If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Barefoot runners' smug may not be justified   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 152
    More: Interesting, lower leg, Long-distance track event  
•       •       •

16288 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Jan 2013 at 10:54 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



152 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-01-28 09:45:47 AM
no, no it's not
 
2013-01-28 10:56:11 AM
So, what they're saying, is that exercise is bad? Finally, justification!!!
 
2013-01-28 10:56:24 AM
Like we needed a study for that?
 
2013-01-28 10:56:57 AM
Like all things hipster, it's only ironically good for you.
 
2013-01-28 10:59:06 AM
Always thought they just couldn't afford the shoes. Wondered why poor people were out jogging because the rest of their outfit looked so nice. Also was curious where there shopping cart was because as I understand it that is the homeless "must have" accessory.

Now I find out they are only trendy hipsters.
 
2013-01-28 10:59:39 AM
If people are spending $59M on "minimalist shoes", thn they aren't athletes, they're "tools".
 
2013-01-28 11:00:34 AM
I like running in these. I can't run as fast because of lack of cushioning, but I do feel that I use more leg muscles and the run feels more "natural" or fluid. I guess I am smug or a hipster or something.


www.northwestmilitary.com

/jogs with regular shoes too.
 
2013-01-28 11:02:58 AM
I didn't know that people gave a shiat about barefoot runners. Like they actually sit in their car at a stoplight and upon seeing a guy with no shoes on think to themselves "Look at that guy with no shoes! He thinks he's so great."

These people need a hobby... or maybe a blow job.
 
2013-01-28 11:04:09 AM
Summary: some other researchers found a different group of Africans and found that they run barefoot, but land heel first. Which does not dispute anything regarding running barefoot.
 
2013-01-28 11:04:23 AM

stuhayes2010: I like running in these. I can't run as fast because of lack of cushioning, but I do feel that I use more leg muscles and the run feels more "natural" or fluid. I guess I am smug or a hipster or something.


[www.northwestmilitary.com image 483x304]

/jogs with regular shoes too.


No, you're just annihilating your hip bones ... you should ask my grandfather that used to run with Jesse Owens back in the days before cork running tracks ... yeah ... enjoy those hip replacement surgeries ...

You want the softest impact running exercises you can find ... cork tracks, padded shoes, anything to reduce the strain on bones and muscles due to repetitive impact.
 
2013-01-28 11:06:25 AM
I have to disagree. Barefoot runners' smug will always be justified as long as people pay $200 and up for fancy running shoes. The only runners who are proof against barefoot smug-buggers are the lucky few who are paid massive amounts of money to shill for shoes and those who have their own branded shoes.

Running barefoot is classic Oneupmanship, as taught by Stephen Potter. Making millions of dollars in endorsements is the only One-up that can trump it, although passing a barefoot runner who is hobbled by blisters or cuts to his or her feet might give you a very temporary boost (smugging stopping to help works better, especially if you win the race any way).
 
2013-01-28 11:06:50 AM

lohphat: If people are spending $59M on "minimalist shoes", thn they aren't athletes, they're "tools".


Americans spend over 200 times that much on bottled water.

Yes, people sure do spend a lot to run around barefoot, but they spend an incredibly huge amount to drink something that comes out of the tap for free.
 
2013-01-28 11:08:29 AM
For "smugging" read "smugly".

And then consider the advantages of making "smug" into a verb.

Used in a sentence:  Where's Joe? He's in the common room smugging over the exam.

Spot my intentional mistake.
 
2013-01-28 11:09:13 AM
After not running for 15 years (knee problems) I tired barefoot, and it works for me.

Just do what you find enjoyable and don't listen to people who seem to think they have the answer to everything.
 
2013-01-28 11:10:21 AM

traylor: Like we needed a study for that?


Sadly, some hipsters need that to stop doing it. While others will claim "IT'S A CONSPIRACY!" and keep doing it anyway...until they blow out their achillies, knee or both.
 
2013-01-28 11:10:34 AM
Barefoot runners' smug may not be justified

I mean come on.
 
2013-01-28 11:11:35 AM
This entire thread sounds fat.
 
2013-01-28 11:11:39 AM

Rapmaster2000: I didn't know that people gave a shiat about barefoot runners. Like they actually sit in their car at a stoplight and upon seeing a guy with no shoes on think to themselves "Look at that guy with no shoes! He thinks he's so great."

These people need a hobby... or maybe a blow job.


You say that like there actually are people who don't need a blow job (or the gender-equivalent.)
 
2013-01-28 11:11:55 AM

MasterPlanz: After not running for 15 years (knee problems) I tired barefoot, and it works for me.

Just do what you find enjoyable and don't listen to people who seem to think they have the answer to everything.


I guess it's a YMMV situation, depending on how you "run".
 
2013-01-28 11:12:50 AM

MasterPlanz: After not running for 15 years (knee problems) I tired barefoot, and it works for me.

Just do what you find enjoyable and don't listen to people who seem to think they have the answer to everything.


So, did you go home right then?

/I keed
 
2013-01-28 11:13:13 AM

brantgoose: I have to disagree. Barefoot runners' smug will always be justified as long as people pay $200 and up for fancy running shoes have more money than them.


ftfy
 
2013-01-28 11:13:54 AM
My experience is simple: ran using traditional padded shoes (fitted at renowned running stores) and developed problems with my legs; ran using minimalist shoes (Vibrams) and mid-strike and leg problems went away.

Entirely possible that had I run using modern shows AND a mid-strike stride I might not have ever developed the leg issues.
 
2013-01-28 11:13:57 AM
Good luck with your hookworms, hipsters!
 
2013-01-28 11:16:29 AM

AverageAmericanGuy: Good luck with your hookworms, hipsters!


In case there was any mystery that hipster means person I don't like.

Here's the deal, hipsters don't exercise. Hipsters stay thin with Parliament Lights and cocaine.
 
2013-01-28 11:17:17 AM

MasterPlanz: After not running for 15 years (knee problems) I tired barefoot, and it works for me.

Just do what you find enjoyable and don't listen to people who seem to think they have the answer to everything.


This. I had to start to run after my ACL tear. Running with a heal strike, even in super cushioned shoes, really hurt my knee. Running with a mid-strike solved all issues. Plus it made my ankles stronger as a side effect (larger calves and anterior tibialis).
 
2013-01-28 11:17:28 AM
chain mail shoes

Link
 
2013-01-28 11:17:40 AM
28.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-01-28 11:18:38 AM

Rustico: My experience is simple: ran using traditional padded shoes (fitted at renowned running stores) and developed problems with my legs; ran using minimalist shoes (Vibrams) and mid-strike and leg problems went away.


Pretty much the same experience here. Started running in traditional shoes and thought I was going to have to quit because it hurt my knees and hips so bad, switched to Ecco Bioms and haven't had a problem since.

But I guess I'll have to go back to being in miserable pain lest I be thought of as a hipster by the Cheeze Whiz shotgunners and elastic waistband aficionados of Fark.
 
2013-01-28 11:20:32 AM

brantgoose: I have to disagree. Barefoot runners' smug will always be justified as long as people pay $200 and up for fancy running shoes. The only runners who are proof against barefoot smug-buggers are the lucky few who are paid massive amounts of money to shill for shoes and those who have their own branded shoes.

Running barefoot is classic Oneupmanship, as taught by Stephen Potter. Making millions of dollars in endorsements is the only One-up that can trump it, although passing a barefoot runner who is hobbled by blisters or cuts to his or her feet might give you a very temporary boost (smugging stopping to help works better, especially if you win the race any way).


$200 is a bit of an exaggeration. I don't think very many true runners pay that much. The last pair of shoes I bought were $67 on sale (Asics GT-2710). I go through 3-4 pairs a year so it adds up a little bit, but it's still pretty cheap.

I've always wanted to try minimalist running but I just haven't gotten around to it. I'm skeptical, I guess.
 
2013-01-28 11:23:37 AM
 
2013-01-28 11:23:42 AM

Rapmaster2000: I didn't know that people gave a shiat about barefoot runners. Like they actually sit in their car at a stoplight and upon seeing a guy with no shoes on think to themselves "Look at that guy with no shoes! He thinks he's so great."

These people need a hobby... or maybe a blow job.


Maybe they are having road head in their beemer and say, wow, this guy's life looks crummy
 
2013-01-28 11:24:41 AM

The Larch: lohphat: If people are spending $59M on "minimalist shoes", thn they aren't athletes, they're "tools".

Americans spend over 200 times that much on bottled water.

Yes, people sure do spend a lot to run around barefoot, but they spend an incredibly huge amount to drink something that comes out of the tap for free.


This is me not disagreeing with you.

Never underestimate the stupidity of people in large numbers.
 
2013-01-28 11:28:01 AM

BojanglesPaladin: Summary: some other researchers found a different group of Africans and found that they run barefoot, but land heel first. Which does not dispute anything regarding running barefoot.


lohphat: If people are spending $59M on "minimalist shoes", thn they aren't athletes, they're "tools".


Considering that Jordan-branded shoes alone has revenues of almost $1 billion, 59M doesn't seem so bad for an entire category.
 
2013-01-28 11:28:11 AM
I hate feet. I hate running. Therefore, I hate barefoot running.

