37 replies to this topic

[goldie*]

Morning all!

I've been running for only 5 weeks now and told myself that when I'm up to the 30 min mark I would get a new pair of shoes. So, rightly or wrongly, I went to Athletes Foot to see what they said about my feet. I always thought I had pretty normal feet (and footprints) but their machine said that I need 'rolling in' shoes. I tried on 3 pairs and thought that the Reeboks felt the best.

BIG MISTAKE! I have been for 3 runs with them now and just want to cry when I reach around 10-20 mins. They seem to have affected my right knee, my left ankle and worst of all it gets to feel like there's a big bar going across inside the shoe under the balls of my feet. The left one especially feels like a huge lump. Even when I start walking then it still hurts the bottom of my feet.

However, when I first go out I can't feel it - only a change in the shoe which the assistant said is to assist in the foot pushing off. I tend to shuffle when I get a bit tired and stop concentrating and so at the time I thought the shoe sounded good. (and it felt good too but now i'm not sure whether it just felt good in comparison with the other 2)

Anyway, I've read on here that people have had success in returning shoes and swapping for another brand/model. But I wonder if AF would be likely just to refund the money???

I'm keen to spend some time looking around and will probably stick to Asics as I was always happy with my old shoes. Just don't want to feel pressured about picking something from their quite limited selection.

Thanks everyone. This forum is great and a real help / boost for anyone starting running.

Edited by harvey998, 20 July 2007 - 12:35 PM.

[Jogger]

No expereince of athletes foot, but a decent store would take the shoes back even if they just give you a credit note for the full amount as a show of goodwill superior shoe companies, ahem, like Loco would give you a full refund.

[Steve 'The Footman']

If you went for advice and that advice was wrong then you should be able to get a refund.

You should have gone to a specialist running store instead then you would have got better advice.IMO

The fitprint device has a lot of problems with it including:
1. They have never been calibrated which shoud be done every 40 hours of use and they are years old.
2. Standing posture is not very predictive of running biomechanics.
3. Walking across a pressure mat has little to do with what your feet are doing running. (The fitprint is not sufficiently strong in MHz to capture running)
4. It takes years of training not hours of training to make accurate predictions from pressure patterns about what your foot is doing and what it needs.

Get a refund then try alot of shoes on and run in them before buying (not just Asics). The only place you will be able to do this is at a running specialist.

Please note disclosure of interest: I own a running specialist sports store.

[blair]

I went to Athlete's Foot and got sold completely the wrong shoe for my foot type which I didn't find out until I had to see a podiatrist after all sorts of problems (the onset of meta tarsel syndrome). My pod told me to go and see Steve and the guys at Intraining and they sold me the right shoe and I have not had a problem since. I would not go back to Athlete's Foot.

I have no affiliation with Intraining.

[Fiftyplus]

Just return the shoes if you are not happy. My wife bought Gym shoes from Athletes Foot recently and it took 3 goes until she was happy, they just replaced them with different shoes.

[Whippet gal]

A supposed 'knowledgeable' staff person at Rebel advised me to try a certain show when I was looking at switching from my usual one, and they were totally wrong. Ran on them three times, took them back, only to be told that type of shoe was definitely not suitable for me and they swapped them over for a new pair, no dramas.

I think if they've given you the wrong advice, they should refund them. If they don't, a mention of spreading the word on a very popular Australian running forum (hehe) might help change their mind!

[Action]

Steve, on Jun 26 2007, 11:05 AM, said:

You should have gone to a specialist running store instead then you would have got better advice.IMO

Be fair - that is called hindsight. harvey998 is new to running and to the unwashed masses, Athletes Foot is the expert running store... In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king!

However, I do agree with you, but understand why harvey998 went that way - and learnt a lesson! Hopefully a refund, or a credit, and a new pair of shoes to follow - then a trip to an expert, like your good self, will set him on the straight and narrow. Expert running stores are a well kept secret outside of running circles!

