The Sole of a Winner

Just give me something to wrap around what Mother Nature gave me. www.vibramfivefingers.com/

Another good one from Adam Weiner. He is perhaps the best writer on popsci.com today. He's not some nerd sitting behind the computer postulating about data. He actually knows what he's talking about it. It wouldn't surprise me if he's a pretty good runner in his own right.

That was an interesting article. I wonder why they would write an article about a product without reviewing it, though. Also, I felt the article needed a little more copy editing. I really wanted to replace the commas in the second paragraph's independent clause (, not all of us live a sedentary life,) with dashes. Actually, that whole sentence is awkwardly phrased. Oh well, at least the content is good.

I look at these shoes from the perspective of a true barefoot runner. I have been running exclusively barefoot for almost five years. So I have some questions about this 'natural' shoe.

Why does the toe-box curl upwards? Natural feet rest flat on the ground. What does the upward curl do to the natural movements of the foot? I can only believe forcing the toes of the foot up like that will constrict their natural movements, and will create an artificial stress in the arch of the foot.

Why do those shoes have such a large, built-up heel on them? Natural feet have the heel resting at the same level as the toes and the mid-foot. The video claims there is no need to heel-strike with these shoes -- so why have the big balloon on each heel? Having the heel built-up like that almost guarantees that it will get in the way, almost forcing a heel strike.

What kind of arch support do these shoes have in them? The arch of the foot is designed to flex, contract and expand with each step. If there is an "arch support" in the shoe, then it will interfere with this natural movement and weaken the foot's arch action and strength. Since I have been running barefoot, my arches have become more pronounced because I am actually using them when I run.

I am fascinated by the shock absorption claimed by the little pockets in the forefoot. How much shock can they really absorb? When I run barefoot, I have the benefit of my natural shock-absorbing arch in my foot, my Achilles tendon and calf muscles, plus I have the benefit of up to many inches of bending in my knees if necessary. From my perspective, that little bit of shock absorption contained in about 1/2 inch of space or material just doesn't compare. Proper running technique uses all of the body's natural shock absorbers, making the 1/2 inch of artificial absorption in the shoe unnecessary.

I would be much more interested in a shoe that had no heel whatsoever, and a flat, flexible sole. If they could whack off that bulbous heel, and flatten out that toe box, I might be interested in giving the modified shoe a test run. But - would I BUY it? I run naturally for free - it costs me absolutely nothing to prepare my feet for running. Those (modified) shoes had better offer me something really impressive to make me want to fork out $70-80-90 or more for them.

Ryan
Vancouver, WA

Ryan, if I understood right, you are basically saying that if they flatened All Stars more they would make better running shoes?

*goes out for a run in my all stars*

I don't know if flattening All Stars would make them better running shoes. What I am saying is that its odd for a shoe maker to claim their shoes promote a "more natural" running style, yet they include so many un-natural characteristics in their design.

What is "natural?" I think bare feet are the most natural thing we have for running. It stands to reason that shoes that try to come close to natural should be true to bare feet -- no artificial curves, curls, arches, uneven surfaces, pinching, fat bulbous spots, and they should be lightweight with flexibility. I think simple aquasox might be better shoes for running in than the hyped up expensive versions we see.

In fact, I told a 65 yr old retired dentist about my barefoot running. He had to stop running because his knees were giving him too much pain. He tried wearing aquasox, practiced the barefoot running forms I taught him, and he was able to resume running again. In just a few weeks of practice, he could run from two to three miles per run, three times a week. He was ecstatic that a simple pair of aquasox did more to help him run successfully than the thousands of dollars he had spent on chiropractors, podiatrists, orthopedic doctors, massage therapists, and on the many various shoes and orthotics he had purchased.

Some of the best runners in the world are the Tuaharama Indians of the Mexican highlands. They run races that last up to three days and nights and cover 150 miles. Their choice of footwear are simple flat sandals they make themselves, called Huaraches.

Ryan
Vancouver, WA

I purchased a pair of Newtons to test them out. They are in essence a traditional running shoe in every way with the exception of the 'lugs' under the forefoot. The intent is to help a runner transition from heel-strike to forefoot touch. The concept has the right intentions but imho the execution is mediocre. Disclosure: I am a barefoot runner. I personally run in simple leather moccasins (Soft Stars) which are super wide in the toe area, have zero cushioning or support and feel great.

Happy trails,

David Sypniewski
Barefoot Runner & Instigator since 2002
www.barefootrunner.com : blog
www.skorashop.com : minimal footwear project