/i sound fat
 
2013-01-28 11:29:22 AM
img3.etsystatic.com
The last best running shoes you will ever need.
 
2013-01-28 11:31:12 AM

RichieLaw: MasterPlanz: After not running for 15 years (knee problems) I tired barefoot, and it works for me.

Just do what you find enjoyable and don't listen to people who seem to think they have the answer to everything.

This. I had to start to run after my ACL tear. Running with a heal strike, even in super cushioned shoes, really hurt my knee. Running with a mid-strike solved all issues. Plus it made my ankles stronger as a side effect (larger calves and anterior tibialis).



I further agree. Used to run in standard running shoes as a heel striker and needed braces for both of my knees for anything over a mile (not to mention the hip pain on anything over 3 miles or so). Learned to run mid-foot and the knee and hip pain went away. Switched to a more minimalist shoe and it was even easier to run mid-foot on account of not having an immense amount of padding in the shoe that was nearly forcing me to heel strike. Once I switched to those I was able to run a two-hour half marathon without any sort of pain after.

In short: do what feels best to you, but there is some validity to mid-foot running and it's connections to minimalist shoes.
 
2013-01-28 11:32:21 AM
Pussies! I have been training in Jimmy Choo 6" heels forever.
 
2013-01-28 11:33:55 AM
All this study suggests is there are, at a minimum, 38 dumb farks somewhere in Africa. Didn't exactly blow apart my world view.
 
2013-01-28 11:34:48 AM

lohphat: The Larch: lohphat: If people are spending $59M on "minimalist shoes", thn they aren't athletes, they're "tools".

Americans spend over 200 times that much on bottled water.

Yes, people sure do spend a lot to run around barefoot, but they spend an incredibly huge amount to drink something that comes out of the tap for free.

This is me not disagreeing with you.

Never underestimate the stupidity of people in large numbers.



I can nearly always find a case of 24 12-ounce bottles of water for $3.99 at my local grocery store.

Drinking a cold bottle of water from my fridge and chucking the bottle in the recycling bin rather than grabbing a glass and filling it with not-cold water (and then washing it out when I'm done) is worth $3.99 to me.

I'm paying (minimally) for the convenience. I'm not paying for the water.
 
2013-01-28 11:34:49 AM
A) the studied population are not runners
B) you're not controlling for surface -- which is what? 90% of the justification for fore-foot-first? (That it's less-damaging *when running on paved surfaces.*)
C) you're not even broaching the subject of efficiency or damage/injury types/rates

Can you imagine a headline of "MLB pitching style may be undermined by new research" based on a study of how non-athletic people throw a baseball with no regard for either effectiveness or drawbacks of the different styles?

Clearly a troll-tastic Fark headline is to be expected. But wapo? Shameful tabloid dickbaggery.

/ only runs when chased
// hopefully the researchers do get more money to continue
 
2013-01-28 11:37:32 AM
The reason why runners get problems may be due to the fact they ignore how their foot strikes the ground or just simply don't know any better. They just buy a shoe in the runner section that looks nice and feels confortable.

If you're going to seriously jog or run you need to do some research on how to identify your foot design that will reveal what part of your foot strikes the ground and buy a shoe that matches your running style. Yes, serious running shoes are made for 3 different types of foot strikers. May sound like trivial BS but it makes a big difference with soreness and being prone to injury.

Man may have been running barefoot for tens of thousands of years but we've also advanced in science to where we can protect our feet, legs,back...etc, as we run. Not saying some people don't benefit from minimalist shoes but there's a certain ambiance out there where we like to think we've had it wrong the whole time and the secret is less. That's just marketing doing it's job.

/run 25 miles a week
//6' 2" 250 lbs as well so absoribing heavy impact is important to me
 
kab
2013-01-28 11:38:44 AM
Subby either didn't RFTA, or has some assumption that minimalist runners advocate heel striking.
 
2013-01-28 11:38:53 AM
I ran for a while in traditional running shoes and the knee and hip pain nearly made me quit. After picking up a pair of Bikilas the pain went away and I could enjoy running again.
 
2013-01-28 11:39:02 AM

Rustico: My experience is simple: ran using traditional padded shoes (fitted at renowned running stores) and developed problems with my legs; ran using minimalist shoes (Vibrams) and mid-strike and leg problems went away.

Entirely possible that had I run using modern shows AND a mid-strike stride I might not have ever developed the leg issues.


This is most likely very true, as the striking is really more important than whatever shoes you are wearing. It's just that by wearing minimalist shoes, the impact of the heel-strike will tell you very quickly that you are losing the mid-strike.

Whereas with traditional running shoes, if you aren't paying attention to your form,it's all-to-easy to fall back into the cushy squishiness of heel-striking.


// My preference for minimalist shoes isn't really for street running, but for trail and rock scrambling due to the "ground feel" and the ability to wrap my whole foot around things.
 
2013-01-28 11:39:24 AM
I tried convincing my girlfriend that minimalistic was the new black.

I was looking for something to give me increased workout and was healthier, with just enough protection.

So I tried some rubber that covered just the tip.
 
kab
2013-01-28 11:40:42 AM

SuperDuper28: That's just marketing doing it's job.


Indeed.

www.newsytype.com
 
2013-01-28 11:42:48 AM

BojanglesPaladin: Summary: some other researchers found a different group of Africans and found that they run barefoot, but land heel first. Which does not dispute anything regarding running barefoot.


Sure it does. Part of what caused the barefoot/minimalist-shoe fad was the claim that regular running shoes cause many of us to run unnaturally. This study suggests that there may be more variation in "natural" running styles than previously thought. Perhaps we didn't necessarily evolve to run as midfoot strikers. As others on this thread have noted, minimalist shoes works for them, but I think it's a YMMV type deal. Minimalists shoes aren't a panacea and I've yet to see any research that shows that even on average minimalist shoes prevent more injuries than otherwise.
 
2013-01-28 11:47:05 AM
I work at a shoe store, and sell a fair amount of minimalist shoes. I can honestly say that 95% of people buying minimalist shoes are insufferable douchebags who don't have a clue what the benefits/disadvantages to them are.

That said, the other 5% are pretty cool and knowledgable on minimalist shoes. I've been running competitively for years and thankfully have always ran with a midfoot strike. I do own several pair of minimalist shoes, though I don't really run with them anymore.

The advantages of these shoes are quite obvious, but many don't understand that you need a lengthy period to get used to the complete lack of cushion and support and then wonder why thy get hurt. Those folks who do take their time to get used to it tend to love the minimalis shoes.
And if anyone is looking to try them out - check out the New Balance minimalist models. They are much more comfortable and the design blows Vibrams out of the water.

/just my two cents.
 
2013-01-28 11:48:12 AM

stuhayes2010: I like running in these. I can't run as fast because of lack of cushioning, but I do feel that I use more leg muscles and the run feels more "natural" or fluid. I guess I am smug or a hipster or something.


[www.northwestmilitary.com image 483x304]

/jogs with regular shoes too.


You know why I hate those shoes? I could not ever where them. Two of my toes are connected past the nuckle on both feet. I feel that there is some bias in that they don't make those shoes for people like me.

//This is true.
 
2013-01-28 11:53:07 AM

seadoo2006: stuhayes2010: I like running in these. I can't run as fast because of lack of cushioning, but I do feel that I use more leg muscles and the run feels more "natural" or fluid. I guess I am smug or a hipster or something.


[www.northwestmilitary.com image 483x304]

/jogs with regular shoes too.

No, you're just annihilating your hip bones ... you should ask my grandfather that used to run with Jesse Owens back in the days before cork running tracks ... yeah ... enjoy those hip replacement surgeries ...

You want the softest impact running exercises you can find ... cork tracks, padded shoes, anything to reduce the strain on bones and muscles due to repetitive impact.


Are you an orthopedic surgeon, kinesiology graduate degree holder, or just an armchair scientist with a sample size of one? It's tough to tell from here.
 
2013-01-28 11:59:40 AM

The Larch: lohphat: If people are spending $59M on "minimalist shoes", thn they aren't athletes, they're "tools".

Americans spend over 200 times that much on bottled water.

Yes, people sure do spend a lot to run around barefoot, but they spend an incredibly huge amount to drink something that comes out of the tap for free.


You get water out of the tap for free? Mine is pretty cheap compared to bottled water, but the monthly bill from the city says it's definitely not free.
 
2013-01-28 12:01:39 PM

sigdiamond2000:

Drinking a cold bottle of water from my fridge and chucking the bottle in the recycling bin rather than grabbing a glass and filling it with not-cold water (and then washing it out when I'm done) is worth $3.99 to me.

I'm paying (minimally) for the convenience. I'm not paying for the water.


Your tap water has quality standards, bottled water has none.

I can see using a filter for hard water but the economics of using fossils fuels to produce the plastic container and burned for the transport of a product that comes out of your tap for fractions of pennies a gallon is institutional stupidity.

Use a filtered carafe for the fridge and reuse the water glass. You don't have to rinse it between glasses the same day.
 
2013-01-28 12:06:47 PM

lohphat: sigdiamond2000:

Drinking a cold bottle of water from my fridge and chucking the bottle in the recycling bin rather than grabbing a glass and filling it with not-cold water (and then washing it out when I'm done) is worth $3.99 to me.

