Nope, plenty of people running marathons and long road runs barefoot and with minimalist shoes.

Other than Bikila can you point to any competitive marathon runners competing barefoot?

I use minimal cushioning on the fells, but if I’m going anywhere near the road or hardpack for most of the run then I’ll thank the last 20-30 years with of developments that mean I can have my shins and knees intact.

One wonders how on earth people managed to run before the 70s 🙂
Oh and try finding a manufacturer who will actually claim their shoes will do anything to keep your knees and shins intact 🙂

One wonders how on earth people managed to run before the 70s

In the same way that people cycled. However I suspect your bike looks more like a 21st C one than a 1960’s model.
The fact that people ran in the 60’s (and in many cases quicker than they do now but thats a different story) doesnt mean the changes in equipment since then havent been largely for the good.

The fact that people ran in the 60’s (and in many cases quicker than they do now but thats a different story) doesnt mean the changes in equipment since then havent been largely for the good.

Quite true, However it doesn’t mean they have been largely for the good.
It does means it’s very difficult to draw conclusions either way. Of course the first problem being even deciding on a common meaning of the word good 🙂

However it doesn’t mean they have been largely for the good.

Maybe its best if you identify a “bad” one?

but the concept of someone telling you that you need stability / motion control / cushioned, etc, benefits only the shop and the running shoe companies.

Except they don’t make any more money – if you go in for shoes you’ll leave with a pair regardless of what kind they’ve sold you.

Running analysis is definitely good, but it depends what advice they are going to give you. Seems to me they just tell you if you over pronate or not, and tell you to choose support shoes appropriately. There’s a lot more to it than that though as I’ve discovered. We tend to think running is completely natural, but you may have been running wrongly all this time. Or at least inefficiently.

Maybe its best if you identify a “bad” one?
Maybe it’s best if you quote the sentence after that.:)

But if you want –
http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2010/06/26/bjsm.2009.069849.abstract

Conclusion The findings of this study suggest that our current approach of prescribing in-shoe pronation control systems on the basis of foot type is overly simplistic and potentially injurious.

The co-authors work for Nike, and Nike funded it.

Why does every running thread on this forum have to end up as an argument about the merits of barefoot running? It’s one option; some people like it, others don’t. Each to their own.

I’m still running on snow-packed pavements and trails. Mudclaws do their stuff in the snow as well as the mud, although I am a little slower of late.

Why does every running thread on this forum have to end up as an argument about the merits of barefoot running?

Cos trolling them into this mess is soooo easy 😆

Cos trolling them into this mess is soooo easy

Oh, well in that case can I just say “I love God and think he’s real”. That should open up another load of typical STW arguments.

Conclusion The findings of this study suggest that our current approach of prescribing in-shoe pronation control systems on the basis of foot type is overly simplistic and potentially injurious.

Given the tiny relative sample and the almost limitless potential for variables I suspect the study, and conclusion is really quite meaningless. Far be it from me to side with shoe manufacturers as I donr feel strongly one way or the other but this is a bit spurious.

However it doesn’t mean they have been largely for the good.

Maybe its best if you identify a “bad” one?

Can you identify a “bad one”?

So what about Nike Frees then? I almost bought some on holiday.

Seems to me that I should work to correct whatever’s wrong with my gait not just cater for it..?

Other than Bikila can you point to any competitive marathon runners competing barefoot?

My point was that there are plenty of people running long distances on hard roads either barefoot or in minimalist shoes. Whether there are many competitive marathon runners is not the issue, its about running without getting injured, not how fast you can go. Prior to the 1970’s when the modern cushioned running shoe was invented, everyone ran in thin soled minimalist shoes.

Surfer, I just have. It’s not my problem if you choose to dismiss it.

But I’m pretty happy that if the Nike researchers on it thought it was spurious they wouldn’t have put their name to it as it doesn’t do their company any favours. Can you really see them signing off on

This study is unable to provide support for the convention that highly pronated runners should wear motion control shoes. Current conventions for assigning stability categories for women’s running shoes do not appear appropriate based on the risk of experiencing pain when training for a half marathon.

if they didn’t have to?

