Daddy got new shoes

[Zoetstofzoetje]

And he uses them to play beach-volleyball. I can now jump higher than the people who wear divers' socks. And I don't suffer from cold feet when the sand is wet. Because of better grip on the sand, I get to the ball quicker.

Now before you crack up the standard volley jokes, let me show you what this is about:

[Al B. Sure!]

I'm not yet willing to have my toes separated. I got these:



I think Jon Miller either has the Vibrams or he's been interested in them.

[Zoetstofzoetje]

The only real problem with the toe separation is that you need special socks too. I got three pairs of them, but they cost a fortunate in terms of price/quality.

[Al B. Sure!]

You don't happen to be a POSE and/or Crossfit guy, do you?

[Zoetstofzoetje]

Nope. And the only six-pack I have is in the fridge!

[SlowwHand]

Perfect for sand.

[Docfeelgood]

I heard camel toe's are good in the sand.

[Provost Harrison]

What the f**k are those things in the first post by thingy...they look terrible!

[Al B. Sure!]

Vibram Five Fingers. They are rubber minimalist shoes that are designed to mimic barefoot running... you know, like how humans are supposed to run.

[Provost Harrison]

I need a bit of cushioning myself otherwise I'd knacker my feet and joints.

That's called progress

[Dauphin]

Feet aren't designed for running in concrete jungles.

[Al B. Sure!]

I need a bit of cushioning myself otherwise I'd knacker my feet and joints.

That's called progress

No.

http://www.popsci.com/entertainment-amp-gaming/article/2009-05/running-barefoot

You cite a study in your book that shows that more shoe cushioning actually results in higher impact forces - apparently due to the subconscious response of planting the foot harder in order to maintain balance on big squishy soles. What about orthotics for those of us with over-pronation problems? My feet seem to get tired when I don't wear the orthotics.

I think you're doing the opposite of what you should. Think about arches in buildings. They're weakened if you support them from underneath. Shouldn't that be the same with your feet? So where is the medicinal value of arch support? The problem is, things take time to develop and strengthen. Orthotics shortcut the process.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1170253/The-painful-truth-trainers-Are-expensive-running-shoes-waste-money.html

In a paper for the British Journal Of Sports Medicine last year, Dr Craig Richards, a researcher at the University of Newcastle in Australia, revealed there are no evidence-based studies that demonstrate running shoes make you less prone to injury. Not one.

It was an astonishing revelation that had been hidden for over 35 years. Dr Richards was so stunned that a $20 billion industry seemed to be based on nothing but empty promises and wishful thinking that he issued the following challenge: 'Is any running-shoe company prepared to claim that wearing their distance running shoes will decrease your risk of suffering musculoskeletal running injuries? Is any shoe manufacturer prepared to claim that wearing their running shoes will improve your distance running performance? If you are prepared to make these claims, where is your peer-reviewed data to back it up?'
Dr Richards waited and even tried contacting the major shoe companies for their data. In response, he got silence.

So, if running shoes don't make you go faster and don't stop you from getting hurt, then what, exactly, are you paying for? What are the benefits of all those microchips, thrust enhancers, air cushions, torsion devices and roll bars?

The answer is still a mystery. And for Bowerman's old mentor, Arthur Lydiard, it all makes sense.

'We used to run in canvas shoes,' he said.

'We didn't get plantar fasciitis (pain under the heel); we didn't pronate or supinate (land on the edge of the foot); we might have lost a bit of skin from the rough canvas when we were running marathons, but generally we didn't have foot problems.

'Paying several hundred dollars for the latest in hi-tech running shoes is no guarantee you'll avoid any of these injuries and can even guarantee that you will suffer from them in one form or another. Shoes that let your foot function like you're barefoot - they're the shoes for me.'

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v463/n7280/full/nature08723.html

Humans have engaged in endurance running for millions of years1, but the modern running shoe was not invented until the 1970s. For most of human evolutionary history, runners were either barefoot or wore minimal footwear such as sandals or moccasins with smaller heels and little cushioning relative to modern running shoes. We wondered how runners coped with the impact caused by the foot colliding with the ground before the invention of the modern shoe. Here we show that habitually barefoot endurance runners often land on the fore-foot (fore-foot strike) before bringing down the heel, but they sometimes land with a flat foot (mid-foot strike) or, less often, on the heel (rear-foot strike). In contrast, habitually shod runners mostly rear-foot strike, facilitated by the elevated and cushioned heel of the modern running shoe. Kinematic and kinetic analyses show that even on hard surfaces, barefoot runners who fore-foot strike generate smaller collision forces than shod rear-foot strikers. This difference results primarily from a more plantarflexed foot at landing and more ankle compliance during impact, decreasing the effective mass of the body that collides with the ground. Fore-foot- and mid-foot-strike gaits were probably more common when humans ran barefoot or in minimal shoes, and may protect the feet and lower limbs from some of the impact-related injuries now experienced by a high percentage of runners.

[Zoetstofzoetje]

I have nothing to add to the post above

[Aeson]

I'd rather run barefoot on concrete than in the jungle. (I've done both.)

[Al B. Sure!]

I'd rather run barefoot on concrete than in the jungle. (I've done both.)

http://www.scienceofrunning.com/2010/01/first-big-study-on-barefoot-running-in.html

In reference to a study that appeared in Nature:

Another interesting finding is the adjustment of impact forces that occurs based on the ground you are going to strike. The study found that barefoot running produced less collision forces on a hard surface than a cushioned shoe.
Similar to the conclusions I came to in the Running shoe article(here), they found that leg stiffness was adjusted to control impact. This created a situation where there was no difference in rate or magnitude of impact loading based on the surface they were running on. As I have said many times, the body has a built in adjustment mechanism. It controls impact via adjustment of several different mechanisms.
So all those people who are worried about the impact forces of running barefoot on concrete should consider that when they stick a cushioning shoe on and heelstrike, there collision forces are higher!

You can read all about everything you need to know here:

Harvard research study