I'm paying (minimally) for the convenience. I'm not paying for the water.

Your tap water has quality standards, bottled water has none.

I can see using a filter for hard water but the economics of using fossils fuels to produce the plastic container and burned for the transport of a product that comes out of your tap for fractions of pennies a gallon is institutional stupidity.

Use a filtered carafe for the fridge and reuse the water glass. You don't have to rinse it between glasses the same day.


Yeah, but that doesn't look nearly as cool popping a plastic bottle into the trash in the same motion a basketball player uses on the free throw line. Gotta be at the gym in 26 minutes.
 
2013-01-28 12:11:18 PM
I can't quite make the jump to pure minimalist shoes. However, I've moved from 12mm to 4mm and 0mm drop shoes and it has definitely helped improve my form and reduced knee pain.
 
2013-01-28 12:14:01 PM

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: I work at a shoe store, and sell a fair amount of minimalist shoes. I can honestly say that 95% of people buying minimalist shoes are insufferable douchebags who don't have a clue what the benefits/disadvantages to them are.

That said, the other 5% are pretty cool and knowledgable on minimalist shoes. I've been running competitively for years and thankfully have always ran with a midfoot strike. I do own several pair of minimalist shoes, though I don't really run with them anymore.

The advantages of these shoes are quite obvious, but many don't understand that you need a lengthy period to get used to the complete lack of cushion and support and then wonder why thy get hurt. Those folks who do take their time to get used to it tend to love the minimalis shoes.
And if anyone is looking to try them out - check out the New Balance minimalist models. They are much more comfortable and the design blows Vibrams out of the water.

/just my two cents.


I'm old and set in my ways, and I can't get used to mid-foot strike. I just like to run (badly, apparently) and listen to my iPod because it gets me out of the house and keeps me reasonably healthy. I also occasionally enter big marathons and half-marathons because it gives me goals to work towards.

I tried lightweight shoes (not quite minimalist toe shoes). I've run up to 18 miles at a time in these on a combination of paved and dirt trails, but I strained my knee while running a marathon on paved streets while wearing them, and they make my right hip hurt. For me, the lightweight shoes are fine for shorter distances or dirt paths, but for anything over 10 miles, I'm sticking with my highly-cushioned megashoes.
 
2013-01-28 12:21:31 PM
Wait.

What some people find comfortable and/or pleasurable another group of people do not? Well I'll be damned.

Since the majority's doesn't like or approve of the minority's choices, the ability to make that choice must be prohibited.

True liberty can only exist when the right to make an unpopular choice is eliminated.
 
2013-01-28 12:26:05 PM
"Smug" is almost always in the eye of the observer. It's very rare that a person you think is trying to impress you has even given you the barest thought.
 
2013-01-28 12:27:10 PM

durbnpoisn: stuhayes2010: I like running in these. I can't run as fast because of lack of cushioning, but I do feel that I use more leg muscles and the run feels more "natural" or fluid. I guess I am smug or a hipster or something.


[www.northwestmilitary.com image 483x304]

/jogs with regular shoes too.

You know why I hate those shoes? I could not ever where them. Two of my toes are connected past the nuckle on both feet. I feel that there is some bias in that they don't make those shoes for people like me.

//This is true.


Same here, but because my "index toe" is longer than my big toe. I don't think it's that uncommon either.

\Though it does cause it's own running problems.
 
2013-01-28 12:33:24 PM
The tribe that runs all the time and is really good at it strike with their midfoot and forefoot.

The tribe that runs about as much and as well as Americans strike with their heel.

D'oh, obviously they're both equally effective, because black people are natural athletes.
 
2013-01-28 12:34:17 PM

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: but many don't understand that you need a lengthy period to get used to the complete lack of cushion and support and then wonder why thy get hurt


Very much true. I spent a few weeks walking in the Vibrams before I began any running. Even then, my calves took another month to adjust to the mid-strike form.

You CANNOT just "turn the switch" from heel-strike/padded show to mid-strike/minimalist shoe without risking significant injury.
 
2013-01-28 12:35:13 PM

stuhayes2010: I like running in these. I can't run as fast because of lack of cushioning, but I do feel that I use more leg muscles and the run feels more "natural" or fluid. I guess I am smug or a hipster or something.


[www.northwestmilitary.com image 483x304]

/jogs with regular shoes too.


you are a smug hipster because you felt the need to play show and tell.
 
2013-01-28 12:35:43 PM

Rapmaster2000: I didn't know that people gave a shiat about barefoot runners. Like they actually sit in their car at a stoplight and upon seeing a guy with no shoes on think to themselves "Look at that guy with no shoes! He thinks he's so great."

These people need a hobby... or maybe a blow job.


Or people are sick of idiots pushing snake oil on them about the 'benefits of barefoot running.' Nobody gave a shiat until the barefoot runners started pulling the superiority complex.
 
2013-01-28 12:37:06 PM

JesseL: The Larch: lohphat: If people are spending $59M on "minimalist shoes", thn they aren't athletes, they're "tools".

Americans spend over 200 times that much on bottled water.

Yes, people sure do spend a lot to run around barefoot, but they spend an incredibly huge amount to drink something that comes out of the tap for free.

You get water out of the tap for free? Mine is pretty cheap compared to bottled water, but the monthly bill from the city says it's definitely not free.


The actual costs for our water here in Arizona is in the billions of dollars, with the SRP dam and canal project, CAP canal project, 50 or so dams in the state and all sorts of laws and regulations to keep it so you and I can turn on our tap and get nice clean water. The stupid thing is, this is mostly the same water that is in bottled water. They just run it through an RO system before bottling it.

As for running, I've hiked, run and worked out with vibrams. I can hike anywhere for any length in them without issue, now. My ankles are stronger and I'm a more careful hiker. I cannot run more than a few miles in them, however. I have some NB Minimus shoes I use for running/trail running. The down side to these is they fall apart so fast. I've all but destroyed my vibrams and minimus shoes inside of a year. So now I am wondering if they make shoes that are 'minimal' in design that will actually last.
 
2013-01-28 12:39:06 PM
I see the hipsters are out trying to justify their purchase of expensive useless shoes by shouting down the researchers.

It's OK, just go on wearing them, I'll continue to use barefoot shoes as an indicator of hipster douchebaggery.
 
2013-01-28 12:40:42 PM
What about that study that finds that while Homo sapiens is capable of running long distances, there is no evolutionary benefit to it and it's not something that would ever have been done on purpose prior to the late 19th century.

Sprinting, even jogging for some moderate distance while hunting herd animals makes sense. Certainly not more than a mile or so, for the herds don't stampede that far and besides, once you've spooked them into stampeding, you've bungled the hunt and you're back to the clan's village to weave baskets or do women's work. But again, look at the vast majority of human existence: it's been 6,500 years since God created man and gave him dominion over the Earth and most of that has been without shoes and on unpaved trails and fields. It's not just the African Negro who's gone barefoot, but all people, White and Slavs and even the Punjabi Indians have spent most of human history barefoot, except for the foot-binding, which is practiced by the Chinaman.

No, running shoes accommodate a modern hobby, the running, and to do so barefoot is a foolishness, unless it is done on a natural surface like grass or dirt or asphalt or sand. And then it should not be for more than the distance one can shoot an arrow.
 
2013-01-28 12:47:36 PM

Nadie_AZ: The actual costs for our water here in Arizona is in the billions of dollars, with the SRP dam and canal project, CAP canal project, 50 or so dams in the state and all sorts of laws and regulations to keep it so you and I can turn on our tap and get nice clean water. The stupid thing is, this is mostly the same water that is in bottled water. They just run it through an RO system before bottling it.


Up in my neck of the woods it's all just pumped out of wells on the Big Chino Aquifer.

Of course the county and city governments still try to squeeze every drop of that they can out of that so they can approve for more housing developments for people who won't be able to find jobs... unless they're working in construction, building houses for more people who won't be able to find jobs...
 
2013-01-28 12:47:59 PM

AngryJailhouseFistfark: What about that study that finds that while Homo sapiens is capable of running long distances, there is no evolutionary benefit to it and it's not something that would ever have been done on purpose prior to the late 19th century.

Sprinting, even jogging for some moderate distance while hunting herd animals makes sense. Certainly not more than a mile or so, for the herds don't stampede that far and besides, once you've spooked them into stampeding, you've bungled the hunt and you're back to the clan's village to weave baskets or do women's work. But again, look at the vast majority of human existence: it's been 6,500 years since God created man and gave him dominion over the Earth and most of that has been without shoes and on unpaved trails and fields. It's not just the African Negro who's gone barefoot, but all people, White and Slavs and even the Punjabi Indians have spent most of human history barefoot, except for the foot-binding, which is practiced by the Chinaman.

No, running shoes accommodate a modern hobby, the running, and to do so barefoot is a foolishness, unless it is done on a natural surface like grass or dirt or asphalt or sand. And then it should not be for more than the distance one can shoot an arrow.


If there was no evolutionary advantage we wouldn't be able to do it.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_hunting
 
2013-01-28 12:49:50 PM

durbnpoisn: stuhayes2010: I like running in these. I can't run as fast because of lack of cushioning, but I do feel that I use more leg muscles and the run feels more "natural" or fluid. I guess I am smug or a hipster or something.


