How did the shoe companies convince us that we need high heels again?

Nike zoom streak 7. I would run in them everyday if my 39 1/2 year old feet could take it.

Because we prefer not to have achilles and calf injuries, and they gave it to us.

Prefer not to have injuries wrote:

Because we prefer not to have achilles and calf injuries, and they gave it to us.

Another sucker for slick marketing. Enjoy paying $250 for your shoes.

I've run in low heeled, minimal racing shoes for 3 decades and NEVER had ANY of those problems. Now the high heels are all the rage, to the point that traditional racers are hard to find.

Kipchoge’s first sub 2 attempt essentially changed the industry. Wear what you think is best for you. Low profile worked for me several years ago. But now I find some of the more cushioned/plated shoes to be more fun. And there seems to be enough anecdotal feedback that says you will be at a disadvantage if competition is a goal. If we are competing against our older selves perhaps we should stick with whatever we wore 10-20 years ago.

I’m just glad Shelby had enough integrity to not seek an advantage and compete in old school spikes.

hobby jogging harry wrote:

Prefer not to have injuries wrote:

Because we prefer not to have achilles and calf injuries, and they gave it to us.

Another sucker for slick marketing. Enjoy paying $250 for your shoes.

I've run in low heeled, minimal racing shoes for 3 decades and NEVER had ANY of those problems. Now the high heels are all the rage, to the point that traditional racers are hard to find.

What about Nike Zoom Victory Waffle 5? Flat, under 5 oz.

Prefer not to have injuries wrote:

Because we prefer not to have achilles and calf injuries, and they gave it to us.

I switched to training in racing flats 20 years ago after having a string of Achilles issues. Then never having another Achilles issue since.

*shrug*

Alan

hobby jogging harry wrote:

I miss the traditional, light, low-heeled racing shoes. How have the marketers convinced us we need to run in stilettos?

Any recommendations for a traditional racing shoe? Don't even bring up the pogo shoes; not interested.

Seems none of the professionals are running a (half) marathon with a zero drop shoe. So zero drop is out of the euqtions, for that distances in my opinion, as it seems to be not so fast. Otherwise the pros would use it and the big shoe companies would have it.

lexel wrote:

hobby jogging harry wrote:

I miss the traditional, light, low-heeled racing shoes. How have the marketers convinced us we need to run in stilettos?

Any recommendations for a traditional racing shoe? Don't even bring up the pogo shoes; not interested.

Seems none of the professionals are running a (half) marathon with a zero drop shoe. So zero drop is out of the euqtions, for that distances in my opinion, as it seems to be not so fast. Otherwise the pros would use it and the big shoe companies would have it.

The pros wear whatever the highest bidder pays them to wear. They would literally race in clown shoes if someone paid them enough. What the elites wear is completely irrelevant to those of us who actually buy our shoes.

Maybe if you look at the global elite, but if you look at national elite (not your big ass country US, but a small 12million people country) they usually pay their own shoes. Everyone with a choice are going with high stack carbon shoes.

therminator88 wrote:

Everyone with a choice are going with high stack carbon shoes.

Incorrect!

Several people on the board seem to like the Reebok Run Fast Pro, which is relatively low-drop and has a modern foam. I've used the regular Run Fast because the Pro is too low-drop for my Achilles problems, but it doesn't sound like that's a concern for you.

Prefer not to have injuries wrote:

Because we prefer not to have achilles and calf injuries, and they gave it to us.

You should pay more attention. Yeah it turned out that all the 'natural', 'zero drop' and so on didn't really lower injury rates so higher stacks came back to mainstream trainers. Thus at first glance your words would've been my words too. But if you try and read not just the title it turns out this is about RACERS. They have never had injury prevention as first priority anyway.

therminator88 wrote:

Maybe if you look at the global elite, but if you look at national elite (not your big ass country US, but a small 12million people country) they usually pay their own shoes. Everyone with a choice are going with high stack carbon shoes.