But if you want a bigger sample size
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA523392

No doubt that won’t meet your exacting standards either 🙂

Whether there are many competitive marathon runners is not the issue,

I think it is (and you mentioned marathon runners) if it works and is an alternative to the shoes that the majority of runners wear then why are competitive runners not picking up on this? I suspect if it were effective that would translate into competitive advantage as more running means better results (within reason) so competitive athletes at all levels from the 55 min 10 mile club runners to the 45 min runners.
I’m not dismissing the concept as that would be luddite I just think its a marketing gimmick, happy to be proved wrong.

Prior to the 1970’s when the modern cushioned running shoe was invented, everyone ran in thin soled minimalist shoes.

Yes they did, some even ran in boots! What is your point?

Ian I understood your point to be that people were apparently missold shoes? Bit like a mountainbiker being sold a skateboard? MTB ing isnt bad due to people being sold a product and the shoes themselves arent wrong but are just wrong for that user. That would probably explain why Nike put their name to it?
Again I am not defending Nike they are a (like all big companies) out to make a buck, they are not benevolent!
In many ways it is an argument FOR the development of equipment over the years that now there is a choice (for people to get wrong!)

Does the snow/icey pavements stop you guys running?

Horrible out there in the freezing fog, pavements would be grim for road or trail shoes. Just back some 1k reps on the frozen footy fields. Lots of water ice. Absolutely no problem in xc spikes though. Best session for ages 🙂

I don’t like running in ice but it’s a lot safer than cycling on it – so upped the running until the ice has started to clear a bit.

I road run in fairly padded Asics Kayanos – I just think tarmac kills knees. Whether it does or not, I find them comfy on roads.

For off road, little padding (the ground gives more) and a nice grippy light sole.

Jamie – you are hurt that I don’t rate Inov8s too short laces?! The ones that comes undone all the time?! Stick some locklaces on (as I have done on my Mudclaws) and you can’t get them on an off ten times quicker and they never come undone. A no brainer for £6. Stuck them on my Kayanos too for quicker transitions.

These are surprisingly grippy on the hardpacked ice.

Really? 😯

Are you sure you don’t mean hardpacked snow, or hardpacked dirt with a bit of ice on it, or anything else on which normal rubber provides a bit of grip? No way do normal rubber soled shoes – no matter how sticky – work on proper ice.

Unless of course you meant these, which is what I use to run on ice – they work very well (no slipping at all on Saturday night with lots of ice about, both on path and off). Highly recommended if you really do want to run on ice – there are several other brands of orienteering shoes with small metal studs like this if you’re not into Inov8s, it’s just that contrary to the comments above I find Inov8s far more comfy than any other orienteering shoe I’ve tried – they’re the only ones I don’t get blisters in, even wearing them for over an hour straight out of the box. Far more practical for all-round use than XC spikes (not sure I’d want to try tarmac with those).

FWIW I really like Inov8s, what with their low to the ground feel, flexibility and lack of support which lets you run like you’re supposed to. Doesn’t mean I buy into the whole barefoot thing – I use orthotics in mine, which correct my structural misalignment – most of us aren’t actually perfect running machines.

@Aracer.

They look good shoes but a bit specific! Can the studs be replaced when they wear?

I run indoors when the weather turns like this. I’m Lucky that there’s a rec centre with a treadmill literally across the street from me. S’easy and the view’s nice.

Studs are non-replaceable, but then they’re tungsten and don’t tend to wear that much provided you don’t do lots of tarmac bashing (that wouldn’t be much fun in those anyway). Previous ones I’ve had from other companies I’ve worn out the uppers before the studs – I’ve also had studs pull out of the rubber when they got old on one pair, but I understand this is something the Inov8s shouldn’t suffer from as they’ve specfically worked on it, after it being a big problem on their previous version.

For sure they’re specific – not really worth it just to run on ice once or twice a year – but then they’re really designed for running off-track through forests, where the studs provide grip on wet wood (roots, fallen trees, brashings etc.).

Hmm – they look handy.

Mudclaws are good on slightly “rough” ice and snow but as you say, no rubber grips well on sheet ice.

Whether there are many competitive marathon runners is not the issue,

I think it is (and you mentioned marathon runners) if it works and is an alternative to the shoes that the majority of runners wear then why are competitive runners not picking up on this?

The whole point of the barefoot/minimalist thing is reduce running injuries not how to run faster.

