36 replies to this topic

[NikonUser]

Hi there,

I'm just starting out in my quest to become fit and healthy through running/jogging/walking and need a pair of shoes...

To give you an idea of the sort of training I'll be doing... It'll be something along the lines of the couch-5kms program and also a decent amount of walking to burn those calories.

Can anyone point me in the right direction in where I should be looking for shoes? Is 'The Athletes Foot' fit system thingy any good?

Also, just as a rough guide...how much do you think I should be looking at spending?

Thanks very much

Paul

[WozFasta]

Hi NikonUser,

To help you avoid what I and many others have endured (hassle, confusion, cost, time, injury, frustration, mood swings, variable opinion and dubious expertise), I offer the following:

Seriously, don't buy shoes before you see a podiatrist and get a proper assessment.
The cost is a lot less than the price of a decent pair of shoes and you may save several hundred dollars, several dozen hours of mucking about in various shops, and quite likely several injuries, simply by going to a podiatrist first.
It's worth the investment, even if right now you think it may be over the top for a "casual" jogger ambition.
If the running bug bites, you will be doing more than 5k in time to come, or likely doing that e few times a week. The wrong shoes will show their dark side and it won't be fun.
If you can't find a pod (look in the Aus Runners World mags - your library may have some to borrow), go to a SPECIALIST running shoe store.
I have had mixed success with Athelete's Foot - theoretical fit is one thing, what you walk out with can (and has been) another. Besides, their technology, while being a long way better than nothing, still takes only a static shot, whereas a good pod will use dynamic analysis. After all, you don't run standing still do you?

(I'm not a podiatrist or shareholder in any store either)

Don't know where you are, but on the off chance it's Perth, go to Peak Podiatry in Subiaco, and/or Runners World also in Subiaco for a specialist store.

As to cost, you should pay between $160 and $220 depending on the brand and "complexity" of shoe you require. Don't scrimp on this, it's not worth injuring yourself and incurring thousands of dollars of surgery, or months of pain and frustration from injury just for a few bucks. Besides, with running, you really only have to buy shoes, the rest is free(-ish).
Then, start easy, go easy, and Enjoy!

[AussieRunner]

Hi NikonUser
Firstly, congratulations on starting to run.

I would like to reitirate what WozFasta has said. I know too well from experience what it is like to buy the wrong runner. I used to think all runners were the same. As soon as I started to go longer distances, the problems began in my lower legs. Lots of frustration and pain, but finally sorted it out with correct shoes after visiting podiatrist. I had no idea, but I found out that my feet roll in alot and are extremely flat and I was in a neutral shoe, when I really needed something that was going to give me support and correct the problem.

See a podiatrist first who will tell you what type of feet you have. A good sports one will tell you what type of runner will suit. Then go along to a good shop. Not sure where you are , but "Active Feet" are very good.

Don't muck around! You'll save yourself alot of expense and pain. Prevention is better than cure!
Good luck with your goals!

[NikonUser]

Thanks for the suggestions,

Sounds like a podiatrist is the way to go.

Do you think I should wait until I can actually run (for more than 30 seconds) before I go and see the podiatrist? Or won't it matter when I go (ie, the earlier the better)?

Paul

[AussieRunner]

I guess everyone is different. I didn't have physical problems until I did too much too soon, but it was going to happen eventually while I had the incorrect runners on my very flat feet.

I obviously don't know your financial situation either, but personally, I'd make sure running is something I really enjoy. Otherwise, I'd have kicked myself after spending the dollars on shoes, then finding I wasn't as keen as I was before. Luckily, I am still hooked almost 2 years down the track (no pun intended )

Maybe there are others on this forum that have had problems from the beginning that would advise you to go and sort it now, but I can only go by my own experience.

[brizza]

pommierunner, on Oct 5 2006, 04:04 PM, said:

I guess everyone is different. I didn't have physical problems until I did too much too soon, but it was going to happen eventually while I had the incorrect runners on my very flat feet.

I obviously don't know your financial situation either, but personally, I'd make sure running is something I really enjoy. Otherwise, I'd have kicked myself after spending the dollars on shoes, then finding I wasn't as keen as I was before. Luckily, I am still hooked almost 2 years down the track (no pun intended )

Maybe there are others on this forum that have had problems from the beginning that would advise you to go and sort it now, but I can only go by my own experience.

head off to your local friendly specialist running shoe shop,athletes foot is like coffee from a franchise coffee shop-why would you-tell cool running where you live and some one will know the nearest one-brizza

[NikonUser]

I live in Mornington, Victoria.

