VO2 Max

We found each additional 100 grams added to shoe weight to increase the aerobic demand of running by 1% (all other things being equal -- mid-sole material, outsole and upper). However this was on a treadmill, which has pretty awful shock absorbing qualities, but probably not unlike a road. On a nice synthetic track barefooted is probably the way to go because the track amterial provides shock absorption and some resiliency (lacking in a road). So, on some surfaces a shoe may help in absorbing landing shock and providing some rebound, but where that is not needed then no shoes are good. I have tested spike and racing flats on a track and found no difference in economy, but we did not go faster than about 4:36 mile pace (hard to find subjects capable of faster while still running submaximally)and that isn't good enough to test for faster racing speeds.

I did three 1500m races last year, all of them barefoot, beating my PR by 4 seconds on a track which is quite hard. It's funny but that track has a reputation for giving people sore calves, and every time I raced in spikes on that track, my calves were sore, but not when I ran barefoot, the track actually felt surprisingly soft.

A 1% increase in aerobic energy demand for each 100g addition in shoe weight would be 6 seconds difference over 1500m for my time in 250g spikes (ridiculously heavy) I felt that it was about 4 seconds, but I dont think we could convince either Nike or Hicham El Gerrouj for him to race barefoot, but he could always paint the Nike swoosh on the side of his feet. His spikes probably weigh 150g so 2 seconds might apply. I am sure that in a 1500m race, lifting the extra weight of the shoe is wasted energy

I know that the 1500m has a substantial anaerobic energy demand, but I think that the 1%/100g rule would apply to all running regardless of speed. That is what I feel when I am training and racing at all speeds.

Barefoot running on the track also gives plenty of grip, but is not good on wet grass or other slippery surfaces, it forces you to slow down or fall over if you dont.

good point.

i had similar experiences

am i the only one that doesnt buy the fact that with such a high vo2, this guy runs a 4:07 1500, and worse only a 9:07 3k? i could see those times working if you were more speed, like 800-1500 guy, but with a vo2 of 79+ it should be a little better or you are doing something wrong, maybe calibrated wrong?

well I wasn't gonna say anything but...

I had the same experience as orangeman, after eating 6 pieces of cheesecake and drinking 3 beers...

Zola, how did you cope with the mud at Neuchatel?