[www.northwestmilitary.com image 483x304]

/jogs with regular shoes too.

You know why I hate those shoes? I could not ever where them. Two of my toes are connected past the nuckle on both feet. I feel that there is some bias in that they don't make those shoes for people like me.

//This is true.


Well, they may not make 'those' for you - but there are plenty of minimalist running shoes that don't split the toes - I have a particular preference for the New Balance minimus trail - looks like a 'normal' shoe, but without all the cushioning, which makes it nice for lifting as well.
 
2013-01-28 12:58:12 PM

ghare: I see the hipsters are out trying to justify their purchase of expensive useless shoes by shouting down the researchers.

It's OK, just go on wearing them, I'll continue to use barefoot shoes as an indicator of hipster douchebaggery.


Who pissed in your Cheerios this morning?

"Stop liking what I don't like! You're all idiots for not doing things the exact same way that I do them!"
 
2013-01-28 01:01:44 PM

The Larch: lohphat: If people are spending $59M on "minimalist shoes", thn they aren't athletes, they're "tools".

Americans spend over 200 times that much on bottled water.

Yes, people sure do spend a lot to run around barefoot, but they spend an incredibly huge amount to drink something that comes out of the tap for free.


You live with your parents don't you?
 
2013-01-28 01:06:47 PM

CheetahOlivetti: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: I work at a shoe store, and sell a fair amount of minimalist shoes. I can honestly say that 95% of people buying minimalist shoes are insufferable douchebags who don't have a clue what the benefits/disadvantages to them are.

That said, the other 5% are pretty cool and knowledgable on minimalist shoes. I've been running competitively for years and thankfully have always ran with a midfoot strike. I do own several pair of minimalist shoes, though I don't really run with them anymore.

The advantages of these shoes are quite obvious, but many don't understand that you need a lengthy period to get used to the complete lack of cushion and support and then wonder why thy get hurt. Those folks who do take their time to get used to it tend to love the minimalis shoes.
And if anyone is looking to try them out - check out the New Balance minimalist models. They are much more comfortable and the design blows Vibrams out of the water.

/just my two cents.

I'm old and set in my ways, and I can't get used to mid-foot strike. I just like to run (badly, apparently) and listen to my iPod because it gets me out of the house and keeps me reasonably healthy. I also occasionally enter big marathons and half-marathons because it gives me goals to work towards.

I tried lightweight shoes (not quite minimalist toe shoes). I've run up to 18 miles at a time in these on a combination of paved and dirt trails, but I strained my knee while running a marathon on paved streets while wearing them, and they make my right hip hurt. For me, the lightweight shoes are fine for shorter distances or dirt paths, but for anything over 10 miles, I'm sticking with my highly-cushioned megashoes.


The only way you should be wearing racing flats is if you have few to zero biomechanical issues. This is especially true in longer races. You can probably get away with flats in a 5K or 10K, but the longer the race, the more tired you become and the more likely it is for your form to go to crap - that is the time you need your regular shoes the most - to help compensate for the drop off in form.

I run a lot and I always tell people to go to someone like SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII to have a gait analysis done. They will point you towards the best shoes for the type of stride you have. One of the biggest mistakes people make is that they buy shoes because they like the way they look. That is the absolute worst way to buy shoes. Other mistakes are running too much, too soon (increasing mileage more than 10% per week) and running too fast (90%+ of your mileage should be long, slow distance).

/midfoot striker who is fortunate not to have any biomechanical issues
//no injuries and 1,753 miles in 2012
 
2013-01-28 01:10:16 PM

Elegy: ghare: I see the hipsters are out trying to justify their purchase of expensive useless shoes by shouting down the researchers.

It's OK, just go on wearing them, I'll continue to use barefoot shoes as an indicator of hipster douchebaggery.

Who pissed in your Cheerios this morning?

"Stop liking what I don't like! You're all idiots for not doing things the exact same way that I do them!"


Very much this. Just because it isn't right for me doesn't mean it isn't right for someone else.
 
2013-01-28 01:11:09 PM

big pig peaches: If there was no evolutionary advantage we wouldn't be able to do it.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_hunting



Gott in himmell, before I was just bullshiat, but now I am fascinate.
 
2013-01-28 01:16:01 PM

waterrockets: seadoo2006: stuhayes2010: I like running in these. I can't run as fast because of lack of cushioning, but I do feel that I use more leg muscles and the run feels more "natural" or fluid. I guess I am smug or a hipster or something.


[www.northwestmilitary.com image 483x304]

/jogs with regular shoes too.

No, you're just annihilating your hip bones ... you should ask my grandfather that used to run with Jesse Owens back in the days before cork running tracks ... yeah ... enjoy those hip replacement surgeries ...

You want the softest impact running exercises you can find ... cork tracks, padded shoes, anything to reduce the strain on bones and muscles due to repetitive impact.

Are you an orthopedic surgeon, kinesiology graduate degree holder, or just an armchair scientist with a sample size of one? It's tough to tell from here.


Can't you read? His grandfather got his GED in running from Jesse Owens University.
 
2013-01-28 01:18:28 PM

sigdiamond2000: lohphat: The Larch: lohphat: If people are spending $59M on "minimalist shoes", thn they aren't athletes, they're "tools".

Americans spend over 200 times that much on bottled water.

Yes, people sure do spend a lot to run around barefoot, but they spend an incredibly huge amount to drink something that comes out of the tap for free.

This is me not disagreeing with you.

Never underestimate the stupidity of people in large numbers.


I can nearly always find a case of 24 12-ounce bottles of water for $3.99 at my local grocery store.

Drinking a cold bottle of water from my fridge and chucking the bottle in the recycling bin rather than grabbing a glass and filling it with not-cold water (and then washing it out when I'm done) is worth $3.99 to me.

I'm paying (minimally) for the convenience. I'm not paying for the water.


Consider: it takes energy to recycle that multitude of bottles, energy to remake the bottles, energy to run the bottling plant, energy to ship the water, etc. That last one is especially ludicrous when you stop and think about it. What you are doing is about as far from "green" as you can possibly get while drinking water. If you're ok with that, so be it. But at least think about it.
 
2013-01-28 01:19:14 PM

mike_d85: The Larch: lohphat: If people are spending $59M on "minimalist shoes", thn they aren't athletes, they're "tools".
Americans spend over 200 times that much on bottled water.
Yes, people sure do spend a lot to run around barefoot, but they spend an incredibly huge amount to drink something that comes out of the tap for free.
You live with your parents don't you?


You're a consumer whore, aren't you?
 
2013-01-28 01:19:48 PM

Skirl Hutsenreiter: durbnpoisn: stuhayes2010: I like running in these. I can't run as fast because of lack of cushioning, but I do feel that I use more leg muscles and the run feels more "natural" or fluid. I guess I am smug or a hipster or something.


[www.northwestmilitary.com image 483x304]

/jogs with regular shoes too.

You know why I hate those shoes? I could not ever where them. Two of my toes are connected past the nuckle on both feet. I feel that there is some bias in that they don't make those shoes for people like me.

//This is true.

Same here, but because my "index toe" is longer than my big toe. I don't think it's that uncommon either.

\Though it does cause it's own running problems.


You guys need tabi-style running shoes, where only the big toe is separated. They have enough extra room that Morton's toe shouldn't be a problem.

I've been in Zemgears for a little while now, and they're great; they call theirs "split toe" or "ninja." Warning: you will look and feel like a reindeer.


I'm considering getting some actual jika-tabi boots from Japan, if I can find some with a rubber sole instead of plastic.
 
2013-01-28 01:19:56 PM

ghare: I see the hipsters are out trying to justify their purchase of expensive useless shoes by shouting down the researchers.

It's OK, just go on wearing them, I'll continue to use barefoot shoes as an indicator of hipster douchebaggery.


I see that you did not bother to read the article, but feel free to continue posting uninformed drivel. It's the American way!
 
2013-01-28 01:20:15 PM

mike_d85: The Larch: lohphat: If people are spending $59M on "minimalist shoes", thn they aren't athletes, they're "tools".

Americans spend over 200 times that much on bottled water.

Yes, people sure do spend a lot to run around barefoot, but they spend an incredibly huge amount to drink something that comes out of the tap for free.

You live with your parents don't you?


Yes, yes, yes... I am aware that the fresh water and sanitation system in the United States is one of the greatest wonders of the modern world. And I am aware that building this amazing infrastructure that has greatly increased our lifespans and is responsible for a huge amount of our success as a nation was not free. Our taxes pay for civilization, and fresh water and sanitation are two of the great gifts of civilization. Yada yada.

But even in the most expensive cities in the United States, tap water costs less than a penny a gallon. An American in an average city can drink eight glasses of water a day, every day, for his or her entire life, for less than $30. If you really can't afford to spend fifty cents a year on water, let me know. I'll send you some spare change I found in my couch.
 
2013-01-28 01:26:04 PM
I bought a pair just because they came in a 14 and I had to reward an manufacturer that made them in my size and a store with a buyer that didn't think I must be a black basketball player in high school.
 
2013-01-28 01:30:43 PM

seadoo2006: stuhayes2010: I like running in these. I can't run as fast because of lack of cushioning, but I do feel that I use more leg muscles and the run feels more "natural" or fluid. I guess I am smug or a hipster or something.