[goldie*]

Thanks everyone. I will take them back tomorrow and hopefully get a refund - if not a credit note wouldn't be too bad I suppose as I could use it on other things, not shoes.

I'm in Adelaide. Can anyone suggest a specialist running store that has a good reputation with runners on this forum?

[sarz]

in adelaide i would recommend Joggers World in Pirie St

[silver]

harvey

had similar issues with Athletes Foot where i had the foot print taken. the shoes then supplied seemed to have the same effects of sore knee's and adfter 3 weras took them back and they were absolutly fine and refunded in full.
wasn't expecting such service - but pleased with the service

[goldie*]

Yes Silver, I had the same. I took back the shoes without any problem at all. Ended up spending an extra $30 on the shoes I did get but they are great. Such a difference. Now if only I could return these legs of mine for taller, faster ones!

[Rachel49]

When I returned my shoes to Athlete's foot after being fitted with a roll in shoe I asked for a neutral shoe and was told I wouldn't be able to return those because they were 'self fitted' and not the shoe they recommended (I also had to get them ordered in). They wrote it all over my receipt and the shoe box. I get the feeling Athlete's Foot fit everyone with roll in shoes, they're reason for me was that I had a high arch and there is more room for the forefoot to spread in a roll in shoe when you have a high arch. It's only now that our local store has started stocking more than one or two pairs of neutral shoes.
I promised myself I wouldn't buy from there again, but now they have the largest range to try on in my town and they gave me a good discount last pair I bought

[lostandrunning]

I also went to athletes foot, was told I needed neutral shoes, according to the machine,bought a pair and they have been ok,as I am becomming more serious about running I will go to a more specialist store next time though.why do things have to be so complicated ? as Im a male i hate reading or following instructions but with running my legs are precious and i have to take note I spose

[DECIM8]

I currently work for the Athlete Foot, I dont often get many returns however when I do I dont hesitate to take them back (obviously in due time)

We do have a membership program called clubfit which offers the customer 30 days "wearanty" for the shoes. If they are not satisfied we will return or replace or exchange the shoes - It is free. This aside we would replace, return etc if the person is unhappy (This includes a Self order or self fit.)

We often get people informing us about what foot type they have when it is clearly obvious they are misinformed. We try achive the best fit for everyone which includes a series of tests and measurements including the fitprint which is only one small part of the process.

In responce to these comments

The fitprint device has a lot of problems with it including:
1. They have never been calibrated which shoud be done every 40 hours of use and they are years old.
Very False, they are currently a brand new system just rolled out across the stores, I believe from memory its inception was only in 1998. we have had 5 series of fit prints?!
2. Standing posture is not very predictive of running biomechanics.
Standing presure not posture indicates inbalance, favouring, presure spots, flattening feet, orientation of the feet and so on. You just have to know how to read it. It is quite complicated.

3. Walking across a pressure mat has little to do with what your feet are doing running. (The fitprint is not sufficiently strong in MHz to capture running)
False again the fitprint can capture running process, however the sensors in the current fitprint are able to pick up tiny movements walking which gives a more indepth timeline in the gait cycle.

The white line through the centre of the foot is the centre of gravity line the horizontal lines which cross this are the time line giving a break down on movements to assist in chosing the right shoe.
4. It takes years of training not hours of training to make accurate predictions from pressure patterns about what your foot is doing and what it needs.

Our staff go through weeks of training before comencing on floor and then several update and enhancment programs (which are listed on the badges of staff)

To further justify the use of fitprint, it was originally designed for podiatrists but because of its high cost not many pods use the program or its pad, its actually designed and made by podtech.

Like I previously stated the fitprint is only some of the process we often ask customers to run, walk and observe knees(rotation), ankle and foot orientation, width, length, depth and so on.

It is ultimately the customers choice on the shoe however we try assist with well trained staff and superior technology. I believe every shoe which I fit is the best for that particular customer.

