306 people run a half marathon totally barefoot

granddaddypurp wrote:

Didn't Pheidippedes also die after his marathon run?

No he did not. He finished his 250 mile route to and from Sparta, and continued with his long career as a messenger.

I'm a barefoot "cultist", I guess. I do just about all my running and racing barefoot. Anand, I take it you're the same guy who posted to therunningbarefoot.com about this race. I cannot speak for the shoe "cultists" here but my concern is the gimmickry of the event, and possible exploitation of the people involved.

Otherwise, Anand I think it's cool what you have done in Mumbai! If these people are really into it and have a choice, more power to them! As for injuries, I have been running barefoot for many years and have about the same number of injuries as most other runners I know. I am very much a competitive runner, otherwise I would not be here at letsrun but I'm competing in a different way. I like the challenge. Running barefoot really does cut a lot of bullsh*t. Basically it's your body, and the ground. Either you have the form, technique, discipline and drive to do it or you don't.

before anyone starts to argue about correct form, I will acknowledge that there is no definitive correct form that's the same for everyone. However, from experience I can tell you that running barefoot on hard surfaces requires different technique than running in shoes. Is this technique "better" or does it necessarily make one faster or less injury prone? I cannot answer that. Probably not. Not in my case anyway, but I like running barefoot anyway. I like getting faster and better, even though I will probably never be the fastest or the best.

I wasn't winning when I wore shoes, and I was slower.

------------------------------------------------------

This has been my experience too. Though I organised a barefoot HM, I have personally not trained much on barefoot before October 2010. Thereafter when I did, I did find a 10% improvement in speed.

Anand wrote:

And as for scale models, do you dispute Lincoln sported a beard?

I'm going to use that line.

Anyway, thanks for a highly entertaining thread. At first I thought you where a very very very persistent troll, but I guess you're for real. Keep it going my man.

Troll of the Day! :)!

coach d wrote:

No listed results at all.

The youtube claims to show the leaders finishing. A 1:10 HM is roughly 5:20 pace. The leaders weren't running anything like that kind of pace when finishing. Those looked like a bunch of joggers "running" 8:00 and slower.

At least two of the first four runners clearly DID look as though they were running that pace. 8:00 pace? C'mon. That's silly. I've seen video of myself finishing races at 5:30 pace and I'm always amazed by how slow I look on video from the foreshortened perspective of almost-straight-on. Your analysis doesn't persuade. In fact, it's not analysis. It's attitudinizing. Anybody can do that--including me. At least malmo actually interfuses his attitudinizing with something that looks like evidence.

kudzurunner wrote:At least two of the first four runners clearly DID look as though they were running that pace. 8:00 pace? C'mon. That's silly. I've seen video of myself finishing races at 5:30 pace and I'm always amazed by how slow I look on video from the foreshortened perspective of almost-straight-on. Your analysis doesn't persuade. In fact, it's not analysis. It's attitudinizing. Anybody can do that--including me. At least malmo actually interfuses his attitudinizing with something that looks like evidence.

So where are the results then? Why isn't the race posted on the AIMS website?

Anand wrote:I wasn't winning when I wore shoes, and I was slower.

------------------------------------------------------

This has been my experience too. Though I organised a barefoot HM, I have personally not trained much on barefoot before October 2010. Thereafter when I did, I did find a 10% improvement in speed.

So, you would like us to believe that running barefoot will make us faster? Up to 10% faster? Wow!

Anand wrote:

I wasn't winning when I wore shoes, and I was slower.

------------------------------------------------------

This has been my experience too. Though I organised a barefoot HM, I have personally not trained much on barefoot before October 2010. Thereafter when I did, I did find a 10% improvement in speed.

It's statements like this that cause controversy. It implies you just get rid of the shoes and you're automatically faster, better. Like flipping a switch.

At least Davis Barefooter is more realistic in stating you need the drive and discipline to do it, and it's not a "one size fits all" way to go. At least he implies there are some people that may never get the form down.