[www.northwestmilitary.com image 483x304]

/jogs with regular shoes too.

No, you're just annihilating your hip bones ... you should ask my grandfather that used to run with Jesse Owens back in the days before cork running tracks ... yeah ... enjoy those hip replacement surgeries ...

You want the softest impact running exercises you can find ... cork tracks, padded shoes, anything to reduce the strain on bones and muscles due to repetitive impact.


Dude. He used the word "jog".
Enough said.
 
2013-01-28 01:33:22 PM
Running mid foot with vivo barefoot. Takes a while to get the calves used to it, but you have to tread more lightly to run mid foot than heel first, and that all by itself reduces the force and injury load. No magic, if you don't slam your heel into the ground, you won't hurt yourself as much. You can't run quite as fast, but on the other hand, with worn out knees, you can't run at all.
 
2013-01-28 01:34:33 PM
When I am not running in my absurdly expensive 14-carat gold encrusted magical rainbow sparkle douchebaggery shoes
I actually run barefoot. You know with bare feet?
In the summer this is typically how I run most of the time.
And yes, I am doing it specifically to gain the attention of a barefoot running hottie twenty years younger than me.
There is no other reason.

Also, I am so old I am not entirely certain what 'hipster' means.
 
2013-01-28 01:35:57 PM

FTFA (which only a few people--not subby--apparently read):

The habitually barefoot Kalenjin studied by Lieberman and colleagues [15] run many kilometers on a daily basis and all ran a minimum of 20 km/week, but the Daasanach adults studied here do not run as frequently or as far as the Kalenjin. Training at a high intensity, running tens of kilometers each week, may elevate the risk of repetitive stress injuries such that it necessitates adjustments to one's running gait.


So if you're a lazy sloth walker, run with your heel-strike first. If you're running to commute to the next village (or from a really farking hungry--but lame--lioness), then ball-of-foot-strike first.

Or, perhaps, more study is needed, from a larger control group?

i651.photobucket.com
 
kab
2013-01-28 01:39:48 PM

MasterPlanz: Also, I am so old I am not entirely certain what 'hipster' means.


FARK definition of hipster = anything I dislike, or have no firsthand knowledge of (which automatically means it's bad).
 
2013-01-28 01:50:01 PM
boothboy007:
I further agree. Used to run in standard running shoes as a heel striker and needed braces for both of my knees for anything over a mile (not to mention the hip pain on anything over 3 miles or so). Learned to run mid-foot and the knee and hip pain went away. Switched to a more minimalist shoe and it was even easier to run mid-foot on account of not having an immense amount of padding in the shoe that was nearly forcing me to heel strike. Once I switched to those I was able to run a two-hour half marathon without any sort of pain after.


yep.

i've been running for almost thirty years now, and i made the switch to Vibram's about 3 years back. when i switched, i noticed immediately that i was pounding the hell out of my heels. so i was going to have to change my stride if i was going to run in them. i kept at it. and though it took a long time (months), going very slowly, for me to change my stride, i'm perfectly comfortable in them now.

now, i still land on my heel somewhat, but it's not the spine-shattering strike i had when i first switched; it's a gentle, rolling, low-impact landing. it's how i probably should have been running all this time, but all those squishy shoes were hiding my bad form. i wish i'd started this decades ago.
 
2013-01-28 01:54:49 PM
After years of knee pain and discomfort I researched minimalist style running. I made the switch and the majority of my aches and pains went away. Additionally, my distances increased and my pace went up, without expending any more energy than previously.

Say what you will, but I have become a believer.

I do need to say this though, It is not like simply running barefoot is the miracle worker. One has to find the running style that works best for them. They need to work on landing on the part of their foot that is best mechanically for each person.

For some it is the ball of the foot, for others the heel. For me, like some mentioned in the article, I switch from ball to heel to both depending on my stride and speed.

The firmly believe the 11mm drop from heel to toe in modern running shoes causes more harm then good by forcing a person into a foot landing pattern that is unnatural for that individual. 0mm drop gives the runner more control and therefore can place less stress on the body.

And for those who do not know, you can get "minimalist" shoes with 0mm drop that still have padding, if on desires. The Brooks 'Pure' series or Saucony's 'Kinvara' is a good case of this.
 
2013-01-28 01:57:07 PM
maybe i should give minimalist shoes a shot, i sound like a clopping clydesdale when i run.
 
2013-01-28 02:04:19 PM
mt. biked with these for over a decade
www.pricepoint.com


now ride with these
ecx.images-amazon.com

/getting a kick
 
2013-01-28 02:13:39 PM

oi_piss_me_off: maybe i should give minimalist shoes a shot, i sound like a clopping clydesdale when i run.


You should give it a go. My advice is to just walk in them at first, and take it easy. It took me about six weeks of walking a mile or two a day and wearing them as everyday shoes to really feel comfortable.

Anyone who's thinking of making the switch should try doing these exercises, as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRS88R 1BAg8&sns=em
 
2013-01-28 02:14:38 PM
The hell with running. I wear them just for walking around and hiking in the bush. My legs feel way better at the end of the day if i have those vibrams on rather than running shoes or hikeing boots. Also -- they dont blister the skin if you get them damp. Also its allot tougher to roll your ankle or slip on a branch in shoes that you can feel through.

I feel better wearing them and they are the most comfertable shoes i own. Screw the health benifits, they are just damn pragmatic outdoor hobby shoes.
 
2013-01-28 02:15:00 PM

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: The advantages of these shoes are quite obvious, but many don't understand that you need a lengthy period to get used to the complete lack of cushion and support and then wonder why thy get hurt. Those folks who do take their time to get used to it tend to love the minimalis shoes.
And if anyone is looking to try them out - check out the New Balance minimalist models. They are much more comfortable and the design blows Vibrams out of the water.


Thats what I have, and the soles are by Vibram and designed for trail running. Definitely helped me switch to a midfoot strike.
 
2013-01-28 02:16:52 PM

inner ted: mt. biked with these for over a decade
[www.pricepoint.com image 300x300]


now ride with these
[ecx.images-amazon.com image 300x300]

/getting a kick


Do a lot of freeride and trials, do you?

/I hate riding flats
 
2013-01-28 02:22:35 PM
When I was in basic training for the Air Force, the mile and a half run every morning injured my knees enough I almost got drummed out. I was sent to the base hospital and the doctor gave me a prescription for getting a good pair of running shoes and instructions to hide in the middle of the pack and run with my own stride instead of having to keep stride with the 6'4" guys up front (I'm 5'7"). Landing on my heels with my leg straight was destroying my knees. Ever since then, I run on my toes. My heels never touch the ground. You do not need minimalist shoes to avoid heel strikes, just practice.
 
2013-01-28 02:23:46 PM
cdn.follw.it

"TAKE OFF YOUR SANDALS!"
 
2013-01-28 02:31:14 PM

Mose: inner ted: mt. biked with these for over a decade
[www.pricepoint.com image 300x300]


now ride with these
[ecx.images-amazon.com image 300x300]

/getting a kick

Do a lot of freeride and trials, do you?

/I hate riding flats


that's a big negative sir

csb wall of text incoming:

i ride cross country / trails

big difference i noticed most when pedaling UP hill - my feet kept coming off cause i was trying to 'pull up'. made for some awkward moments. i feel more powerful and have as much or more endurance than when i rode clipless. i'm a real creature of habit & ride the same trail over and over, so i can tell when i'm faster or not.

but i truly think it's made me a better rider both in technical skill and fitness. even the most mundane downhills require concentration - let alone something steep / technical - with clipless i just point and shoot knowing i'll always stay in the pedals - but now with platforms, that isn't a given & it makes it all more entertaining & rewarding.

like i heard someone put it: sprint runners don't train with spike shoes - they only use those to race in. i think clipless is similar to this.

protip: if you go platform (& you should) invest in 5.10's - they are the shizznit

/learning how to properly bunny hop is freaking hard - but when i do it, i feel boss
//sorry, i tend to go on at the mouth if someone dare ask me about something i'm interested in - will be as long winded on other topics like: halo or lumber
//csb wall of text "off"
 
2013-01-28 02:33:02 PM
Kenyans running.


Great.
 
2013-01-28 02:33:49 PM
I'm sure doctors love this new fad.

Sure barefoot is how we evolved but we also did so on dirt and grass not concrete and asphalt. Anyone do a study on minimalist running and a spike in shin splints and hairline fractures in the hips/legs?
 
2013-01-28 02:41:07 PM
I ran for years in top-of-the-line Asics ( Gel-Nimbus, Kayano) and always got fitted at specialty running shops. I had shin splints off and on for about 7 years which greatly impacted my ability to run, as one can imagine. I switch to VFF in 2011 and haven't had shin splints since. Sore legs and ankles for a bit, yes, but nothing like chronic shin splints. There's my anecdotal evidence, but whatever. Criticize for looking stupid or being trendy but for many people these shoes have reopened the sport to them.
 
2013-01-28 02:50:04 PM
I run several half and full marathons a year, along with the occasional ~39 mile weekend. I'm 30 and in pretty good shape. After four years of running, I started developing acute pain in my right knee after ~16 miles into a race. At about mile 20, it became so bad I had to finish the rest of the race at a walk (which didn't hurt at all). Soon the pain started happening earlier and earlier in my runs, getting to the point where anything after 5 miles wasn't doable.