As always there can be a worm in the ripe apple however I would have to disagree that we are not a "running store"

Rachael49 In regards to your experence I would contact our head office about the store. What they have done is incorrect if you are indeed a neutral runner

Edited by DECIM8, 24 July 2007 - 01:11 PM.

[Oakley]

Sorry to pick on you again there DECIM8 but walking and running are bio mech pretty different.

I find with these fitprint systems that sales people are just that, sales people. Often they are not shoe geeks and if they see some pronation they automatically prescribe a medially posted shoe to control this. Which is wrong. Not saying you do this personally, however it is something that happens in every store not just TAF.

Question is... are people relying on someone elses opinion too much and not researching things for themself? Or are store owners/managers not tough enough on what sales people are telling their customers.

Ive been to several TAF stores, been put on fit print and told I need asics 21XX series shoes. Which I dont and has been confirmed by RMIT in Melb where I have studied.

I commend you on your knowledge and genuine interest in shoes and feet.

It's sad that Rebel Sport will be getting there pressure sensitive type fit systems in a few months as the same problems will occur. They will be used as a sole indicator for someones foot type rather than a tool like you said.

The best fit system ive seen are the video analysis types... which wouldnt cost much to set up.

[blair]

I'm sorry to have to tell you this Decim8 but I will never go to an Athlete's Foot store again.

A couple of years ago I went there and was told that the Brooks Epiphany was the right shoe for my foot. Wearing these shoes I had no end of problems with my feet.

I eventually went to a podiatrist who took one look at my foot and told me that the Brooks were entirely the wrong shoe for my foot.

I then went to a proper running shoe store and got fitted with a pair of Mizuno Wave Alchemy 6. I have not had a single foot problem since.

I am sure that there are some Athlete's Foot employees like yourself who know what they are talking about but in my experience the sales people I encountered would not know their arse from their elbow when it comes to determine the correct shoe for someone.

[Sunset]

I agree that stores like Rebel and The Athletes Foot are no substitute for a podiatrist looking at your feet and how you run.

The people who work there would be paid a standard retail wage and therefore I wouldn't expect them to have the same level of knowledge as a good podiatrist.

It might be okay for the occasional recreational runner but if you are a serious runner then I would be cautious.

The last pair of shoes from TAF were too cushiony for me and it made my knee problems even worse. The sales person wouldn't know that by looking at my foot print.
A podiatrist recommended a pair of Mizunos and they have been great.

[Steve 'The Footman']

As a competitor to Athletes foot you can take my bias any way you like.

HOWEVER:
The fitprint device has a lot of problems with it including:

1. They have never been calibrated which should be done every 40 hours of use and they are years old.
Very False, they are currently a brand new system just rolled out across the stores.
You have not answered how often they are recalibrated. Is it once a week or is it not until it is replaced? This has a big impact on the reliability of any results.

2. Standing posture is not very predictive of running biomechanics.
Standing presure not posture indicates inbalance, favouring, presure spots, flattening feet, orientation of the feet and so on. You just have to know how to read it. It is quite complicated.
Standing Pressure is also not predictive and neither is walking pressure. If it is so complicated it makes you question whether your staff has the required skills knowledge and experience to understand it.

3. Walking across a pressure mat has little to do with what your feet are doing running. (The fitprint is not sufficiently strong in MHz to capture running).
False again the fitprint can capture running process, however the sensors in the current fitprint are able to pick up tiny movements walking which gives a more indepth timeline in the gait cycle.
Your answer does not show sufficient understanding of pressure technology. It is about the amount of information that can be collected per second. The foot is on the ground longer walking so the information collected is greater. What is the MHz of the fitprint system?

4. It takes years of training not hours of training to make accurate predictions from pressure patterns about what your foot is doing and what it needs.
Our staff go through weeks of training before comencing on floor and then several update and enhancment programs.
I am not convinced that weeks of training is sufficient.