You guys have been very helpful with my 5 posts so far

Paul

[WozFasta]

Hi NikonUser / Paul,

One other thing you may want to consider which may not pop up on any podiatrist's radar is shoes by a crowd called Locos.

They sell by internet, with a money back offer.
Their point is, basic shoes, that keep their design for 5 years so runners that use them can stick with them.
One of the the blokes who is amodereator on this site is an owner of Locos, I think.
Again, whether a pod recommends them or not, I wouldn't know.
There are quite a few folks on thsi site who seem to use them.
(I don't have shares in Locos or use their shoes)
This is just another idea for what may become a verey busy head-space shoe wise)
The website is here: Locos Australia

Hasta la Fasta Baby!

[SlowDave]

With the podiatrist recommendations I was wondering what sort of recommendations come from the podiatrist. Is it for a type of shoe or a particular model or brand? And if it's for a particular model, what happens then the following year when the model changes.

The reason I switched to Loco's (on my second pair) was because of the big change between 2070 and 2090. If I had been recommended 2070 by a podiatrist, I'd probably back again the following year to get a new recommendation.

[samplesize]

hi NikonUser!

congratulations in taking the first steps to running comfortably and reducing the risk of injury! (pun intended)

from this sneaker freaker's perspective, definitely see a podiatrist as WozFasta and pommierunner suggest - even if you're not running yet!

WozFasta, on Oct 5 2006, 12:12 AM, said:

Seriously, don't buy shoes before you see a podiatrist and get a proper assessment.

... please note - some podiatrists are better at foot pathologies and some are better at biomechanical assessment - some also have a much richer understanding of footwear technologies and footwear function than others.. either way, it's still worth the investment for identifying foot type, structure and needs.

AND as far as footwear specifically - thanks SlowDave - it's the construction and features, not simply a specific brand or model, AND the models DO normally change every 12 months and can significantly alter fit and to a lesser extend function (how about Kayano's 12 year history back and forth from motion control to neutral) - THEREFORE, it's best for a podiatrist to recommend features and function over specific models

ALL brands are starting to get serious about footwear solutions for different foot types and shapes - I personally recommend you look at a running shoe with both heel and forefoot cushioning to combat the unforgiving surfaces we tend to step on - this usually means a shoe starting at AU$150-160 RRP - I normally run in models between AU$160 & AU$200 and have been very happy.

although athlete's foot is not getting a great wrap so far, these types of stores liase with local podiatrists, staff have ongoing training sessions, and they should go out of their way to fit you appropriately - same goes for any store claiming to offer a specialist fit

best of luck in your quest!

samplesize

Edited by samplesize, 06 October 2006 - 11:02 AM.

[AussieRunner]

Hi SlowDave
I saw a sports pod who gave me 3 or 4 models of shoes, and told me why they would be ok for me feet. She pointed out the parts of the shoe that gave me support in the right places and what to look for when shopping for runners. I'm learning as I go basically. So far so good with the reccommendation she gave me. I need mid foot and rear foot support.
I learnt from her that I have very flat feet / pronate. Up until then , I had no idea. Thought I had perfect feet.
So in answer to your question, she gave me specific models, but also the type of runner. I'd feel quite confident now shopping for new runners.

[WozFasta]

I looked at this thread again and I think I may not have been entirely fair in what I said about Athlete's Foot. Sorry.
I should have also said that I actually got my latest pair of shoes from them, which seem to be working for me OK so far.
The fact that it could probably have happened at the first attempt instead of messing about with visits to other shops and then back to AF is now moot.
The fitting machine wasn't used to make the final choice, just continual research and trial and error, all on my part, but that's also moot, since it did give me an initial idea of my foot and arch shape. The fact that this did not translate into a successful first choice is now neither here nor there, and may be as much my fault for not insisting on implementing often given advice: try all the models on the wall.
However, the service at the Garden City AF store was impressive and friendly, and everything one could ask for, especially late on a Thursday night 5 minutes before closing time. Well done AF - we may not have got it the 1st time, but between us we seem to have got it in the end.
I reckon their foot fit screens are a good advance on other retailer shoe selection methods, especially for the newbies. Could they go further? Sure but at what expense? Floating pods who visit stores on appointments for those customers who want video treadmill analysis? Maybe, but maybe also too over the top for the bulk trade.
Bottom line? Do personal research. I did...eventually.