After going to a Orthopedist doc he suggested that my problem came from the collapsing of my arch, which in turn lightly jars my knee sideways during a run. After a couple hours, the cartilage gets inflamed - causing my pain. I was given a wrapping technique to better support the arch/ankle. It worked pretty well, but the wraps started getting all jacked up when I sweat and after a dozen miles, starting to cause more problems than they're worth (unraveling, twisting, etc).

After seeing a physical therapist to check on the issue, she suggested I try out a barefoot style shoe and see how I do. After about two weeks of retraining myself on how to run (landing on the ball of my feet vs. heel), it started to feel really natural. When I ran my first "barefoot shoe" half-marathon, I cut my best time by 15% and had no knee pain. I have yet to try a full marathon with them, but after a couple half marathons, I can personally attest to the shoes dramatically helping me and allowing me to run long distances again.

Oblig cheezy finish photo!
sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net
/ymmv
 
2013-01-28 02:50:32 PM
Endorphine addicts!
 
2013-01-28 02:51:47 PM
This is one of these things that you have to just decide for yourself. I've been running in traditional shoes for years on a pavement running trail and I have zero problems with my knees, calves or ankles. All I do is listen to my footsteps when I am running, if they sound too loud I try to move my weight forward a bit so I am landing flat on my feet instead of back on the heels. I've known people who have switched to vibrams and they actually made them stop running because the transition was so painful.

My advice is that if traditional running shoes work for you and you don't have chronic pain, then just keep doing that. Don't switch because it is "better" to run in vibrams.
 
2013-01-28 02:54:01 PM

DoBeDoBeDo: I'm sure doctors love this new fad.

Sure barefoot is how we evolved but we also did so on dirt and grass not concrete and asphalt. Anyone do a study on minimalist running and a spike in shin splints and hairline fractures in the hips/legs?


Actually, I heard about barefoot running two or three years ago, before it became a megafad. I was in PT for my back, which was injured in a car wreck. I repeatedly heard my therapist recommend barefoot running to numerous other patients with ankle and knee injuries.
 
2013-01-28 02:56:34 PM

inner ted: Mose: inner ted: mt. biked with these for over a decade
[www.pricepoint.com image 300x300]


now ride with these
[ecx.images-amazon.com image 300x300]

/getting a kick

Do a lot of freeride and trials, do you?

/I hate riding flats

that's a big negative sir

csb wall of text incoming:

i ride cross country / trails

big difference i noticed most when pedaling UP hill - my feet kept coming off cause i was trying to 'pull up'. made for some awkward moments. i feel more powerful and have as much or more endurance than when i rode clipless. i'm a real creature of habit & ride the same trail over and over, so i can tell when i'm faster or not.

but i truly think it's made me a better rider both in technical skill and fitness. even the most mundane downhills require concentration - let alone something steep / technical - with clipless i just point and shoot knowing i'll always stay in the pedals - but now with platforms, that isn't a given & it makes it all more entertaining & rewarding.

like i heard someone put it: sprint runners don't train with spike shoes - they only use those to race in. i think clipless is similar to this.

protip: if you go platform (& you should) invest in 5.10's - they are the shizznit

/learning how to properly bunny hop is freaking hard - but when i do it, i feel boss
//sorry, i tend to go on at the mouth if someone dare ask me about something i'm interested in - will be as long winded on other topics like: halo or lumber
//csb wall of text "off"


Ok, I rode for several years without clipless, in the late 90's when I started mtbing. I can bunny hop and tail lift without them. I love clipless because you can wear shoes with spikes for hike a bike not slip-and-die-flat soled jobs, no bear traps, and I am more efficient. I race XC and almost never see flats. The terrain around here is pretty technical though.
 
2013-01-28 02:59:28 PM

DoBeDoBeDo: I'm sure doctors love this new fad.

Sure barefoot is how we evolved but we also did so on dirt and grass not concrete and asphalt. Anyone do a study on minimalist running and a spike in shin splints and hairline fractures in the hips/legs?


I dunno; jogging in regular running shoes with heel strike makes my knees and ankles swell up and hurt and gives me shin splints; that's why I don't run for exercise. I'm thinking about trying a pair of the minimalist shoes just to see if it makes any difference.

/cyclist.
//But not those goddam toe shoes; those are an abomination. Worse than Crocs.
 
2013-01-28 02:59:36 PM
Knee problems while running? This this instead

bikereviews.com
 
2013-01-28 03:00:15 PM
The human body is all round pretty crappy. We are bad design incarnate, why do you think we need so many machines just to survive? Tech is our only trick and it's funny how so many people keep saying tech is bad. Without it we would either starve or be lion food.
 
2013-01-28 03:02:35 PM

hitlersbrain: The human body is all round pretty crappy. We are bad design incarnate, why do you think we need so many machines just to survive? Tech is our only trick and it's funny how so many people keep saying tech is bad. Without it we would either starve or be lion food.


There is a couple of hundred thousand years of human natural history that proves you are either a troll or utterly stupid.
 
2013-01-28 03:05:29 PM
You don't need minimalist shoes to not heel strike.  You need to correct your running form.
 
2013-01-28 03:10:14 PM
In all of this (my own comments included). It amazes me that no one has pointed out the stupidity of buying shoes that mimic not wearing shoes.

\I'd like to sell some invisible clothes. Virtually weightless.
 
2013-01-28 03:11:22 PM

JackieRabbit: hitlersbrain: The human body is all round pretty crappy. We are bad design incarnate, why do you think we need so many machines just to survive? Tech is our only trick and it's funny how so many people keep saying tech is bad. Without it we would either starve or be lion food.

There is a couple of hundred thousand years of human natural history that proves you are either a troll or utterly stupid.


We used tech all that time. Spears, flint tools, fire. He's not completely wrong; without tools we're not nearly as badass as other large primates. No big fangs, not nearly as strong as chimps and gorillas, and not nearly as good at climbing, either.
 
2013-01-28 03:14:17 PM

Mose: inner ted: Mose: inner ted: mt. biked with these for over a decade
[www.pricepoint.com image 300x300]


now ride with these
[ecx.images-amazon.com image 300x300]

/getting a kick

Do a lot of freeride and trials, do you?

/I hate riding flats

that's a big negative sir

csb wall of text incoming:

i ride cross country / trails

big difference i noticed most when pedaling UP hill - my feet kept coming off cause i was trying to 'pull up'. made for some awkward moments. i feel more powerful and have as much or more endurance than when i rode clipless. i'm a real creature of habit & ride the same trail over and over, so i can tell when i'm faster or not.

but i truly think it's made me a better rider both in technical skill and fitness. even the most mundane downhills require concentration - let alone something steep / technical - with clipless i just point and shoot knowing i'll always stay in the pedals - but now with platforms, that isn't a given & it makes it all more entertaining & rewarding.

like i heard someone put it: sprint runners don't train with spike shoes - they only use those to race in. i think clipless is similar to this.

protip: if you go platform (& you should) invest in 5.10's - they are the shizznit

/learning how to properly bunny hop is freaking hard - but when i do it, i feel boss
//sorry, i tend to go on at the mouth if someone dare ask me about something i'm interested in - will be as long winded on other topics like: halo or lumber
//csb wall of text "off"

Ok, I rode for several years without clipless, in the late 90's when I started mtbing. I can bunny hop and tail lift without them. I love clipless because you can wear shoes with spikes for hike a bike not slip-and-die-flat soled jobs, no bear traps, and I am more efficient. I race XC and almost never see flats. The terrain around here is pretty technical though.


i'm certainly no racer - but the terrain here in the pacific nw can be challenging (though there seems to be a lot of trail smoothing these days that turns fun roots and rocks into flat & featureless, but that is another topic)

while i can appreciate having spikes in the toes of clipless shoes, i never once installed them in the decade plus i used clipless and never really missed them. i could always hike steep muddy slopes well enough. i can see how using my 5.10's to do the same may be tough.

as for more efficient using clipless.. i suppose, but i also think that the "efficiency" you mention is part of what i view as becoming almost lazy on clipless.

maybe give the platforms a try... they are a bit to get used to at first, but i think you may be surprised
 
2013-01-28 03:16:29 PM

JackieRabbit: hitlersbrain: The human body is all round pretty crappy. We are bad design incarnate, why do you think we need so many machines just to survive? Tech is our only trick and it's funny how so many people keep saying tech is bad. Without it we would either starve or be lion food.

There is a couple of hundred thousand years of human natural history that proves you are either a troll or utterly stupid.


You mean where we almost died as a species? Many times over? We suck at everything. No natural weapons, slow as hell, weak as hell, no armor no camouflage, crappy eyes, crappy ears, crappy sense of smell, not even much of a fur coat. Again, why else would we have all this tech? Why else would we need huge brains? Sorry to burst your bubble.
 
2013-01-28 03:18:39 PM
Oh well if Africans do it then it must be true
 
2013-01-28 03:22:20 PM
I don't understand the headline.
 
2013-01-28 03:29:25 PM

hitlersbrain: JackieRabbit: hitlersbrain: The human body is all round pretty crappy. We are bad design incarnate, why do you think we need so many machines just to survive? Tech is our only trick and it's funny how so many people keep saying tech is bad. Without it we would either starve or be lion food.