Like I previously stated the fitprint is only some of the process we often ask customers to run, walk and observe knees(rotation), ankle and foot orientation, width, length, depth and so on.
Perhaps we should do a survey and see how many people have run for more then a few steps when buying shoes at Athletes Foot. I cant imagine they would let anyone run outside of their small stores. You need to be running for at least six strides to complete acceleration for an easy jog. Anything less makes the findings (and pressure information) invalid.

The Fitprint system is really a clever marketing ploy that has been very effective. Confuse the customer enough with technology and jargon and you may convince them that you know what you are doing but it does not change the sad reality.

I think Athletes Foot does the best job of all the sporting retail chains to help the customer get the best shoe. The fitprint does not add much to their ability to do that IMO. I still like to think that Running specialist stores do a better job. With any purchasing experience you will get variable service depending on the company the service process and the individual sales persons ability. Customers vote with their feet.

Edited by Steve 'The Footman', 01 August 2007 - 10:36 AM.

[coups]

Regarding my previous issue regarding the (what I consider) rapid wear of my Mizuno Wave Creation 8's which (in my opinion) for a lateral heel striker are not a high mileage trainer as advertised- DECIM8 was the only respondant who was prepared to make inquiries with the Mizuno rep regarding my shoes and I found his response very informative and helpful - he was the only shoe guru to inquire what my weight was (surely a major factor influencing wear) and he and Oakley were the only respondants who considered that maybe the shoe was faulty - please note I purchased the shoes elsewhere not at Athletes Foot- (won't bag the shoe store as good advice been given to me previously). Nobody informed me that a high mileage trainer meant that the cushioning life was extended in these shoes - in my case all the cushioning in the world won't help if you're running through the wave plate.

[TRAVY]

I first went to a podiatrist and found out what shoe was right for my foot. I have tried several stores including Athlete's foot. The owners in Shepparton are to money hungry and not helpful . I go to Bennett's in Kyabram and of Echuca. But as I said before the Podiatrist put me on the right track first.

[DECIM8]

Sorry for the delayed reply to this all, however most of you are correct.

The people who work there would be paid a standard retail wage and therefore I wouldn't expect them to have the same level of knowledge as a good podiatrist.
I must Stress We are in no way anything next to as knowledgable about your foot movements as a Pod..Either is any running store. We dont attempt to perscribe custom orthotics or address issues such as planta facitis. we only assist with footware in some cases off shelf orthotics.

On this note, We know shoes (we as in running stores) and Pods know FEET and biomechanics etc. If you do see a Pod and they suggest you need new shoes ask them what They are trying to achive in the shoe and what features they want. for instance straight last, wide, narrow, met dome, lace locking etc.. helps alot and helps us work with the pods and your needs.

Our staff are paid retail wages, and I have little doubt I could easily match a sports store fitting a correct shoe, i.e tredmill etc using the fitprint and walking/running situations. However I dont have that sort of faith with everyone, particularly after I have heard some stories on here. I also understand a "new" staff member wont have the same skill as I do, and also a general concern and interest in the customer and the running.

It is really a shame with Rebel releasing similar fitprint systems, from what I understand they arnt matching the systems with the skills in staff. Ive also heard that the systems will be personal use.. so no staff assessment. From memory sports co. tried to match our use of the system a few years back and failed. On that point I'm not particularly worried.

On to further points...

Fitprint, It is recalibrated via the tech department when Im asleep. so cant really tell you.


Standing Pressure is also not predictive and neither is walking pressure. If it is so complicated it makes you question whether your staff has the required skills knowledge and experience to understand it. Don't particularly understand this claim, We dont just look at walking presure or standing presure its the combination of gait line, presures, arch length, etc.. Im sure you also assess the same. And yes ive been to a running store.

In regards to MHz Ill have to get back to you.