What kind of country is that? 12m is a bit larger than Sweden. Swedish national elite without a brand contract would seem crazy. There may be some, but that's def not the norm.

JamesD2 wrote:

Several people on the board seem to like the Reebok Run Fast Pro, which is relatively low-drop and has a modern foam. I've used the regular Run Fast because the Pro is too low-drop for my Achilles problems, but it doesn't sound like that's a concern for you.

What makes no apparent sense is that many years past the new cushy foams, Reebok may be THE only company to use that cushy foam in a thin, very light racing shoe.

Why the heck haven't the other companies - perhaps Nike foremost - done this?

A month or two ago when I saw new adidas racing shoes at Running Warehouse, I had to laugh. Their huge foamy, plated racing shoe weighed x (decent for a bulky racing shoe, 7-something oz, maybe?). But their "bare bones"/traditional racing shoe weighed slightly MORE, and thus NOT decent for a thinner racer 40+ years after racing shoes started weighing 5 oz.

Oh, and the Reebok shoes weighs what, 3-something? THAT is progress. If you had told me in 1980 when the 5 oz. Nike Eagle came out that many 7-8 ounce shoes would be marketed as racing shoes 40 years later, I guess that I wouldn't have believed you.

And ironic (and outright sad for the other running shoe companies) that it has to come from a company that appeared to be dead fairly recently, and is probably still mostly focused on gym rats.....

hobby jogging harry wrote:

lexel wrote:

Seems none of the professionals are running a (half) marathon with a zero drop shoe. So zero drop is out of the euqtions, for that distances in my opinion, as it seems to be not so fast. Otherwise the pros would use it and the big shoe companies would have it.

The pros wear whatever the highest bidder pays them to wear. They would literally race in clown shoes if someone paid them enough. What the elites wear is completely irrelevant to those of us who actually buy our shoes.

Just super wrong, any professional would love to break e.g. 2h for a marathon earning a lot of many.

Having a good material matters in a lot of sports. Why people think running is different?

So again zero drop shoes is not that what elite runs with. Period.

If it would be faster they would have and use it.

hobby jogging harry wrote:

lexel wrote:

Seems none of the professionals are running a (half) marathon with a zero drop shoe. So zero drop is out of the euqtions, for that distances in my opinion, as it seems to be not so fast. Otherwise the pros would use it and the big shoe companies would have it.

The pros wear whatever the highest bidder pays them to wear. They would literally race in clown shoes if someone paid them enough. What the elites wear is completely irrelevant to those of us who actually buy our shoes.

Many non-Nike athletes got special permission to race in Vaporflys.

The extra energy return in the heel improves performance. Dinosaurs like you will just have to deal with it, or keep telling us how your old VHS player works just fine thanks.

hobby jogging harry wrote:

Prefer not to have injuries wrote:

Because we prefer not to have achilles and calf injuries, and they gave it to us.

Another sucker for slick marketing. Enjoy paying $250 for your shoes.

I've run in low heeled, minimal racing shoes for 3 decades and NEVER had ANY of those problems. Now the high heels are all the rage, to the point that traditional racers are hard to find.

I had soleus/calf injuries all the time with old spikes and flats. The past few years with the new shoes that has all gone away. If you never had injuries before then good for you, but a ton of people did and a lifted heel helps prevent those injuries

People in this thread still seem to conflate stack and drop, which are different.

The Born To Run guy actually claimed in the book that everyone now would be a runner if Nike hadn't invented cushioned shoes and gotten everyone injured. So maybe the shoe companies just want to injure more people so there will be fewer runners.

There may have been some market correction, but low-drop Hokas and such are a much bigger market share now than a decade ago and I'd guess that the average drop is lower these days than back then.

But it's not really clear what we're talking about. By low-heel vs stiletto, you imply drop, but you seem to be talking about racing flats vs super shoes and I'm not sure if the conversation is about drop or stack or both or neither.