80s & 90s runners: how did you survive the terrible shoes?

Hot take: People were stronger and had stronger feet; a breed apart from the cushy supershoe generation we're currently in. Read Born to Run to find out more. Jokes aside, human adaptation is amazing and runners likely had higher bone density.

For a company that really never had much presence in the running market they had some models that I really liked. I can't think of the names of a couple of them. One was a racing shoe. Another was a trainer that I looked really cool and felt great, again, no recall of the name. And the other one I liked was a shoe called the Trans Am Trainer. It probably was an "entry level" shoe. I'm not sure running shops even carried it but it was a staple in shoe departments at big box stores. It was very cushioned but fairly light and flexible. And I recall there was a stretch of time when Bill Rodgers was running for them.

Medial posts were terrible for me. There was a time around 1990 when I was having trouble with plantar fasciitis. It would be bad one day and seem to get better for about three days and then get bad again. At the time I was rotating between four pairs of shoes. One had a medial post and eventually I noticed that the bad day was the one after I'd run in the medial posted shoe. I took that one out of the rotation and the problem was gone in less than a week.

Nike Pegasus and the Nike Air Edge (circa 1985) and the Oregon waffle for XC were great shoes. I liked the Air Edge used for 10km on the track and road. Pegasus lasted forever.

I started running in the mid 70s and ran in awful shoes (my family was too poor for Nike and so I ran in whatever crap K-Mart or Kinney had on sale). At least for my crappy connective tissue, I didn't survive them. Injuries started mounting in junior high and by high school, I was on the limited training plan to avoid missing races. I haven't been able to stay consistently on the track until running in these foamy support shoes we have today - wish we'd had this tech back then.

As someone who trains in flats, I would argue it's easier to "survive" back then.

Wow! Etonic shoes really brought back memories for me. They still exist at etonic.com. The shoes look like they're still the same model they sold in 1980.

My daily running goes back to 1975. I ran for 2 years in high school with a pair of Onitsuka Tiger Nairobi shoes that had 7 mm of EVA foam. After that it was a pair of NB 320 the first New Balance model that sold widely. I think runners in the 1970s and 1980s just got toughened by logging long road miles in shoes that today you wouldn't wear to the grocery store.

Perhaps, but referencing Born to Run won't strengthen your argument .

shoes were good by the 90s, flats were decent too.. the nike eldorets and ventulus came out and that was a game changer that everyone responded well too

Before Asics, there was the Onitsuka Tiger.

That's going to merit a look. Thanks.

Etonic had a model in 83 or 84 that had a mid/outsole sculpted like your foot, decades before shoes were anything but completely flat (Adidas sort of did the same thing ten years later). LOVED that shoe, but it disappeared after about three months.

I train in the XERO HFS 280km a week, been training in minimal shoes / barefoot for 11 years and I was actually looking through last weeks race photos.. so many people wearing supershoes and yet there was more heel striking than a bowling alley

My dad used to run back in the late 70s and he had a pair of blue and gold Etonic Street Fighters.

i was very challenged to find a suitable running shoe,

i landed on the front of the foot, then heel, then lifted off the front part of the foot.

the adidas 72 was the best, then the sl 76 came out and it was more than terrible.

since i would find a good shoe, and within 2 years they "upgraded" it, where they changed back to a clunker overpadded, which causes knee and shin issues, which every coach knows about, except the new design team did not know anything about shoes, and god knows what happened to their former good team, that got it right.

this is the experience,

a good shoe is discontinued and the next generation is crap.

for all their warts, al salazar, gordon pirie, percy cerutti, victor conte, and many other world class sports medicine pros (from premier sports leagues), they know the biomechanics and principles in the gate, foot plant, transfer of momentum, and these types are the ones that can contribute.

big corp on the other hand, in their weird power games and hubris, will fire the good guys, and bring in phonies.

this is called the theory of de-evolution, where, despite all the money and technology in the world, things go backwards.

this is your world today, top to bottom

it is counterintuitive, but fact. beyond repute.

at one time, i went with basketball shoes that offered great support, and without padding that messes up your stride.

letsrun could do us a favor and do a biomechanics study of at least a handful of shoes, and lend a verdict, and also red flag model changes that are obviously garbage.

adidas sl 72 upvote

sl 76 downvote piece of sh**t

I didn't always survive - first xc race was in Nike Oboris, which had zero tread or support = strained Achilles and missed most of the season. Lots of knee tendonitis in high school from crappy Puma 9190 trainers, rectified by the Nike LD1000 (the first ever maximalist shoe!!). My spikes were Adidas Jets, until Nike came out with the Vanquer (sp?). College saw increasing PF issues due to spikes with little arch cushioning/support and super sore legs after a 5000 or 10k. The Waffle Racers (v2) were decent xc shoes though. By the mid-80's Nike also had some good road racers, but training in ASICS high drop GT1000s (or whatever they were called) ultimately killed my knee such that I had to quit running. It wasn't until Hokas came out that I could resume.

Fila German Silva Trainer FTW baby!!!!!!