Its quite obvious walking and running share similar yet different movements. Yes both can be seen on the fit print however walking gives a better analysis and the presure pad. It allows me to see main presure points, gait lines, starting point, leaving point, arch length (ussually indicative of arch height, rolling in etc)

On the same note I have no doubt if we had the tredmill in here we could do the same job you do. I feel watching someone walk is the best indicator and running (with more weight) works best too.

I dont own the store, I just run it, And all I make is my wages (so I really dont get anything from backing the stores) I back my skills and knowledge and all my staff as I train them and upkeep that training. Its obvious to most (thanks for the kind words btw) I have extensive knowledge on shoes and movement and I pass it all on. However we also have external training completed by them too.

I take no offence to comments and thank all of you for making them, Cheers always good to hear both sides to the story.

Now im expecting alot of spelling mistakes and missing words so bare with me while i proof read :S

Edited by DECIM8, 06 August 2007 - 05:24 PM.

[DECIM8]

I just give up .. I know nothing .. why would I even bother.

Edited by DECIM8, 07 August 2007 - 05:23 PM.

[Duffman]

DECIM8, on Aug 6 2007, 08:40 AM, said:

Pods dont fit shoes.. They make orthosies and correct foot/leg issues .. Most have no idea about shoes. They can advise you on what you need in a shoe tho.

Decim8,

I understand you are defending your store, however it is'nt appropriate to rubbish health proffesionals (many of whom would regularly refer patients to your store) in the process.

Your comments are slanderous and jepardise the integrity of the many podiatrists that do prescribe footwear.

It takes 2 weeks to learn footwear brands/models and how to fit shoes to different 'foot types'. It takes 4 years to learn precisely what these structures and biomechanical intricacies are, and how they interact with footwear and orthoses.

You sell a person a pair of shoes and in most cases, never see them again. Podiatrists recommend a pair of shoes and review them regularly.

Do not suggest you are more qualified to prescribe shoes than a podiatrist

[DECIM8]

Like I said MOST pods dont know much about shoes, they attend meetings with groups etc about the shoes to review them.

I didnt say they dont know anything, I'm refering to the pods and or physios who send me requests for shoes in such order as this.

Recommendations - Straight last, Medial posting, PDRB etc

Shoes - Glycerin, Addiction, Kayano

Im sure you can see the fault...

Pods who sell their own shoes know alot! I never stated I new more than a pod about anything to do with feet, legs, biomechanics. Seems you misunderstood.

Pods know quite alot, however Im not protecting or promoting my store. I work with pods to achive the best shoe. Thats why I regularly talk with them about shoes and what works.

I dont attack every comment you make mate so i'd appreciate if you would lend me the same favor. I really dont know why I bother posting any more.

Edited by DECIM8, 07 August 2007 - 05:22 PM.

[Duffman]

Do the podiatrists you "work with" know what you are saying behind their backs? Surely it wouldn't inspire much confidence in continuing to recommend patients to your store if the first thing you tell them when they get there with a list of shoes is "Your podiatrist doesnt know much about shoes".

Its not that im out to personally attack you. I just have a problem with ill informed statements.

Saying "MOST pods dont know much about shoes, because in the past some have sent me contradicting recommendations" is like saying "MOST athletes foot stores dont know much about fitting shoes because in the past I've had flat footed people presenting with problems after being sold excessively structured shoes."
Both statements are incorrect and slanderous. They offer no constructive information, and create unhelpfull stereotypes.

To answer the question: Yes, your local podiatrist can provide you with an accurate assessment and list of shoe prescriptions. It is also common for podiatrists to work in association with shoe stores by refering patients for recommendations and fitting to compliment a diagnosis as part of a treatment plan.

Edited by Duffman, 07 August 2007 - 08:39 PM.

[DECIM8]

Yes, your local podiatrist can provide you with an accurate assessment and list of shoe prescriptions. It is also common for podiatrists to work in association with shoe stores by refering patients for recommendations and fitting to compliment a diagnosis as part of a treatment plan.