Umm btw, unlike Bombay, half of the US is too cold and wet (frostbite risk) to truly run barefoot, let alone walk around barefoot.

And what about us who have run injury free in shoes for years and years? Do we defy the laws of nature? So are WE now superhuman?

Like I said before, just make it a separate "sport"...

classof89 wrote:

It's statements like this that cause controversy. It implies you just get rid of the shoes and you're automatically faster, better. Like flipping a switch.

At least Davis Barefooter is more realistic in stating you need the drive and discipline to do it, and it's not a "one size fits all" way to go. At least he implies there are some people that may never get the form down.

Well, yes. When you're chronically injured for years in shoes, you see lots of podiatrists, get lots of orthotics, end up on crutches, then you start running barefoot and twenty years of problems miraculously melt away ... it does feel like flipping a switch.

If you're not injured, no one is asking you to switch - at least, I'm not. What I don't get is all the runners and ex-runners who are injured - they are EVERYWHERE - who refuse to consider going barefoot. That defies all logic.

I know Davis Marathoner. (Hey E!) Davis Marathoner is a friend of mine. Classof89, you're no Davis Marathoner.

@HHH:

I can't answer your good question. Anand strikes me as a guy who may be on top of certain aspects of directing races and not quite as on top of other aspects. Uneven competence rather than fraud is what I sense here.

Anand: What's your answer to HHH's good question? Some of us are willing to believe you if you offer something that looks a little more like evidence. Do you have a spreadsheet with names and full race results? Please copy and post. Or, of you don't have that, explain why you don't have it.

Big talk is just fine with me. But some attempt to back it up would be good. Complete race results, please.

What no one here doubts, I trust, is that a half marathon was recently held in Mumbai in which a whole lotta young runners competed, and finished, barefoot. That's great. What's not to like? I wear shoes, personally, but I'm in favor of a diverse running ecosystem.

Malmo, your comments in other thread suggest that you are, too. You've disagreed sharply with those who try to prescribe one correct running form.

So consistency and objectivity would dictate, I'd think, that you'd welcome this sort of thing, rather than trying to stamp it out and insisting "Incorrect!" Let me get this straight: there's no one correct running form--but barefoot runners are all fools? Is that your position? Please clarify.

That's just stupid: A bunch of impressionable morons if you ask me.

------------------------------------------------------------

A brutally frank self-intro. Glad to meet you, guys.

Wilfredo: half of them run slower than 11:00 pace. have fun crushing shells douchetits

------------------------------------------------------

Your cup is always half-empty, eh?

classof89: The real trick is to get 306 Americans and see what happens

------------------------------------------------------

Your podiatrists will find their hands full

ukathleticscoach: There were 155 finishers within 2.5 hours

What happened to the rest - still walking barefoot?

-----------------------------------------------------

You really believe you sound smart?

coach d: If you gave 306 poor Indians some rupees, you could get them to do HM in stilettos. You don't see people in India running around barefoot except for the dirt poor

-------------------------------------------------------

I fail to get your context, coach d. The topic here is ‘barefoot vs shod’. Your interjection reminds me of a kids’ tale in India. Seeing the peacock spread out colourful feathers, the baboon wanted to show off his wares. Turned around and upped his red butt. “Hey, see, I have this.” Shove your greenbacks up yours, Mr. Crimson Asshole. We are talking serious stuff.

stringer bell: Wouldn't the world record for a barefoot marathon be Bikila's 2:15:16?

-----------------------------------------------------------

Of course, so far. Bikila’s the inspiration. It was one off. We are now attempting mass barefoot runs in India.

Coach d: The youtube claims to show the leaders finishing. A 1:10 HM is roughly 5:20 pace. The leaders weren't running anything like that kind of pace when finishing. Those looked like a bunch of joggers "running" 8:00 and slower. Average is something like 11:00 pace (how many here would even call that "running"?) and the leaders didn't look like a whole lot faster than that, which is consistent with what we see from barefoot runners--really slow people.