[Neavesy]

Howdy everyone, I have just joined CR and stumbled onto this thread and wanted to make mention to any new runner's or long time runner's,

Poditrists are not the best thing on this earth for runner's, like everyone else in here we all have our own experience....

So from my experience with POD's, alot of Pod will be connected to a specific local running store so everyone they see they will send to that store and in turn they will get a free pair of shoes once or twice a year, in saying that yes they can still recommend you get certain types of shoes, but I have been to 6 different Pod's over past 3 years and every single one said I needed orthitics and have over prontaing feet so get a pair of shoes that restrict this, after 3 years of running I went to a well known sports doctor and he said my feet are fine and my running tech are fine, the problem was I had Chronic Shin Splints, 8 weeks later I am using Nike Air Pegasus (nuetral Shoes) and my shins feel amazing, not running big distance's yet but I am sure I will be early 07.

So I guess my point is, Pod have there own agenda when refering customer's and alot of people and runner's I know have been wrongly told they should be wearing anti pronation shoes when they dont need them.

So I think now get as much advice from experienced runner's from local club's or running groups, like everything getting the right pair of shoes takes time.

One thing I do agree with above is $160-$200 is a good price point.

Cheers

[deadcat]

i have to agree with the Pod's being sometimes tied up with a commercial outlet.. but you can ask.. they have to tell you the truth!!!

As a newish runner (5years running on a treadmill and 12 months in the real world) the crunch time came when i made the move to outdoors.. i was recommended Brooks Beasts (super support shoe), but after 6 months of running outdoors i'd shed a lot of weight and was happy to move on to something a bit lighter and with less support.. so as you improve as a runner and change, your needs will change as well

[DECIM8]

All is true, some pods are visited by reps from brands i.e brooks,asics, so they can often have a blurred idea of the shoes. I work at the "foot", The Athletes Foot, and as mentioned we have relationships with some pods, and they will often send customers in with referrals(which is good) then on reading the referrals they have just choosen three or four completely different types of shoes. i.e nimbus, evolution, 1120. which is a little confussing for us and also for the patient.

And there are occasions where pods will know more about shoes than other pods. We have a pod student working in our store. From our end, in what we do, it is best to find out what function or features in the shoe you are chasing and an idea what the pod is trying to achieve. Then you can find a shoe that best fits the individual circumstance.
Most shoes around that 160-$200 price point will offer all the features you need, depending on your foot type,
A $300 shoe could end up doing more harm than a $160 shoe.

[Charli]

When I started running in the US, I was fitted for shoes at a store where the staff were runners and knew what they were talking about. I ended up with a pair of New Balance 761 (I think, it was a while ago!) and they were excellent. When I came to replace them 2 years later, they no longer had that shoe. Very frustrating! Also, the shop had gone and the place I was recommended ended up providing shoes that didn't work as well as they should.
When I lived in Sydney, I went to a place on Victoria Road in Rozelle and was fitted with shoes, following a video assessment. Spent $250+ on Brooks shoes. And then found that within 10 minutes of walking (OK, so I slacked off!), the soles of my feet were burning as the shoes just didn't fit properly.
I guess the moral of the story is that you can get lucky or you can get a lemon. Question the staff about the shoes, give them a good wear in the store and speak up if they don't feel right. It's not the store's fault if they sell you dud shoes because you've not told them how they fit!
I'm now aiming for my 5th C2S and wanting to get back to running. So I'm running the gauntlet of finding a decent store in Adelaide that will give me what I want. Any suggestions??

[Lors]

I realise this post is quite old now but for any new inexperienced runners like myself that may be browsing. I want to share my experience. I started running last year purchased a pair of shoes from a running store that i have trusted with my kids sport shoes for quite some time. Trained up and ran my first half marathon with minimal problems, All good. Bought a new pair of shoes with the same store,struggled to choose between the new version of the model I had or buy model up. Choose the model up which must have made a slight alteration to my biomechanics sustained a knee injury fortunately not serious and achilles tendonitis sadly on different legs. Have been on a very expensive journey with the podiatrist and physio. The good thing that has come out of it all is that due to some inherited genetics I have terrible biomechanics which hopefully with orthotics and a heap of muscle strengthining excercises from the physio will reduce my reocuurance of achilles problems.