Happy?

Now another negative comment .. *moderated*

BwhaHHAA - Fine lets settle for this, I have not ever "dissed" your store for a thing. Even so I have heard people (as recent as yesterday in my store - concidering its not in brisbane I thought it was a little strange.)

So lets keep it all about advice about shoes and not about who is better or not. We both do it different ways and obviously choose to use different ways of doing it, diffrences aside ill keep my mouth shut if you keep yours shut.

Hope this brings this item to a close.

Edited by DECIM8, 08 August 2007 - 04:03 PM.

[moby]

OK shoe store experts. This is off the original topic but will provide an opportunity for you to provide a little helpful specialist shoe advice based on my podiatrist’s recommendations.

I am recovering from a metatarsal stress fracture. Have been running in the Asics Landreth for the past couple of years (I get them from the US) and absolutely love them. This is a lightish neutral shoe with a lower heel profile than standard trainers. Previously tried Mizuno Wave Rider and Brooks Glycerin but neither had adequate forefoot cushioning for me on long runs which I mostly do on asphalt bike paths.

I had an appointment with my podiatrist this week ahead of returning to some running via a jog/walk program. She feels that when running in bare feet there is nothing problematic with my biomechanics, however when running in my shoes (which have about 400km on them) that they appear to have collapsed a little on the medial side resulting in my feet being somewhat rolled in. Whilst there is no suggestion that this was a major contributor to the stress fracture, it has been suggested that I might consider a pair of shoes with a little medial support to prevent this collapse. I have a brand new pair of Landreth’s that I’ll be breaking out once I get into any serious running so this will solve the problem in the short term, however am interested in recommendations of shoes that might offer a bit more medial support combined with adequate cushioning. Not sure if this would mean a change to a shoe with a medial post or a more heavy duty neutral shoe like the Nimbus? Or maybe I just need to retire my shoes earlier than I previously thought? I am male, 6’2” and 75kg and was averaging about 80km a week prior to injury.

[DECIM8]

Well thats a hard one :S

I dont feel you would need posting

I just wrote all this dribble and remembered a shoe I forgot...

Nike Free 5.0 - No posting, its a sock ontop of a shoe basically and works as if your barefoot.. It gets softer when you run (how I dont know)

Other suggestions I just made included:
Adidas Supernova/Adistar - Cushion Has a rear formotion control crash pad to reduce pronation movements.

Nike Vomero - Good crash pad same thing.

Im assuming your a neutral or supinating foot type. the shoe you have is not excessively curved and looks similar to a Noosa (noosa has posting unfortunately) So apart from no posting dont see how a shoe can colapse on the medial side? could you post photos for me? Its something new Id like to see

Good luck getting back on track

Edited by DECIM8, 09 August 2007 - 08:42 PM.

[Duffman]

Yeah, photos would be awesome.
The metatarsal stress fracture and compressed medial side of your shoes might possibly be from a 1st ray or forefoot pathology. Did the podiatrist suggest anything about forefoot stability or reduced/increased range of motion? Primary funtional hallux limitus for example could cause issues such as this, where the range of dorsiflexion in your big toe is diminished under loading as a result of constant intermittent trauma eg: running.
(disclaimer: Atm this is just a stab in the dark - unless I have some info from a podiatrists report I can only come up with possibilities I’ve learnt so far at uni .)

Where was the met fracture and what did the podiatrist say about its cause?
Do you get any joint pain?
What is your arch profile like under weight bearing and non-WB?
Do you get excessive callous in certain areas or bunions?

Orthotic management might be the best option if you haven’t already looked into it but a shoe with good forefoot cushioning and facilitation of sagittal plane motion will help. For reduced ROM, shoes with a rocker sole that allow the big toe to reach maximum dorsiflexion will be the best option. I’ve read suggestions that it is beneficial to increase the available motion at the first MPJ for this type of problem so as Decim8 suggested, the Nike Free could possibly be worth a try. The 7.0 has a little more medial support than the 5.0 but with an SF history I would be sure to double check with your pod first. The Saucony Triumph is also well known for its superior forefoot cushioning, and arch lock support.