------------------------------------------------------------

Some people can believe a MacDaugall when he says the Tarahumara ran with a smile in their face before they disappeared into the Canyons for ever. Was it an AIMS mandated race? But get video evidence from India, switch your brain to slow-motion, and exclaim: Oh, its just 11:00 !! Strange.

Coach d: I also have serious doubts about ANY group of college kids going out and running a half marathon on some kind of lark for the world record without training: Most wouldn't even finish a HM without regard to footwear without serious training

------------------------------------------------------------

You seem to be carving out a living, of all things, training gullible guys ‘to run’! The very concept of ‘training’ for a run sounds stupid to many Indians. Weren’t we born to run? Who trained us to walk, to talk, to eat; to reach the ground with our legs when we stand? Yes, these ARE a bunch of college kids from only ONE district in India. They just kicked off their NIKES and Reeboks and ran on impulse when we announced the marathon. Some of them were relieved to get rid of their stupid trainers, who insist on wearing shoes. We were short of time. There are 600 districts in India. And then there are veterans from the armed forces, railways, insurance companies, police and fire departments…

Coach d: It wouldn't surprise me if this was really a 10K and the times are what are claimed above.

-------------------------------------------------------

I don’t care.

Ruff: Reading this thread is making me more and more racist against Indian people.

---------------------------------------------------------

Anybody hearing some minority rant in Obama’s Amercia?

classof89: Barefooters should take a clue from walkers and leave shod runners alone. Just consider barefoot running and shod running as two different sports with shod running being the more "dangerous" sport if you want. There's no b1tching between stock car and Indy car racing, beacappy to h vs court volleyball, greco vs freestyle wrestling, ballroom vs latin dancing.

----------------------------------------------------------

I wouldn’t bet on shod being more dangerous. No conclusive medical evidence still on it. . But yes, they are two distinctly different styles of running. And there is no benefit one decrying the other. In our country, temperatures being what they are, people are happy to just fling away the shoes. In most places in your country, barefoot would mean frost-bite.

HHH: I'm not going to Bombay, not even on my list of places to visit (sorry if there are any Indians out there, just not my type of travel destination). I don't even care if your course isn't accurate, it won't matter.

-------------------------------------------------------

Fair enough. Your travel preferences. Still I should thank you for instilling this good idea of a barefoot vs. shod competition. Will work on it.

HHH: There are no results posted for this marathon, so yes, we doubt the winner's 1:10.

Kudzurunner: Anand: What's your answer to HHH's good question? Some of us are willing to believe you if you offer something that looks a little more like evidence. Do you have a spreadsheet with names and full race results? Please copy and post. Or, of you don't have that, explain why you don't have it.

--------------------------------------------------------

I relished these sentences. ‘Cause, incredulity is the highest form of flattery.

Its not in AIMS calendar. So Anand is bluffing.

No Dave Cundy supervised the results. So Anand may be a fraud.

No results in the web-site. Anand’s just phoney propaganda.

None of you anyway said 1:10 is chicken feed for a HM. That’s my trump card.

Shows how much you people would stand awestruck, if a barefooter made a certified 1:10.

Well, that’s the easiest thing for us to prove, because we have actually seen it happening.

Come December ‘11, and there will be a more regulated show.

I have already mentioned the first ten timers in this thread. As for the entire spreadsheet of ’10 results, I will have it uploaded by March ’11 (held back till then for specific reasons).

Sorry Anand, we have all written you off as a Troll at this point since you can't back up anything you have written.

HHH wrote:

Sorry Anand, we have all written you off as a Troll at this point since you can't back up anything you have written.

"We all.."? Not me. Good work Anand! Great wit too. Cheers.

Davis Barefooter wrote:

HHH wrote:

Sorry Anand, we have all written you off as a Troll at this point since you can't back up anything you have written.

"We all.."? Not me. Good work Anand! Great wit too. Cheers.

Those of us that aren't barefoot nut jobs Davey...