Prior to the 1970’s when the modern cushioned running shoe was invented, everyone ran in thin soled minimalist shoes.

Yes they did, some even ran in boots! What is your point?

Modern running shoes have done NOTHING to reduce running injuries and in some cases have made them worse.

A huge proportion of runners have nagging injuries every year and running shoe companies have been feeding the public bollocks since the 70’s about injury prevention.

Most runners I meet have suffered injuries in some form or another and would like to find something that works to help them get back to running. Minimalist/barefoot running is something that is proven to help in a lot of cases and is not just a load of marketing guff cooked up by nike and other shoe companies.

The whole point of the barefoot/minimalist thing is reduce running injuries not how to run faster.

surely the whole point is to find a shoe that makes running for you pain free? rather than just say; barefoot: good. Running shoes: bad?

I suspect that there are loads more people running recreationally now there then ever were in the 70’s, hence there are loads more injuries.

Ok so what do people think of Nike Frees?

Nike’s take on the barefoot running shoe?

If it works for you…

They were very comfortable indeed running up and down the shop…

The whole point of the barefoot/minimalist thing is reduce running injuries not how to run faster.

surely the whole point is to find a shoe that makes running for you pain free? rather than just say; barefoot: good. Running shoes: bad?

I suspect that there are loads more people running recreationally now there then ever were in the 70’s, hence there are loads more injuries.

Whether it’s a shoe, a slipper or running barefeet, whatever works and allows you to run injury free is the main thing. The problem is that running shoe companies have been preaching Cushioned running shoes = good, everything else = bad, which is total bollox.

Some people can happily go their whole lives running with terrible running form and not get injured, but the majority will suffer sooner or later. Cushioned running shoes allow people to run with awful technique.

Cushioned running shoes allow people to run with awful technique.

so what? As long as their pain free who cares what their technique looks like.

The problem is that running shoe companies have been preaching Cushioned running shoes = good, everything else = bad, which is total ******.

Really? I’ve never seen anything from any running shoe company to that effect, in fact some are embracing it and doing their own take on eh whole idea (that’ll be Nike Free, for example) Remember running shoe companies want to sell trainers, to the most people they can, and loads of folk will use these to jog ever-so-slowly round the park, mostly on their heels, shuffling along, and y’know what? Really cushioned shoes are dead comfy for that, and that’s cool.

FWIW I’ve done the whole barefoot thing on training runs, along beaches, across grassy fields, and it’s great. but for my regular pavement/road 10k a good pair of cushioned soles works great…for me.

BTW, you might want to edit your sweary post, the mods are being ruthless about it…

so what? As long as their pain free who cares what their technique looks like.

I’ll say it again: Some people can happily go their whole lives running with terrible running form and not get injured, but the majority will suffer sooner or later. Cushioned running shoes allow people to run with awful technique.

Really? I’ve never seen anything from any running shoe company to that effect

Really? Never heard that you should replace your running shoes after 400-500 miles because of the cushioning? I wonder where that came from?

Remember running shoe companies want to sell trainers, to the most people they can

More technological mumbo jumbo = more sales, bit like mountain biking 😉

No way do normal rubber soled shoes – no matter how sticky – work on proper ice.

I just got in from a 7 miler in my F-Lite 230s which have a really sticky sole and are nice and grippy usually.

Was on my arse several times so I can confirm the above 😉

The whole point of the barefoot/minimalist thing is reduce running injuries not how to run faster.

I fully understand that however my point is that to be a fast runner, as well as training hard you need to remain injury free. If running barefoot reduced injuries then competitive athletes would soon adopt this method not because they want to run barefoot but because they want to run fast. Consistent periods of training make runners fast. If this correlation existed we would see competitive runners training and competing in races in their bare feet. I see none so I suspect the correlation doesnt exist.

Modern running shoes have done NOTHING to reduce running injuries and in some cases have made them worse.

You cant say this with any degree of certainty and the studies I have seen dont bear this out. It is impossible to know that if a runner hadnt run in built up shoes they would have been injured less.

As I said above Nike et all are out to fleece us all but that doesnt mean the latest shoes are bad or that a few people getting results (of which you cant give examples of) from barefoot running substantiate your hypothesis.