If forefoot instability was the problem something with a forefoot platform such as the Ascis empire or
Nike Cesium would offer more support where needed

Interesting case!

Cheers,
DM

Edited by Duffman, 10 August 2007 - 06:53 AM.

[PlodBod]

Swear to god, I overheard this last night in a certain sports chainstore that shall remain nameless.

Customer, trotting gingerly around the running shoe section in a pair of runners, says to assistant:-

"So, what's the difference between a neutral shoe and a cushioned shoe?"

Assistant:-

"Well, a neutral shoe is if you have a neutral foot and a cushioned shoe is for when you need more cushioning"




It took all the self-restraint I had not to pull the customer to one side and 'av a word!!!

[DECIM8]

PlodBod, on Aug 10 2007, 07:35 AM, said:

Swear to god, I overheard this last night in a certain sports chainstore that shall remain nameless.

Customer, trotting gingerly around the running shoe section in a pair of runners, says to assistant:-

"So, what's the difference between a neutral shoe and a cushioned shoe?"

Assistant:-

"Well, a neutral shoe is if you have a neutral foot and a cushioned shoe is for when you need more cushioning"


It took all the self-restraint I had not to pull the customer to one side and 'av a word!!!

Well at least hes semi right .. lol

On a serious note, I'm pretty sure I know which chain your refering to. I'm becoming quite concerned at this lack of knowledge I keep hearing about.

Edited by DECIM8, 10 August 2007 - 11:59 AM.

[DECIM8]

Duffman, I feel the 7.0 is to much support.. I have no idea why the medial side of the midsole colapses but the 7.0 has a diagonal sole to control pronation or over pronation, Basically on my mate with a heavy over pronation foot and a good 85-90kg it sets him neutral-ish (foot orientation)

I suppose you could wear them but i'd say you'd run a super high chance of heavy rolling off, and out of the shoe. 5.0 i'd back, just because its neutral as.

[Oakley]

DECIM8
You'll never win an argument against a Pod, they can talk the talk and have a 'degree' for whatever that is worth.
I think it is fair to say that not every heath care professional is competent. For example, Vets. You cant expect them to know EVERYTHING! How can you tell a good vet from a bad one? The good ones will admit they dont know something and refer you onto someone who does.

I know some pods on a personal level locally, some are great at chronic foot issues, fractures, posture etc. But have little to no knowledge of current footware. Some are runners themselves and invite all the major foot brand reps to come and see them so they know what is going on... and get some freebies lol

I hardly think DECIM8 is slandering all pods, in fact I think it is a truth of life.

I got some Nike Free 7.0's today. Awesome awesome shoe! Cant wait to put some miles on them. They have very high arch support that works for me.
DECIM8, if you mean over supinating in them im not sure someone could. Unless they break an ankle in the process.

In closing, if someone comes to a running forum for advice they have to take it into account. When looking for a Pod, id be asking questions to make sure they suit me. Question what they tell you, dont just take what they say as the 100% truth. They are human after all... Same as TAF, dont just believe them coz they have a fancy footprint thing! It's common sense really....

[moby]

Not sure I’m going to have a method of posting a photo.

There is a little visible compression in the solyte material on the medial side of the shoe and Pod advised that when she watched me running in the shoes they looked somewhat compressed and so my feet were angled slightly inward. As I’m still injured this was only a very short jog observation at this point.

It’s possible it might just be this particular pair of shoes which are the first pair of Landreth 3’s I’ve had. Looking at one of my older pairs of Landreth 2’s which I ran in for over 750km they don’t seem to have the compression in the Speva material.

