Anthony, cheers
Jonathan
Anthony, cheers
Jonathan
JonnyO wrote:
very comfortable and very flexible with a sensible low heel.
ROFL
rofl, this one is much better;
hedgehog wrote:
Sensible low heels? Are you a lesbian?
Has anyone trained in the Puma H Street? They look like they would work well. I know a couple guys who wear them as flats, but any one log any real miles in them?
JonnyO wrote:
whether solid rubber is better than eva foam which starts to compress and deform from the moment you start walking or running?
Solid rubber is best.
when did shoe companies stop using solid rubber soles and start using foam?
When they (1) found out it was cheaper, wore out more quickly, and (2) podiatrists found they generate more customers and income by designing poorly made shoes that cause injuries.
agreed dunes,
I think people are reluctant to acknowledge the truth about their injuries.
A while back, some good folks on this list turned me on to some windsurfing shoes(?) made by Teva. They said they were the next best thing to running barefoot. I looked at some and was impressed, but I chickened out and bought a slightly more heavy-duty version (Teva Gamma). Unlike the windsurfing shoes -- which are like rubberized ballet slippers -- the Gammas have a very, very thin layer of foam between the insole and rubber outsole. They have very slight amount of heel lift, but it's almost imperceptible.
They're the most comfortable damn things I've ever put my dogs in. And get this: they're actually shaped like the human foot (wide at the toes, narrow at the heel).
I'm coming back from meniscus surgery slowly, so I've only been able to run short distances in them, but they feel great. If interested, see the link below.
P.S. I have no commercial stake in these things whatsoever.
Hey thanx Drew I'm definately going to check those shoes out.
now this thread is going somewhere at last. although I did enjoy all that funny stuff on the first page. i also wondered if anyone was going to take me seriously.
I do a lot of barefoot running in the summmer, running any kind of distance at any kind of speed. to do this confidently, you need a good running surface.
when you find that surface, and you gain a bit of confidence, you will find yourself running ridiculously fast for less effort. this is of course because even a light pair of shoes weighs 200-250 grams. when you remove that weight, and run barefoot, the faster you run, the more you realise just how heavy 200-250 g is and how much it slows you down.
minimalism in a shoe for the roads and trails is very appealing to me Drew, so thannks again for your suggestion and the link.
Hey JonnyO,
Flipping through that same site, I found the windsurfing shoes I first mentioned (link below). I think they'd be very good on grass or even softer dirk/bark dust trails, but it would be a while before I'd brave the roads with them.
Speaking of brave, I remember reading about David Bedford putting in his 200-mile weeks, and I think he was wearing those (now retro) kangaroo-skin Adidas training flats(Olympias or Mexicanas, I think they were). I assume most of that was on pavement. I guess he had his share of injuries, but I think the fact that he was able to do it at all suggests the shoes back then were more than adequate.
Right, the lighter the shoe, the faster you run, provided the shoe doesn't throw off your stride, i.e. with heel lifts etc.
$60 is a lot to pay for a pair of shoes with no gimmicks.
All you basically need is a rubber sole and an elastic nylon upper.
you dont need to be brave Drew, your feet are designed for barefoot running, so running on roads, requires only protection from cuts to the feet. confidence will come with time, after all, dont you run around your home barefoot? or on the beach in summer?
Dave Bedford will probably acknowledge now, that he did too much training and could have run much faster than his world record in the 10000m. but like Zatopek and Jim Peters, he was a pioneer of his time.
by learning from the great runners of the past, todays runners are standing on the shoulders of giants.
These look just like the mexico 66's to me? any one know if they are very different
http://thestore.adidas.com/cgi-bin/adilive/b2c/index.w?sourceid=qDRCP9P9X0UnAhifciOZ
that link doesn't work. what's the name of the shoe?
Sorry, the "Italia" its in the Originals
..you dont know the brand names..??..In other words you have no idea what the f*** your talking about.......
the brand name is shoreline. what's your problem? if these shoes last more than 500 miles, then dont you think I've made a good choice?other posters are talking about more than 1000 miles from similar shoes.
B.S.Detector wrote:
..you dont know the brand names..??..In other words you have no idea what the f*** your talking about.......
Why the f*** would you want a lesbian girlfriend? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of having a girlfriend?