There is a couple of hundred thousand years of human natural history that proves you are either a troll or utterly stupid.

You mean where we almost died as a species? Many times over? We suck at everything. No natural weapons, slow as hell, weak as hell, no armor no camouflage, crappy eyes, crappy ears, crappy sense of smell, not even much of a fur coat. Again, why else would we have all this tech? Why else would we need huge brains? Sorry to burst your bubble.


We're good at distance running. We can run pretty much any prey to death, because they overheat and we don't because of sweat and a low-energy bipedal gait.
 
2013-01-28 03:30:23 PM
Sooooo, if shoes are so terrible for your feet, why we're they invented in the first place? Seems counter-productive.
 
2013-01-28 03:31:38 PM
Dammit, Kindle! You didn't need to add an apostrophe then.
 
2013-01-28 03:38:26 PM

mike_d85: In all of this (my own comments included). It amazes me that no one has pointed out the stupidity of buying shoes that mimic not wearing shoes.

\I'd like to sell some invisible clothes. Virtually weightless.


Think of them as foot condoms. They let some of the sensation through, whilest protecting you from infectious disease.
 
2013-01-28 03:39:16 PM

inner ted: mt. biked with these for over a decade


Those are jinxed anyway.

One guy ditched his bike and it ended up going down a hill. In his defense he did it so he wouldn't hit a kid. He had those...

Another guy managed to mangle his arm in a fall. He had those.

Finally a guy pulled off and found his bike wasn't secured to the car. He had those.

/CSB
//They're jinxed!
 
2013-01-28 03:42:46 PM
The minimalist shoes will never go away though, because those shoes happen to be great for other sports, namely sailing/surfing/windsurfing, etc...

So the running minimalists will always have their equipment to perform their silly walk.
 
2013-01-28 03:44:32 PM
We need a "no shiat" tag.
 
2013-01-28 03:46:55 PM

entropic_existence: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: The advantages of these shoes are quite obvious, but many don't understand that you need a lengthy period to get used to the complete lack of cushion and support and then wonder why thy get hurt. Those folks who do take their time to get used to it tend to love the minimalis shoes.
And if anyone is looking to try them out - check out the New Balance minimalist models. They are much more comfortable and the design blows Vibrams out of the water.

Thats what I have, and the soles are by Vibram and designed for trail running. Definitely helped me switch to a midfoot strike.


New Balance Minimus? I have a pair. Love them.
 
2013-01-28 03:50:38 PM
I am not one of those people who wear running shoes everywhere. So when I need to dress up, I wear a pair of these:

d1535dk28ea235.cloudfront.net
 
2013-01-28 03:50:41 PM

randomjsa: inner ted: mt. biked with these for over a decade

Those are jinxed anyway.

One guy ditched his bike and it ended up going down a hill. In his defense he did it so he wouldn't hit a kid. He had those...

Another guy managed to mangle his arm in a fall. He had those.

Finally a guy pulled off and found his bike wasn't secured to the car. He had those.

/CSB
//They're jinxed!


lol

they aren't for everyone that is for certain

i had a bit of skiing history, so the idea of being locked in wasn't completely foreign.

and i got used to them to the point of becoming dependent on them - which is part of what motivated me to switch

also - i think that clipless limit your body movement so much that it is not a good thing

plus walking in those shoes blow dog & you look like a tool
 
2013-01-28 03:52:32 PM

Rustico: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: but many don't understand that you need a lengthy period to get used to the complete lack of cushion and support and then wonder why thy get hurt

Very much true. I spent a few weeks walking in the Vibrams before I began any running. Even then, my calves took another month to adjust to the mid-strike form.

You CANNOT just "turn the switch" from heel-strike/padded show to mid-strike/minimalist shoe without risking significant injury.


That's true with any change in running form.  You have to ease into it.
 
2013-01-28 03:57:11 PM
VFF are for middle aged housewives to wear to yoga.
 
2013-01-28 04:05:42 PM

seadoo2006: stuhayes2010: I like running in these. I can't run as fast because of lack of cushioning, but I do feel that I use more leg muscles and the run feels more "natural" or fluid. I guess I am smug or a hipster or something.


[www.northwestmilitary.com image 483x304]

/jogs with regular shoes too.

No, you're just annihilating your hip bones ... you should ask my grandfather that used to run with Jesse Owens back in the days before cork running tracks ... yeah ... enjoy those hip replacement surgeries ...

You want the softest impact running exercises you can find ... cork tracks, padded shoes, anything to reduce the strain on bones and muscles due to repetitive impact.


You see, you're not being *natural* enough. If you really want to get back to the life nature intended, you should get yourself eaten by a leopard when you're 34 -- just like our ancestors have been doing for 100's of thousands of years. If you lived like that, you'd never need hip replacements because you'd be leopard-chow long before your hips gave out.
 
2013-01-28 04:07:39 PM

Tri 26.2: Thats what I have, and the soles are by Vibram and designed for trail running. Definitely helped me switch to a midfoot strike.

New Balance Minimus? I have a pair. Love them.


Yup, bought them last summer. Quite comfortable to just wear casually too.
 
2013-01-28 04:08:22 PM

mbillips: hitlersbrain: JackieRabbit: hitlersbrain: The human body is all round pretty crappy. We are bad design incarnate, why do you think we need so many machines just to survive? Tech is our only trick and it's funny how so many people keep saying tech is bad. Without it we would either starve or be lion food.

There is a couple of hundred thousand years of human natural history that proves you are either a troll or utterly stupid.

You mean where we almost died as a species? Many times over? We suck at everything. No natural weapons, slow as hell, weak as hell, no armor no camouflage, crappy eyes, crappy ears, crappy sense of smell, not even much of a fur coat. Again, why else would we have all this tech? Why else would we need huge brains? Sorry to burst your bubble.

We're good at distance running. We can run pretty much any prey to death, because they overheat and we don't because of sweat and a low-energy bipedal gait.


We're also good at socializing, allowing us to overwhelm other animals with our numbers. Additionally, we can digest a wider variety of foods than nearly any other animal, allowing us to survive in varied environments and increase our numbers.

Humans have killed pretty much every animal we've encountered with nothing more advanced than pointy sticks and sharp rocks. We can use our brains to find workarounds for our lack of natural weapons, camouflage, etc. On the other hand, a tiger can't bite its way into developing a cooperative social structure with other tigers.
 
2013-01-28 04:16:52 PM

kab: MasterPlanz: Also, I am so old I am not entirely certain what 'hipster' means.

FARK definition of hipster = anything I dislike, or have no firsthand knowledge of (which automatically means it's bad).


"Witchcraft" is SOOO 19th century
 
2013-01-28 04:24:37 PM
I'm in the same boat as a few of the others posters.

I just recently switched from conventional running shoes to the fivefingers. I no longer have any shin splint pain and feel as if I can run forever.

Do what feels best.
 
2013-01-28 04:29:49 PM
I'll start taking barefoot runners seriously when I finish a race behind some.

/form drills and a couple barefoot strides give you 100% of the benefits
 
2013-01-28 04:55:37 PM
I'm a minimalist runner. Once a year or so is good enough
 
2013-01-28 04:58:39 PM

AngryJailhouseFistfark: What about that study that finds that while Homo sapiens is capable of running long distances, there is no evolutionary benefit to it and it's not something that would ever have been done on purpose prior to the late 19th century.

Sprinting, even jogging for some moderate distance while hunting herd animals makes sense. Certainly not more than a mile or so, for the herds don't stampede that far and besides, once you've spooked them into stampeding, you've bungled the hunt and you're back to the clan's village to weave baskets or do women's work. But again, look at the vast majority of human existence: it's been 6,500 years since God created man and gave him dominion over the Earth and most of that has been without shoes and on unpaved trails and fields. It's not just the African Negro who's gone barefoot, but all people, White and Slavs and even the Punjabi Indians have spent most of human history barefoot, except for the foot-binding, which is practiced by the Chinaman.

No, running shoes accommodate a modern hobby, the running, and to do so barefoot is a foolishness, unless it is done on a natural surface like grass or dirt or asphalt or sand. And then it should not be for more than the distance one can shoot an arrow.


THis is Gold.
 
2013-01-28 05:02:18 PM

Smeggy Smurf: Knee problems while running? This this instead

[bikereviews.com image 600x378]


If I wanted a machine to do the work for me I'd just drive.
 
2013-01-28 05:03:22 PM

PirateKing: I am not one of those people who wear running shoes everywhere. So when I need to dress up, I wear a pair of these:

[d1535dk28ea235.cloudfront.net image 460x329]


Indeed.

www.bundyology.com
 
2013-01-28 05:20:37 PM

jshine: You see, you're not being *natural* enough. If you really want to get back to the life nature intended, you should get yourself eaten by a leopard when you're 34 -- just like our ancestors have been doing for 100's of thousands of years. If you lived like that, you'd never need hip replacements because you'd be leopard-chow long before your hips gave ou


I'd rather be eaten by a cougar. Maybe not. At my age, the nearest cougar would be the 71 year old hooker down a few threads.
 
2013-01-28 05:36:18 PM
I'll just wait over here until the motorized model is done.
 
