American College of Sports Medicine
American College of Sports Medicine
google is your friend wrote:
American College of Sports Medicine
Just like it says right in the link from the first post.
nice heel strike bro!
I race in flats though wrote:
The authors really seem to like to study really really fat people.
http://www.biomedexperts.com/Profile.bme/1488836/Heather_K_VincentThe only thing I know is that when I run in less cushioned shoes, me feet hurt and then my legs start aching from the pounding. The rest of you sheep can do anything you want.
xenonscreams wrote:
I've never understood the logic of the low heel-to-toe drop. Can someone explain that to me? Why does that even matter?
When I buy shoes I go for shoes that feel good for me to run in. My shoes have a huge heel-to-toe drop but that's not something I ever paid attention to until the barefoot fad started griping about it.
The drop of a shoe influences body alignment. Picture a women wearing high heeled dress shoes, which put the user in a very different posture than if they were barefoot.
Different drop running shoes do the same thing but to a lesser degree. It's about finding your sweet body where your body is comfortably aligned and relaxed.
For many people that happens to be a zero drop shoe. For others it's 4mm. Some are 12mm, some a little higher than 12 but not much. Very few are comfortable in a negative drop shoe, where the heel is lower than the forefoot.
Find your sweet spot.
I actually learned something in a LR thread. From the video, not you.
UK Limey runner wrote:
xenonscreams wrote:I've never understood the logic of the low heel-to-toe drop. Can someone explain that to me? Why does that even matter?Homo Sapiens and our predecessors have likely been making 'shoes' for about (ballpark) a million years+, but they have always been flat (animal skin or other type of simple wrap, then eventually sandals). As such our sensory and proprioceptive feedback mechanisms evolved with an environmental pressure of flat shoes. The recent ~50 year old fad of making 'functional' shoes with a heel drop can confuse the sensory feedback mechanism and lead to altered biomechanics although this doesn't necessarily happen with everyone. Some people can slap a brick onto their feet yet still run with the mechanically-correct kinematics.
[NB: Non-functional/decorative shoes with heel drops have a history deeper than 50 years, but these were never intended for running.]
Lee Saxby did a great summary of this in a short youtube clip that I'd recommend if you are interested. Manages to sum up the whole issue in a little over 10 minutes. Regards.
http://youtu.be/OUU8MJzrwHQ
Did Homo sapiens (lower case sapiens) and our predecessors evolve running on asphalt and concrete?
coach d wrote:
http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2013/06/12/bjsports-2013-092202.abstract
One study does not make a consensus.
brick on my feet wrote:
Did Homo sapiens (lower case sapiens) and our predecessors evolve running on asphalt and concrete?
No.
brick on my feet wrote:
Did Homo sapiens (lower case sapiens) and our predecessors evolve running on asphalt and concrete?
No, that's why some cushioning is good. It might be more "natural" to run on concrete in a shoe with a bit of cushioning than to run barefoot. Raised heels, stiff soles and motion control systems still doesn't make sense for most runners.
I had good luck transitioning to 'minimalist' shoes a few years back. My PF disappeared and I really like the lower heal and lighter shoe combo. I didn't go as far as vibrams or Newtons, I was running in the Brooks Free line. They are very neutral, 4mm drop but still cushioned.
Eventually, after about 3 years, I ended up with sesamoiditis. I presume from more of a forefoot strike. I am now in orthotic inserts and a lightweight neutral shoe. I hope to find a low heeled shoe that can handle my orthotics. My heel is already hurting from the shoe/orthotic combination.
UK Limey runner wrote:
SMJO wrote:Because it allows your lower leg to have more of a spring effect and provide free energy return via elastic rebound.
Also this, good summary (never noticed your post at first).
^This. Also, for heel strikers, the lower heel lift shoe touches the ground later in the foot strike AND provides less heel cushioning. Combined, these two factors help prevent overstriding in recreational runners and promotes more of a forefoot strike to increase the rebound effect in faster runners.
New Balance 890v.3 or 4 Best shoe out there.
Is the 890v4 a daily training shoe? or a race specific shoe? Can it be used for single-track trail running on other than technical trails?
dagfasgsdfg wrote:
New Balance 890v.3 or 4 Best shoe out there.
10mm drop according to RW...
It's hard for me, who was ridiculed when I started training in flats in 2001 as a sophomore in high school, to not feel smug these days.
Let's think wrote:
No, that's why some cushioning is good. It might be more "natural" to run on concrete in a shoe with a bit of cushioning than to run barefoot. Raised heels, stiff soles and motion control systems still doesn't make sense for most runners.
No cushioning is necessary. Studies show impact forces are greater in cushioned shoes than barefoot. Your feet instinctively search for stable ground when you land, so in cushioned shoes you land harder than barefoot so that your feet get a strong sense of stability.
Of course, all shoes have some natural amount of cushioning since they have some amount of rubber.
her_eyes wrote:
Let's think wrote:No, that's why some cushioning is good. It might be more "natural" to run on concrete in a shoe with a bit of cushioning than to run barefoot. Raised heels, stiff soles and motion control systems still doesn't make sense for most runners.
No cushioning is necessary. Studies show impact forces are greater in cushioned shoes than barefoot. Your feet instinctively search for stable ground when you land, so in cushioned shoes you land harder than barefoot so that your feet get a strong sense of stability.
Of course, all shoes have some natural amount of cushioning since they have some amount of rubber.
Absolute nonsense. I know how my calves feel after I´ve done a hard run on asphalt in shoes without cushioning!
First: studies show impact forces are higher when heel striking in a shoe compared to forefoot striking barefoot, but a forefoot strike in shoes does NOT increase the impact peak compared to barefoot. The maximum ground reaction force peak is higher barefoot than in cushioned shoes. Second: the impact peak (vertical loading rate) is not associated with injuries, except for maybe tibial stress fractures.
Yes, we run with stiffer legs the softer the surface (or shoe), because that is more economical. In one study runners ran over a hard or a cushioned treadmill, and the results showed that on average, 10 mm of cushion was the most economical situation (0 mm and 20 mm were less economical). When running barefoot on a hard surface we have to use our own muscles and tendons more actively to handle the forces, which increases energy consumption and puts more stress on the tissues. Of course a surface that is too soft makes running again less economical due to lack of a stable platform for push-off.
Running with non-cushioned shoes on hard surfaces also increases bending forces at the metatarsals (although not elsewhere in the skeleton) which results in a greater risk for metatarsal bone injury.