Anyway, she has given me a pair of “Formthotics” insoles to try as a way of providing some support but I find them pretty uncomfortable and she said an alternative would be to consider a shoe with a little medial support. So I was wondering whether something like a DS Trainer would be suitable?

I do have a pair of Nike Free 5.0 at home but I only wear them around casually and haven’t run in them as I wouldn’t have thought they would have enough cushioning.

Apparently no biomechanical issues observed when running barefoot. Arches are fairly high and stiff.

I think the stress fracture resulted from overtraining and not allowing adequate recovery during a fairly intense training period. I ran Canberra marathon in April and then a half mara 6 weeks later. I was then targeting another half 3 weeks after that. In between the two half’s I kept up my mileage (87km the week after the first half) and whilst this was pretty much all at easy pace I found that I was doing my easy paced runs as much as 30secs/km faster than prior to Canberra. This wasn’t deliberate; I just found that what felt an easy pace was faster than previously.

Anyway, I think this increase in intensity caught up with me even though I thought I was running easy. Stress fracture occurred about 18km into a planned 24km run. Looking back I probably just did too much without allowing adequate rest. I also already had low bone density based on a scan done last year.

As I recall, the original version of the Landreth was an Asics 2080 without the medial post. In the US range it fits in between the Cumulus and the Speedstar. The first version was available in Australia but not the 2nd or 3rd however I have heard a rumour that the next version will return to being part of the Asics range here. The following was posted on a US forum by an ASICS rep regarding the difference between the Landreth and Cumulus:

“The shoes are similar from a technology point of view. What is often not pointed out is that the Landreth has lower midsole heights compared to the Cumulus. The landreth is 2 mm lower to the ground. This means the Landreth will provide a little more performance. The Cumulus is all about cushion. Another point of view is that the Landreth was created for a very special reason. I don't want to get into that reason on this forum, but if you want to know the reason you can do some quick research on-line. The Landreth is also a gold account (only select speciality running stores) only shoe which allows these accounts to sell the shoe without competition from other channels of distribution. That is a very quick answer on differences between the Landreth and Cumulus.”

[Duffman]

so taking into account there are no real biomech abnormalities aside from a slight adduction of the foot and high stiff arches, I'd look at going for a run in a few curved lasted, firm neutral shoes to start with and then compare them to some mod stab high mileage trainers. This will give you a better indication of the amount of cushioning and stability you need. Shoes with any more support than those below will be aimed more at a flexible foot prone to overpronation, whilst any shoe more flexible than below, will be aimed more towards an excessively rigid foot.
so a rough list to start with might include:

Saucony Triumph
Brooks Glycerin?
Asics Nimbus
NB 1061
Mizuno Creation
----------^cushioned firm neutrals^---------------
Asics Kayano
Brooks Trance
Adidas Adistar CTL - (highly countoured arch often requires extra formthotic mods)
----------^cushioned high mileage trainers with mod stability^---------------

I think also considering the combination of a SF, your weekly mileage, and excessive mid sole compression you will need a shoe with a bit more bulk than a lightweight racer trainer.

[moby]

Many thanks Duffman. I'll try a few of those when next shopping for new runners.

Given some of the comments on the "asics" thread, any thoughts on the Pegasus compared to the Nimbus?

[DECIM8]

Pegasus and Nimbus in two different ball parks .. If you want to compare two good shoes try nimbus vrs vomero (nike also) or a pegasus vrs a fortitude or higher.

And if duffman suggests a curved last Id stay away from anything apart from adidas adistar cushion or adidas supernova cushion. as the adidas brand make true curved lasts, especially the supernova cushion.

None of the shoes listed above from duffman are curved, they seem to be all semi curved lasts which to some point produce pronation but a curved will do more.

If you think hes right please at least stay away from:
creation!!!

1061

And glycerin, dont even look twice at a radius (not listed but just advice)

Edited by DECIM8, 18 August 2007 - 04:11 PM.