2013-01-28 05:56:30 PM

stuhayes2010: I like running in these. I can't run as fast because of lack of cushioning, but I do feel that I use more leg muscles and the run feels more "natural" or fluid. I guess I am smug or a hipster or something.


[www.northwestmilitary.com image 483x304]

/jogs with regular shoes too.


I use the vibrams as martial arts shoes if the room is too cold to go barefoot or if the surface isn't ideal, like asphalt or splintery wood. Basically like wrestling shoes for my purposes, but with a little bit more flexibility. They're pretty comfortable in this application, too.
 
2013-01-28 06:03:58 PM

randomjsa: inner ted: mt. biked with these for over a decade

Those are jinxed anyway.

One guy ditched his bike and it ended up going down a hill. In his defense he did it so he wouldn't hit a kid. He had those...

Another guy managed to mangle his arm in a fall. He had those.

Finally a guy pulled off and found his bike wasn't secured to the car. He had those.

/CSB
//They're jinxed!


Wrong Alt - no blame of Obama included.
 
2013-01-28 06:49:33 PM

Jument: sigdiamond2000: lohphat: The Larch: lohphat: If people are spending $59M on "minimalist shoes", thn they aren't athletes, they're "tools".

Americans spend over 200 times that much on bottled water.

Yes, people sure do spend a lot to run around barefoot, but they spend an incredibly huge amount to drink something that comes out of the tap for free.

This is me not disagreeing with you.

Never underestimate the stupidity of people in large numbers.


I can nearly always find a case of 24 12-ounce bottles of water for $3.99 at my local grocery store.

Drinking a cold bottle of water from my fridge and chucking the bottle in the recycling bin rather than grabbing a glass and filling it with not-cold water (and then washing it out when I'm done) is worth $3.99 to me.

I'm paying (minimally) for the convenience. I'm not paying for the water.

Consider: it takes energy to recycle that multitude of bottles, energy to remake the bottles, energy to run the bottling plant, energy to ship the water, etc. That last one is especially ludicrous when you stop and think about it. What you are doing is about as far from "green" as you can possibly get while drinking water. If you're ok with that, so be it. But at least think about it.


Just for that, I'm throwing away more recyclables today and probably tomorrow.

\ everyday actually
 
2013-01-28 06:50:16 PM

cryinoutloud: mike_d85: The Larch: lohphat: If people are spending $59M on "minimalist shoes", thn they aren't athletes, they're "tools".
Americans spend over 200 times that much on bottled water.
Yes, people sure do spend a lot to run around barefoot, but they spend an incredibly huge amount to drink something that comes out of the tap for free.
You live with your parents don't you?

You're a consumer whore, aren't you?


Isn't everyone?
 
2013-01-28 07:14:48 PM

Cyclonic Cooking Action: cryinoutloud: mike_d85: The Larch: lohphat: If people are spending $59M on "minimalist shoes", thn they aren't athletes, they're "tools".
Americans spend over 200 times that much on bottled water.
Yes, people sure do spend a lot to run around barefoot, but they spend an incredibly huge amount to drink something that comes out of the tap for free.
You live with your parents don't you?

You're a consumer whore, aren't you?

Isn't everyone?


Cyclonic Cooking Action: cryinoutloud: mike_d85: The Larch: lohphat: If people are spending $59M on "minimalist shoes", thn they aren't athletes, they're "tools".
Americans spend over 200 times that much on bottled water.
Yes, people sure do spend a lot to run around barefoot, but they spend an incredibly huge amount to drink something that comes out of the tap for free.
You live with your parents don't you?

You're a consumer whore, aren't you?

Isn't everyone?


You don't speak for me.
 
2013-01-28 08:14:28 PM
Running on your toes is FASTER. Not necessarily lower impact on your body.
Running so your heel comes down hard, is just all around bad.

If you are running CORRECTLY your heel will strike first however following the design of your foot it will roll forward.and dispersing the energy across your foot rather than a single point of impact. The power then comes from the front of your foot and then your toes pushing off.

If you want a different concept of this. Compare it to jumping off something high. You can land completely straight legged, you will fark up your knee. You can land with completely bunched up legs, you will fark up your ankle, knees and tendons. Or you could land with legs slightly bent allowing your whole body to absorb the impact.

From when your foot touches ground in front of you until it is just behind you all you are doing is dispersing the energy from your stride. Just after your foot is below you it transitions into power. If your foot steps are really loud when running, you are doing it wrong (this will happen for both landing on the front of the foot and coming down to hard on your heal. If you are running correctly it will be very quiet, you can easily sneak up on people if you are running correctly.


This is why sprinters run on their toes. It is faster.
This is why endurance runners use their whole foot, it is lower impact on the body.
This is why people who land on their heels complain about their joints.
If you are running competitively you will take more damage than if you just go out for a really long run there are trade offs to going faster and the trade off is the damage done to your body.


That being said the surface you are running on makes a huge difference. (Reason for surface and not talking about shoes, many shoe cushions cause you to run poorly). What you can do is select locations where you will have a solid footing but the ground will give way even slightly (limestone trails, hard packed dirt, grass, or hard sand) rather than running at places which will cause joint damage (cement, concrete, asphalt) or places that you are likely to run poorly in due to increased cushioning (soft sand).

Do not worry the hipsters are still wrong running on your toes is retarded. You lazy farks are right to a certain extent, can't take joint damage if you don't use the joints, but that is not entirely correct neglect can have just as bad consequences.


My point is the study was stupid we already know that landing on your heel is better...but only if you use the rest of your foot to help cushion and disperse the energy.
 
2013-01-28 08:14:44 PM
I'm also here to recommend the NB minimus series. I haven't run since, what, middle school and decided the bike just wasn't enough exercise, and these shoes are treating me right. That said, I have no basis of comparison with big clunky padded shoes but these are light, encourage a mid strike, and aren't heinously ugly.
 
2013-01-28 09:38:13 PM

stuhayes2010: I like running in these. I can't run as fast because of lack of cushioning, but I do feel that I use more leg muscles and the run feels more "natural" or fluid. I guess I am smug or a hipster or something.


[www.northwestmilitary.com image 483x304]

/jogs with regular shoes too.


I had a classmate who wore those every day to chemistry, except in blue. He also biked to class. He was a farking stoner, like the bad kind. The kind that shows up to class blazed out of his mind, if he shows up at all, and can't stay focused for two minutes. He claimed to be a physics major, but he dropped out of Chem 101.
 
2013-01-28 10:26:37 PM

Rustico: My experience is simple: ran using traditional padded shoes (fitted at renowned running stores) and developed problems with my legs; ran using minimalist shoes (Vibrams) and mid-strike and leg problems went away.

Entirely possible that had I run using modern shows AND a mid-strike stride I might not have ever developed the leg issues.


Yeah, I've always found padded shoes uncomfortable... but until the minimalist running fad came along I'd assumed running in unpadded shoes was bad for me. I'd still run for exercise and because my dog needed it, but I never got to the point where I enjoyed it.

The minimalist shoe fad let me retrain my running style to something much more comfortable, and I don't use expensive shoes at all. Give me an old pair of unpadded sneakers or teva sandles (ok, a bit expensive, but I wear them all summer anyway) and I actually prefer a light jog to walking.
 
2013-01-29 02:16:29 AM
When I was boy there was no such thing as a "running shoe", only canvas tops with flat soles without that annoying arch support. I tried running shoes, but ended up with sore knees, sore feet, and twisted ankles. They also wore out fast. Since I switched to so-called zero drop shoes, all those problems are gone and my shoes last years instead of months.
 
kab
2013-01-29 09:08:04 AM

inner ted: maybe give the platforms a try... they are a bit to get used to at first, but i think you may be surprised


During my brief stint with mountain biking (there really aren't that many fun places to ride around here), I always absolutely hated clip-ins. Growing up riding BMX probably had everything to do with that.

/can't live w/o them on the road sled, however.
 
2013-01-29 10:15:49 AM

kab: inner ted: maybe give the platforms a try... they are a bit to get used to at first, but i think you may be surprised

During my brief stint with mountain biking (there really aren't that many fun places to ride around here), I always absolutely hated clip-ins. Growing up riding BMX probably had everything to do with that.

/can't live w/o them on the road sled, however.


i'd sure be curious about roadies using flats - i think there would still be benefits for you & it'd be easier to get used to them as you don't really have to worry about technical aspects of a trail
 
2013-01-29 08:21:28 PM

hitlersbrain: JackieRabbit: hitlersbrain: The human body is all round pretty crappy. We are bad design incarnate, why do you think we need so many machines just to survive? Tech is our only trick and it's funny how so many people keep saying tech is bad. Without it we would either starve or be lion food.

There is a couple of hundred thousand years of human natural history that proves you are either a troll or utterly stupid.

You mean where we almost died as a species? Many times over? We suck at everything. No natural weapons, slow as hell, weak as hell, no armor no camouflage, crappy eyes, crappy ears, crappy sense of smell, not even much of a fur coat. Again, why else would we have all this tech? Why else would we need huge brains? Sorry to burst your bubble.


Read the article about persistence hunting. We can chase horses and deer until THEY DROP DEAD. That is amazing stamina.
 
Displayed 152 of 152 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report