. Heel-toe running was "invented" by Bill Bowerman out of a mis-thought notion that it was a more energy efficient running technique for the masses. He developed shoes to facilitate it and the rest is a painful history.

This is not some "hippy craze" but an awakening to the fact that for 40 years the sports shoe industry have been trying to solve a problem of it's own making and selling an awful lot of shoes in the process. Feet cannot function as nature intended in shoes with inflexible soles and so, by trying to correct the problems caused by wearing these shoes with more cushioning/support etc, you're just chasing shadows.

Barefooting is not the answer as, for most people, it's impractical due to road/trail surfaces but shoes with minimal cushioning and flexible soles etc are.

[CL]

I'm afraid you're missing the key point Mr Knot. Modern cushioned/supported running shoes allow people to run badly. Without them you're forced develop a natural, more efficient and body friendly running style because you can't heel strike.

I can understand you citing Tim Noakes and The Lore of Running is rightly viewed as a classic but, like many classics, some of the thinking and ideas are out-dated.

Food for thought below:

1) There’s no evidence that running shoes are any help at all in injury prevention: Dr Craig Richards published a research paper in 2008 in the British Journal of Sports Medicine that revealed that there have been no evidence based studies that demonstrate that running shoes make you less prone to injury. He went so far as to issue an open challenge to running shoe manufacturers to back-up their claims with peer reviewed data and is still waiting for any replies.

2) The more you pay the more you’re likely to get injured: Dr Bernard Marti of the University of Bern analyzed 4358 runners in the Bern Grand Prix, a 9.6 mile road race. He studied every aspect of their training in the year building up to the race and found that 45% had been injured. The most common variable for the injured runners was the amount they’d spent on their running shoes. Runners in shoes that cost more than $95 were more than twice as likely to get hurt as runners in shoes that cost less than $40.

3) A half inch of rubber isn’t going to do jot: When you run, you can generate up to twelve times your body weight of force. A half inch of rubber, gel pad or air pocket isn’t going to absorb a significant amount of that energy. Also, studies have shown, that impact forces actually increase the more cushioning you have. Our feet instinctively seek stability so, if you put something soft and squishy underneath them, they’ll come down harder.

4) Pronation isn’t bad: Pronation has been demonized but it is just the natural movement of the foot. The foot is supposed to pronate. To see correct pronation in action kick off your shoes and run over a hard surface such as concrete. You’ll find yourself landing on the outside edge of your foot, then gently rolling from little toe over to big. That pronation is a natural shock absorbing twist that allows your arch to compress. The arch of our foot is a wonderful dynamic shock absorber so why cripple it’s natural movement by underpinning it with chocks of rubber? Dangerous over-pronation only occurs when you heel strike (see next point).

5) Heel striking is the problem: Imagine standing on a high bench in your bare feet and jumping off onto a hard surface. How would you land? Certainly not on your heels, yet this is what the majority of modern runners do every time they stride. Modern cushioned shoes allow us to heel strike and that is not how, from a biomechanical perspective, our bodies evolved to run. Heel-toe running was "invented" by Bill Bowerman out of a mis-thought notion that it was a more energy efficient running technique for the masses. He developed shoes to facilitate it and the rest is a painful history.

This is not some "hippy craze" but an awakening to the fact that for 40 years the sports shoe industry have been trying to solve a problem of it's own making and selling an awful lot of shoes in the process. Feet cannot function as nature intended in shoes with inflexible soles and so, by trying to correct the problems caused by wearing these shoes with more cushioning/support etc, you're just chasing shadows.

Barefooting is not the answer as, for most people, it's impractical due to road/trail surfaces but shoes with minimal cushioning and flexible soles etc are.

1) Watch that glass Mr Craig Richards, "what gla...aahhhh." Come on Nicklas there is no research because not many are insane enough to run down the road without shoes on.

2) Maybe the athletes paying the most for their shoes ran more and as a result got injured more.

3)If I drop a bouncy ball (it's about half an inch)and a ball of stone, which will return the most energy? If there is something soft and squidgy under my feet I won't land harder I'll land softer. I'll tell you what Nicklas we'll both jump from a 30ft tower, you can land on the nice soft concrete floor and I'll land on a nice hard bouncy castle. Oh and what flowers would you like at the hospital?

5) Jumping off a high bench and running are two different movements. Forcing one to run against nature's design is wrong whether heel strikes, mid-foot plants or forefoot strikes.

[nikalas]

1) Watch that glass Mr Craig Richards, "what gla...aahhhh." Come on Nicklas there is no research because not many are insane enough to run down the road without shoes on.

2) Maybe the athletes paying the most for their shoes ran more and as a result got injured more.

3)If I drop a bouncy ball (it's about half an inch)and a ball of stone, which will return the most energy? If there is something soft and squidgy under my feet I won't land harder I'll land softer. I'll tell you what Nicklas we'll both jump from a 30ft tower, you can land on the nice soft concrete floor and I'll land on a nice hard bouncy castle. Oh and what flowers would you like at the hospital?

5) Jumping off a high bench and running are two different movements. Forcing one to run against nature's design is wrong whether heel strikes, mid-foot plants or forefoot strikes.

Here we go again.......

1) Dr Richard's research paper wasn't about barefoot running. He was simply stating that there has been no data supporting the hypothesis that modern cushioned/supportive shoes help to prevent injury. This is surprising as, considering the budget and research facilities of Nike etc, if their shoes do perform this miracle then you'd have thought they'd have put the work in to show it. Also, as I said, he put out an open invitation to the running shoe manufacturers to back up their claim and no-one, as yet, has. Finally, you don't tend to get something published in BJSM unless it is valid (in strict scientific sense) and has been subjected to extensive peer review... it's not a mickey mouse journal.

2) Sorry, didn't feel I could write a summary of the whole paper but all other variables such as volume, speed, terrain etc were put into the analysis and cost of running shoes came out with the strongest correlation to injury. Again, I think the American Journal of Sports Medicine where his paper was published would have checked for such simplistic flaws in his analysis.

3) CL, I'm sorry but impact force studies have been done and the data all points to the fact that a barefoot/lightly shod runner will strike with less force than one in heavily cushioned shoes. Your ball/rock analogy is one of your typical "irrelevance granades" as energy returned is not the issue but actual impact force. As is your jumping from a tower analogy, spectacular, showy but total BS. I back-up my arguments with sound scientific studies you seem to prefer dreamt up analogies , gossip on the web or the Daily Mail. At McGill University in Montreal, Dr Steven Robbins and Dr Edward Waked performed a series of tests on the landings of gymnasts. They found that the thicker the mat, the harder the gymnasts stuck their landings. Instinctively the gymnasts were searching for stability. When they sensed a soft surface underfoot, they slapped down hard to ensure balance.

4) This example simply illustrates that the heel has not evolved as a landing/striking surface (whether jumping or running) and only by artificially cushioning it have we allowed it to become one. None of us should be heel-strikers, it's not natural for anyone but conditioned by a lifetime wearing inflexible soles.