The point of this story is money well spent on a pod and a visit to a specialist running store will save problems with injuries later.

[steenbokpixie]

Lors, on Apr 25 2009, 07:30 AM, said:

I realise this post is quite old now but for any new inexperienced runners like myself that may be browsing. I want to share my experience. I started running last year purchased a pair of shoes from a running store that i have trusted with my kids sport shoes for quite some time. Trained up and ran my first half marathon with minimal problems, All good. Bought a new pair of shoes with the same store,struggled to choose between the new version of the model I had or buy model up. Choose the model up which must have made a slight alteration to my biomechanics sustained a knee injury fortunately not serious and achilles tendonitis sadly on different legs. Have been on a very expensive journey with the podiatrist and physio. The good thing that has come out of it all is that due to some inherited genetics I have terrible biomechanics which hopefully with orthotics and a heap of muscle strengthining excercises from the physio will reduce my reocuurance of achilles problems.

The point of this story is money well spent on a pod and a visit to a specialist running store will save problems with injuries later.

Wow, reading all of these replies I feel really lucky that I didn't get any big problems with the shoes I bought when I started running. I got the Nike Air Max+ (greeeen ) and had some strange backwards shin splints for my first couple of days, but assumed they just had to do with me never running before because they then turned into calf muscle pain, which is what I was expecting, and then that mellowed out as well. Very happy with the shoes so far, though maybe it's just because I'm comparing to the old sneakers I used to wear day to day. Definitely seeing a professional when I end up needing to buy new shoes, though.

Edited by steenbokpixie, 24 July 2009 - 11:08 PM.

[mattrockell]

NikonUser, on Oct 5 2006, 04:23 PM, said:

Do you think I should wait until I can actually run (for more than 30 seconds) before I go and see the podiatrist? Or won't it matter when I go (ie, the earlier the better)?

Paul

If there's one thing that can be said for running injuries it's that they're almost always caused by the repitition of the stride magnifying an often small biomechanical innefficiency.

If you're one of the lucky ones that has no mechanical problems you'll have he peace of mind of knowing that...conversly, should you have some underlying potential problem, you can pick it up ealry and prevent it from causing you trouble in the future.

Prevention is always better than cure.

Take yourself of to see a pod or at the very least a specialty running store if you have one that you can get to.

Enjoy running!

Matt

[absolutebeginner]

I went to Athletes foot several months ago and was recommended a pair of neutral shoes, have since had problems with my back and have been told by a podiatrist that I need supportive shoes as my feet roll in! So i'd recommend a podiatrist too. Good luck!

[njclifford]

Just my experience with Athlete's Foot considering all the questionable stuff I have been reading about them....

Had my meniscus reattached to my knee a few years back. Anyway had never run before and KNEW I would need something to support it. Unknowingly, I trusted AF and went and got shoes fitted. Pronate a fair bit and they recommended Asics Kayano 13's. Not sure if this was really be best fit (being a noob), but seemed one of the more expensive shoes they sold.

Anyway, went to A-Mart NEXT DOOR and they had the SAME shoe $60 cheaper. Went back into AF and said '$60 cheaper next door. Meet me half way as I feel loyal spending 45 minutes on your fancy foot machine!' To my surprise, thje guy at AF said 'We do NOT drop our prices or price match!'

OMG, I was happy to meet them half way, and anyway, went to Amart and got them cheaper!

Years on, have had NO pain at all in my knees - of course standard muscle pain, but NOTHING in the way of knee or shin splints.

Either I am VERY LUCKY or AF actually recommended the RIGHT shoe.

Am buying new shoes, and am probably getting the Kayano 16's. Should I go and get my feet re-tested? Or should the 16's perform similarly to the 13's??

Thanks

Nick.

[Zorba]

can i ask why it matters if the model changes the following year?

if the shoes you have are still comfortable then why do you need to upgrade. or do you replace your shoes once per year and if the model changes you have to go on the search for a new shoe?

