A case against racing flats.

I developed PF my first season of running when I was 14--about 20 years ago. Before that, I was "minimalist" in soccer and had constant foot and ankle problems. The only thing that kept the PF at bay was serious arch support--a far cry from the minimalist approach. And, somehow, I find it difficult to believe that in another 35 years my joints and legs would be better off if I ran in virtually nothing shoe-wise than if I ran reguarly in a well-cushioned trainer. I know all the cool kids are doing flats. But, the argument that these are better for one in the long-run is dubious. I'll cast my lot with better cushioning as I accumulate thousands and thousands of miles by the time I'm 60.

Change a few words here, and this advice would end many of the Muslim/Christian/Jew problems in the world.

rip van runner wrote:

Why don't everyone train in the shoes they are most comfortable in and quit F***ing proselytizing to everyone else.

RIPPY

Switched to H Streets about a year ago (at the age of 37). Been running around 70 mpw all summer (with two hard track workouts and a long run each week) without one injury. A friend in his late 50s has had the same experience (although he's doing less track work). I usually don't chime in on these threads, and you did say that it's just one runner's opinion, but because you were expressing an opinion I wanted to provide a counter. Did it take me months to adjust? Yes. Are my feet sometimes sore in the morning? Yes. (Is something usually sore for anyone who is training hard? Yes.) At this point, could I imagine going back to orthotics and modern training shoes? Absolutely not. This has changed my whole perception of running.