Most “runners” suffer injuries because they are always pushing the envelope in terms of both volume and intensity. Whatever they wear they will likely injur themselves at some point simply because they will continue to try to do more.

Making “joggers” (by that I mean recreational runners who have no intention of improving performance or speed) less injury prone is hardly a big win. A bit like my GP curing my running injuries by telling me never to run.

More technological mumbo jumbo = more sales, bit like mountain biking

I agree however barefoot running is the latest gimmick I think.

Cushioned running shoes allow people to run with awful technique.

But youve just made that up!

I suspect that there are loads more people running recreationally now there then ever were in the 70’s, hence there are loads more injuries.

+1. Running/jogging is mainstream and years ago the injury rate was very high.

‘Nike Free’ have as much cushioning as anything else out there – i had a close look at them cos i like thin-soled shoes, and the adverts suggested they were simple and minimalist.

(they’ve got dirty great wedges of rubber under the heels)

a bit more research (youtube) digs up something about the way that the front of the sole flexes more easily than other shoes.

maybe the idea is so that your foot has to adapt to lumps and bumps like you were running barefoot, but still with loads of heel cushioning.

if you like heel cushioning, but don’t need ‘support’ – then maybe Nike Free shoes might be worth a look at?

only the crustiest of hippies would suggest that running literally barefoot is a good idea, but there’s a lot to be said for running with a fore-foot strike in simple cheap shoes.

but there’s a lot to be said for running with a fore-foot strike.

+1

The whole point of the barefoot/minimalist thing is reduce running injuries not how to run faster.

I fully understand that however my point is that to be a fast runner, as well as training hard you need to remain injury free. If running barefoot reduced injuries then competitive athletes would soon adopt this method not because they want to run barefoot but because they want to run fast. Consistent periods of training make runners fast. If this correlation existed we would see competitive runners training and competing in races in their bare feet. I see none so I suspect the correlation doesnt exist.

Modern running shoes have done NOTHING to reduce running injuries and in some cases have made them worse.

You cant say this with any degree of certainty and the studies I have seen dont bear this out. It is impossible to know that if a runner hadnt run in built up shoes they would have been injured less.

As I said above Nike et all are out to fleece us all but that doesnt mean the latest shoes are bad or that a few people getting results (of which you cant give examples of) from barefoot running substantiate your hypothesis.

Most “runners” suffer injuries because they are always pushing the envelope in terms of both volume and intensity. Whatever they wear they will likely injur themselves at some point simply because they will continue to try to do more.

Making “joggers” (by that I mean recreational runners who have no intention of improving performance or speed) less injury prone is hardly a big win. A bit like my GP curing my running injuries by telling me never to run.

More technological mumbo jumbo = more sales, bit like mountain biking

I agree however barefoot running is the latest gimmick I think.

Cushioned running shoes allow people to run with awful technique.

But youve just made that up!

I suspect that there are loads more people running recreationally now there then ever were in the 70’s, hence there are loads more injuries.

+1. Running/jogging is mainstream and years ago the injury rate was very high.

I cannot be arsed to argue about it. Good luck with your cushioned shoes, if they work for you great, keep going with them.

We had this discussion a while ago.

Here is a link to the thread: http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/any-runners-on-here-why-do-my-legs-hurt

I’m not going to get involved in another internet debate, I stand by what I said on the thread and will merely say if you are new to running then start out minimalist because you’ll be starting from scratch anyway. So starting slowly won’t be anything other than what you should be doing anyway.

If you are not and you are prone to injury (Which it sounds like you might be, why else are you getting your running assessed?) reign it in start slowly, with every step think about how your foot is striking the ground. Consider the forces your body is experiencing with every foot strike and whether the route of transmission of those forces through your body is the best.

Dom

Has any of this cobblers helped the OP?

surfer
I’m not dismissing the concept as that would be luddite I just think its a marketing gimmick

why would encouraging people to try barefoot running be a marketing gimmick? you cant sell people new feet 😯

nohands – HAHA!

To be fair the “bare foot” shoes are horrendously expensive! I paid over a hundred quid for mine for some reason.

However you don’t need them, it depends how hardy you are, I am a southern softie and I like my tootsies!

To be fair the “bare foot” shoes are horrendously expensive! I paid over a hundred quid for mine for some reason.

😯