[njclifford]

What I meant was the 13's I have now are old and showing signs of wear. I was curious as to whether they change the fit of the shoe a lot between models. I am happy to go get a set of 16's as have been VERY happy with the 13's.

That was all.

Nick

[Bellthorpe]

Zorba, on Oct 22 2010, 08:05 AM, said:

can i ask why it matters if the model changes the following year?

if the shoes you have are still comfortable then why do you need to upgrade. or do you replace your shoes once per year and if the model changes you have to go on the search for a new shoe?

I don't think you'll find anyone who changes their shoes because there's a new model out.

You replace your shoes when they're worn out. And if the model's changed, you might have to buy a new model. And if it works for you as well, good. If it doesn't, you might have to look for something else.

I wear Mizuno shoes. My view is that model changes have no practical effect, so I go to some trouble to buy superseded models, because they're cheaper.

[Rico]

There have been some famous/notorious transformations of shoe models that have caused people who thought they had found their shoe for life to have to start all over again. Nike and New Balance seem to be the biggest offenders.

In general I think people credit (or discredit) their shoes with way too much of a role in their form or injuries. That said, I totally blame my new Pegasus for the twisted ankle that has had me out of action for 2 weeks and trashed my Deep Space Mountain preparation.

[noumenon]

I had a New Balance 781 for a number of years, and was quite happy with it. Wearing it regularly for casual, walking, cycling and some jogging. But almost no high speed turning.

About 6 months ago I dropped into the NB wharehouse near here and bought a pair of 413's, but only recently started wearing them because my 781's tread has pretty much gone.

The 413's are ok for walking, haven't tried them yet for cycling, and I don't seem to notice much problems with jogging either, but recently I started doing some shuttle runs, and my feet seem to float inside them when I do 180 degree turns at the 20 meter marks. IOW I probably need some "stability" or "motion control" shoes? Perhaps something more suited to say a hard court sport? Something like tennis or, whatever involves turning at high speed on asphalt, pavement, or even uneven hard ground. Indoor court sports are usually played on smooth wooden floors, which is not the same as grass nor bitumen roads.

So I am not sure now, but might make an appointment with my podiatrist and get some ideas off her, or even go get measured at the nearest AF, and then go back to New Balance and pick up one of their suitable clearance / sale shoes that meet the requirements?

I have had both plantar released surgically in '98 and '02, and still pronate. And jogging more than 5 laps with the new 413's give me some aches in the arches.

[noumenon]

noumenon, on Oct 29 2010, 02:01 PM, said:

I had a New Balance 781 for a number of years, and was quite happy with it. Wearing it regularly for casual, walking, cycling and some jogging. But almost no high speed turning.

About 6 months ago I dropped into the NB wharehouse near here and bought a pair of 413's, but only recently started wearing them because my 781's tread has pretty much gone.

The 413's are ok for walking, haven't tried them yet for cycling, and I don't seem to notice much problems with jogging either, but recently I started doing some shuttle runs, and my feet seem to float inside them when I do 180 degree turns at the 20 meter marks. IOW I probably need some "stability" or "motion control" shoes? Perhaps something more suited to say a hard court sport? Something like tennis or, whatever involves turning at high speed on asphalt, pavement, or even uneven hard ground. Indoor court sports are usually played on smooth wooden floors, which is not the same as grass nor bitumen roads.

So I am not sure now, but might make an appointment with my podiatrist and get some ideas off her, or even go get measured at the nearest AF, and then go back to New Balance and pick up one of their suitable clearance / sale shoes that meet the requirements?

I have had both plantar released surgically in '98 and '02, and still pronate. And jogging more than 5 laps with the new 413's give me some aches in the arches.

Just purchased my MR1226BS from New Balance. $250 But got it for $187. We'll see how it goes with the sprints and turns.

[BarefootBj]

absolutebeginner, on 21 March 2010 - 11:57 AM, said:

I went to Athletes foot several months ago and was recommended a pair of neutral shoes, have since had problems with my back and have been told by a podiatrist that I need supportive shoes as my feet roll in! So i'd recommend a podiatrist too. Good luck!

Holy thread revival Batman!

I'm constantly amazed at the recommendation of supportive shoes and orthodontics etc by Pods when the real issue for injuries is poor running technique!
I've been running for almost a year in no shoes or in Vibrams with no injuries (had cronic shin splints previously) because they promote proper running technique.

