The shoe on the cover of Jim Fixx's first book is the Tiger Pinto, at least that is what is claimed in the book. The second book featured the Marathon Trainer, not the Marathon 80 as advertised on East Bay. The original Marathon 80 was blue with flourescent yellow trim.
Don't know why I remember this. I must be old.
old timer is correct about the Tiger (onitsuka) marathons. Although the Fix cover shoes the shoe as red, I remember them as acually being maroon. The other wierd thing about them was there was no insole or arch. Sometimes I added a spenco, other times just ran in them like they were.
Remember those shoes well. They were my second pair of running shoes, first pair was Adidas antelope.
The tigers were the first non leather/canvas running shoe I know of. I bought them in 1968 for about $8.00. Mine were blue with white stripes. They also came in maroon. Jim Fixx's
book showed them in red.
There was nothing to them, very thin sole and a slight heel.
The insole was cardboard. However I have to tell you they
held up through my mourning 10 mi runs afternoon track workouts, and races. The only injury I got in them was a blister on the ball of my foot in a ten mile road race.
Most of us didn't were spikes because most of the ruberized
tracks back then were new. I think our lack of injuries back then was due to the fact that shoes like the tigers
let our feet do what they were supose to do not like the restrictive shoes of today. The shoes that come close to
it today would be the Nike Free.
To answer your question I would guess 6 oz.
Those were my first pair of flats, back in '75, and they were called Tiger Pintos.
This spring I ran a track 5 km in my pair that I got from Blue Ribbon Sports in the early 1970s.
I ran 19:08. They used to be faster.
I am saving them for the next special race on a nice clean track.
If I had a bunch of new ones I would wear them all the time.
Tom
FWIW I disagree that the most similar shoe would be the Nike Free. The Free is thicker and softer. I think some spikeless cross country racing shoes, like the Nike Waffle Racer or Asics 15-50, might be better comparisons. I've been running exclusively in cross country racing shoes (on almost exclusively sidewalks) for a little over a year now. I'm not magically getting faster, but I have far less aches and pains, and take less time to recover in between runs, than ever before, and I credit smoother running in thinner shoes for most of that.
I agree with you fully since I have a pair of the Nike spikeless shoes I forgot about in my closet. I last used them a few years ago for x country. I have to say though
since I'm 52 I don't think a can run more than 3 miles in them now. I guess the blue color of the Free reminded me of the tigers first.
Well it so happens that I have a pair of old blue tigers, nylon uppers, solid white rubber tread, no arch, little heel, size 7 1/2(us), weight 6 7/8 ozs. I ran marathons in them.
I also have a pair of old red tigers, suede uppers, dimpled rubber tread, more of a heel, overall just as unforgiving. I won these in a race, they are really too big for me but I never changed them. Probably size 9, weight 7 3/8 ozs.
My current racing shoes including marathons are Brookes conquest, 10 years old, size 8, weight 5 5/8 ozs, foamed rubber soles, some heel, some arch support. I consider them better in every respect to the old tigers which were as good as they got back in the 70's
Do you really want to get rid of those size 9's?
Got an e-mail address?
Hi Ed,
Could you tell us what shoes you are training/racing in these days? And could you give us a description of your training philosophy/programme/schedule? We would all be interested!
I train in shoes I have won and wear them down past their due date. I race in Brookes Conquest, as far as I know now no longer available.
Training is more than 95% long slow distance. Same thing almost every day. The objective is to get to the point that running a marathon at least in terms of time (not distance) is a matter of routine. I was a middle distance runner and I consider this training routine has converted me to a distance runner. It seems to have worked for me, I expect its not a universal recipe.
I'm not ambitious about parting with my red tigers. How would I be able to answer such fundamental questions if I no longer had them! They are worn to an extent but still look good. Give me a good reason to let them go and let me know your email if you want to explore further
"Good reason"?
Hmmmm...a trenchant question from THE MAN himself.
Errrr... a question to which I lack a GOOD answer.
Good reason? How about I wear a size 9?
My last pair:
Was there a particular training philosophy that you found helpful? Ed, we would like to know.[quote]ewhitlock wrote:
That picture brought back some memories, but I was running for some years previous to that model being introduced in the original Tiger which had a canvas upper.
An incredibly versatile shoe, incredibly light, with a cleverly ribbed sole - one could run road races, cross-country and long distance track in the same shoe.
We had never seen anything like it before, the only weakness was that the heel width was rather narrow.
Thanks for the picture. It does bring back memories.They look like the ones my mother through out on me. I never did comletly were them out.
bump
old timer wrote:
The old Tiger Marathon was around in the early 1970s (I wore them in 70-75). The shoes (size 10) probably weighed 5 or 6 oz. each.
There was NOTHING to them. They had a simple blue nylon upper, stitched to a white rubber sole that was all of a 1/4 in. thick, with maybe 1/2 in. under the heel.
Some people actually did run marathons in them.
Ran my first marathon in a pair of those. Seaside, 1971.
victoria, b.c., canada, runner wrote:
Ran my first marathon in a pair of those. Seaside, 1971.
Victoria B.C.- Do you remember these guys?
Scott Daggat Bellevue HS 2:29:52
Russ Daggat Bellevue HS 2:40:38