If you run properly, it doesn't matter what's on your feet. That said, minimalist, barefoot or 'zero drop' shoes promote better running form and all newbies should look into getting their form right as early as possible.

I like to say that we're all born to run - just not in cushioned shoes!

[sportsphysio]

BarefootBj, on 03 December 2011 - 11:25 AM, said:

Holy thread revival Batman!

I'm constantly amazed at the recommendation of supportive shoes and orthodontics etc by Pods when the real issue for injuries is poor running technique!
I've been running for almost a year in no shoes or in Vibrams with no injuries (had cronic shin splints previously) because they promote proper running technique.

If you run properly, it doesn't matter what's on your feet. That said, minimalist, barefoot or 'zero drop' shoes promote better running form and all newbies should look into getting their form right as early as possible.

I like to say that we're all born to run - just not in cushioned shoes!

BarefootBj

If only it were that simple. Putting on VFFs or similar doesn't automatically correct technique. It will work for some, will fail for others and, if done right, may work for those in between. The biggest issue I see clinically, ie. once runners have broken themselves, is that they cast away the evil runners and switch to VFFs overnight. Good intentions but it's akin to deciding you want upper body strength and starting with a 200kg bench press. Barefooting needs to be a gradual shift and can augment a shod runners program, rather than the runner needing to choose teams and commit 100%.

For more in-depth reasoning and discussion, see "Barefoot running: back to basics or misguided principles"

SP

[BarefootBj]

sportsphysio, on 18 December 2011 - 05:24 PM, said:

BarefootBj

If only it were that simple. Putting on VFFs or similar doesn't automatically correct technique. It will work for some, will fail for others and, if done right, may work for those in between. The biggest issue I see clinically, ie. once runners have broken themselves, is that they cast away the evil runners and switch to VFFs overnight. Good intentions but it's akin to deciding you want upper body strength and starting with a 200kg bench press. Barefooting needs to be a gradual shift and can augment a shod runners program, rather than the runner needing to choose teams and commit 100%.

For more in-depth reasoning and discussion, see "Barefoot running: back to basics or misguided principles"

SP

Hi,
I agree with you. Partially I should have specified that it's down to running technique and not just taking the shoes off.. Effectively I had to relearn how to run ( for the better) and the focus was on improving my technique and running barefoot facilitated this.. Transitioning, as you say, takes time and one has to start slow (like walking barefoot).

Re the Sydney Running article, I'm not sure if this was written by you or someone else but clearly it was written by someone with no idea of barefoot running (just bringing up the 'modern' hard surfaces argument is just silly - hard, smooth surfaces is one of the best for running barefoot. Try running in the bush - that's hard). And - despite claiming otherwise - I found it extremely negative towards barefooting and with a strong bias for shod running. A little like Fox News claiming to be 'Fair and balanced'...

I just hope that new runners take the time to explore the options available to them and try running naturally and at least give up destructive heel striking and focus on running right - regardless of footwear (or lack thereof).

Merry Christmas

[sportsphysio]

BarefootBj, on 25 December 2011 - 09:07 AM, said:

Hi,
I agree with you. Partially I should have specified that it's down to running technique and not just taking the shoes off.. Effectively I had to relearn how to run ( for the better) and the focus was on improving my technique and running barefoot facilitated this.. Transitioning, as you say, takes time and one has to start slow (like walking barefoot).

Re the Sydney Running article, I'm not sure if this was written by you or someone else but clearly it was written by someone with no idea of barefoot running (just bringing up the 'modern' hard surfaces argument is just silly - hard, smooth surfaces is one of the best for running barefoot. Try running in the bush - that's hard). And - despite claiming otherwise - I found it extremely negative towards barefooting and with a strong bias for shod running. A little like Fox News claiming to be 'Fair and balanced'...

I just hope that new runners take the time to explore the options available to them and try running naturally and at least give up destructive heel striking and focus on running right - regardless of footwear (or lack thereof).

Merry Christmas

The article, as with most of our articles, is written by one main author with input from a number of people (usually 1-3 from different professional backgrounds). The focus is always to examine the current research on the topic and to present a view based on research findings with minimal personal opinion (any personal opinion is stated as such in the article).

Were there any statements in particular that you found specifically negative towards barefoot? Any comments should be justified by research findings so I'd be keen on making sure that has happened by providing the paper that the statement was based on.

Interestingly, it seems we all agree on the importance of running technique but opinions are divided on which foot strike pattern is best. This is probably due to the different types of running where fast runners need the higher performance of a forefoot strike pattern whereas longer distance runners needed the improved efficiency of a heel strike pattern.

Merry Xmas


And FYI, the Fox News comparison hurts, really hurts . Those monsters.

[BarefootBj]

sportsphysio, on 25 December 2011 - 08:51 PM, said:

The article, as with most of our articles, is written by one main author with input from a number of people (usually 1-3 from different professional backgrounds). The focus is always to examine the current research on the topic and to present a view based on research findings with minimal personal opinion (any personal opinion is stated as such in the article).

Were there any statements in particular that you found specifically negative towards barefoot? Any comments should be justified by research findings so I'd be keen on making sure that has happened by providing the paper that the statement was based on.

Interestingly, it seems we all agree on the importance of running technique but opinions are divided on which foot strike pattern is best. This is probably due to the different types of running where fast runners need the higher performance of a forefoot strike pattern whereas longer distance runners needed the improved efficiency of a heel strike pattern.

Merry Xmas


And FYI, the Fox News comparison hurts, really hurts . Those monsters.

I'm sorry for the Fox News comparison, that was too harsh..

However I can't agree that heel striking is ever a good option when running as it is created by running in cushioned shoes and not natural biomechanics...

Here's an interesting article, in Podiatry Today no less, http://www.podiatryt...arefoot-running

[sportsphysio]

BarefootBj, on 04 January 2012 - 10:03 AM, said:

However I can't agree that heel striking is ever a good option when running as it is created by running in cushioned shoes and not natural biomechanics...

Here's an interesting article, in Podiatry Today no less, http://www.podiatryt...arefoot-running

It's difficult to find a source of reliable info on the topic that doesn't have some degree of bias. Our Podiatry Today author has a Facebook page where he presents his "101 reasons to run in a minimalist shoe".

For most aspects of barefoot running and even foot strike generally, the research world doesn't have much solid evidence. The evidence that is out there is riddled with assumptions and statements from the authors that are unsupported, so even the evidence can be misleading. So here's my take, purely opinion based and up for argument/discussion/revenge attacks:

* Forefoot strike generates more stored energy in the Achilles tendon and is a higher performance technique
* Heel strike is more efficient/economical and utilises the "roll thru" action of the foot, suitable for longer distances
* I don't believe anyone out there can run an ultra on their toes
* I don't believe anyone out there can sprint quickly on their heels
* It's likely that 80% of runners are suitable for shod running and 80% are suitable for barefoot running (ie. the overlap can take their pick and there will be 20% who aren't suited to one option). I see just as many patients who are cured by going barefoot as I do getting injured by barefooting.

I liken the shoes vs barefoot debate to the vegetarian vs omnivore debate: neither team is willing to concede and both teams present reasonable arguments. The simple answer is that there is not one right answer, just options.

[SpecBGT]

I don't really see the point in discussing foot strike on its on own. One has to look at the total running posture.

[BarefootBj]

sportsphysio, on 04 January 2012 - 08:38 PM, said:

* I don't believe anyone out there can run an ultra on their toes

I agree the debate won't be won by either side, but it's fun discussing!
I also agree that it's not just about foot strike but the whole running form, which takes time to get right

BTW, re the above, I've run a ultra, albeit a small one at 52k, in Vibrams and will do TNF100 in them this year.. Does that count?

[russell2pi]

BarefootBj, on 03 December 2011 - 11:25 AM, said:

I'm constantly amazed at the recommendation of supportive shoes and orthodontics etc by Pods

Jesus, I'm all for the latest shoe company jibbajab but when they start telling me I need straight teeth to run properly, that's where I draw the line!

[Flash187]

Hey guys

I know this thread has taken many turns but as a relative newcomer Ive had some concerns about footwear of late and being a believer in 'prevention' being the best medicine (I already have the running bug!) I am looking for anyone that has had pod experience in south east Melbourne to maybe be start me off with in the right direction?

Any help/advice is appreciated

Cheers