Great article on barefoot/minimalist running!

That's it, you guys convinced me. I'm going out for my usual Friday night 15-miler. Only this time, NO SHOES! This is gonna be great.

A lot of you are missing the point of the article. While he is biased and says that there are no studies to support barefoot running, he doesn't outright discredit it. He says that biomechanics are the real issue and that minimalist/barefoot running is not for everyone, which is very very true.

Most of you are saying one of two things. Either it's; "Well I run barefoot now and no longer have all the injuries I had when I wore trainers, so that means the author is wrong." Or it's "I've been telling minimalist they are wrong for years and now they are injured." Why does everything always have to be so black/white, right/left, up/down, etc? Few things (if any) are so two dimensional. Do whats right for you and who cares what others do.

The only way minimalists will be satisfied is if we agree with them. Just remember, Vibram is taking these people as suckers just like every other company. They are laughing all the way to the bank. Any store that carries Vibram 5 Fingers, Frees, the Ecco version, etc. are all making money off these products. Their argument is weak. People are running more (big running boom 10-12 years ago). Hence, more injuries. They got nothing to stand on. Nothing else to debate. Those are the only arguments they bring to the table, really.

I just ran 9 miles with one foot wearing the Brooks Beast and one foot barefoot. It was awesome.

Nike Frees are \"minimalist\"? With those big marshmallow heel pads on the shoes you can hardly say that. They are supposed to create instability, more so than other shoes. Interestingly, barefoot would be the most stable, on dry ground. I don\'t think Frees would be considered \"minimalist\", as I understand the concept.

Also I have personally seen the height of the arch change numerous times with properly executed strength training, I disagree with the author of the blog on that point.

Not that slow.Right now, i can run between 25.7km/h and 15km/h reliably. injury and pain free.Winning is not the only priority.Anyway, i am looking to improve and it is happening.Nothing to do with fads.As far as being middleaged. It really depends on how long we all live.If you see Life only as a race, well you might want to take into account that it's sort of a very unique race: no one knows where and when the finish line comes up. And anybody, really anybody, could actually defeat you.I like the idea of enjoying the course.

Dr philosopher wrote:

He didn't say that he can beat every minimalist runner just every one he has encountered. He is getting at point here. Most minimalist are the types of runners who follow fads and those who are attracted to the back-to-nature aspect of the running barefoot. Therefore most of the minimalist are middle aged and slow.

HL wrote:

True story: I fractured two metatarsals in my foot solely from barefoot running about 160 meters on grass in the summer.

bonecruncher wrote:

Holy shit, that can't be typical. Any idea why a tenth of a mile on grass was too much for your metatarsals? History of anorexia, drink no milk and a gallon of Coke per day, structural anomalies... ?

It was truly a perfect storm of bad circumstances that unfortunately cost me an entire summer of training. My biomechanics were ridiculous because I was overcorrecting previous problems, muscles were weakened/unresponsive because I was just coming off a tibial stress fracture, and I had osteopenia. I know it is clearly an extreme example, but it is evidence that not everyone is ready for barefoot running, even in small increments.

sunarm wrote:

The only way minimalists will be satisfied is if we agree with them. Just remember, Vibram is taking these people as suckers just like every other company. They are laughing all the way to the bank. Any store that carries Vibram 5 Fingers, Frees, the Ecco version, etc. are all making money off these products. Their argument is weak. People are running more (big running boom 10-12 years ago). Hence, more injuries. They got nothing to stand on. Nothing else to debate. Those are the only arguments they bring to the table, really.

As a minimalist, I would be satisfied if those against minimalism or the "this isn't for everyone/some people can't run barefoot because of things they were born with" crowd would offer SOME kind of good counterpoint to the minimalist argument. So far, the only decent argument against minimalism on here is "I like the pegasus so leave me alone" (that includes Mark Plaatjes' article). Fine, fair enough, but that isn't really a counterpoint. It is unfortunate to see someone of such high stature and knowledge as Mark Plaatjes talking about "fat pads."

Fine, fair enough, but that isn't really a counterpoint. It is unfortunate to see someone of such high stature and knowledge as Mark Plaatjes talking about "fat pads."[/quote]

Tell that to someone with Morton's Toe or Morton's Neuroma. You all that dismiss basic anatomy will learn it when you are having problems.

Could we be clear on one thing? Isn't there a difference between barefoot and minimalist? As to the former, my understanding is that it compels one to run on the forefoot, the heel not being engineered to be the point of contact, with the VFF being in that camp.

Minimalist, on the other hand, have soles and thus allow heelstriking but have a minimal amount of other things going on. To some extent those are the types of shoes those of us who started in the early 70s/pre-Nike days wore.

Plaatjes is not high stature...he's like 5'4 and weighs like 85 pounds. But he's chill...

To be clear on anything may i suggest we avoid approaching the issue with exactoknives?

Even on th most simplistic level, etymological if you will, it should be easy to accept that barefooting is a subset of minimalism is subset of overall production.

Think of it as concentric circles.

This description then needs to be matrixed with running conditons: physical and physiological, terrain, speed and time and "goals" of sessions.

This is we want to have a civil approach.

Boulder Running Company can still sell minimalist shoes, so it's not like they only sell traditional running shoes. I think he wrote the article based on his knowledge / opinion, and because he's probably been asked about it numerous times.

sunarm wrote:

You all that dismiss basic anatomy will learn it when you are having problems.

This is the second most hilarious sentence I have ever seen on letsrun, behind the "it isn't tyranny of the majority if they voted on it" one I saw after the Maine gay marriage vote.

Guess I will keep waiting for that good argument from the other side. In the meantime, enjoy your heel striking, because my lack of knowledge about anatomy foolishly leads me to believe it might be a decent idea to footstrike when running on someplace with a joint.

Really, so explain anatomically why it is preferable to strike on a joint. This should be good. And please don't reference anything from Born to Run or Barefoot University.

I guess what I am saying is: you telling me my argument is "hilarious" doesn't make your argument any stronger. I'm all ears. And sooner is better than later.

why would references from Born to Run make an assertion any weaker? since when does citing from a published source make something less valid? especially scientific studies - McDougall's book cites a fairly large number of studies and observations. You can also find a bunch on your own if you search on google scholar or many other online databases if you take the time to look.

why would it not work for some people? as long as people gradually transition, i don't see any reason why someone shouldn't be able to run barefoot. it's very likely how we survived for a very long time, until very recently.

and why so much anger? people are trying to help each other - and the injuries that minimalists get are likely due to a number of factors, one of the main ones being doing too much too fast. could be running on too much asphalt, or any number of issues, but you can't fault people for trying to help someone else out when they discover something they think is great.

and i think that it's great that people are able to find success with and without running shoes. for me, it seems like the people who have made the transition to running barefoot/minimalism are merely trying to spread their joy and showing a potential way to grow as a runner. personally, i think that barefoot running might be a great way for me to avoid injury and run faster. if it doesn't i'll stop, if it does i'll continue.

my recommendation: have an open mind, read up on the literature, and try it out for yourself. don't tell barefoot runners to shut up, and don't make this into a name-calling contest. and keep enjoying running, with or without shoes.

Interesting how the shoe industry and it's proponnents won't discuss kids shoes. We can debate this thing all day. I've read the thread and it's 5 pages of nothing new. Let's talk about kids shoes and how these so called running experts at Brooks and other companies are producing the exact opposite type of childrens footwear required for healthy feet.

As far as growing childrens feet, the scientific research is not even debateable. They need something minimal. Until the shoe industry addresses this huge flaw they have zero credibility with me.

They fact that they and you supporters on LR will not even touch this only proves the point.

Yea, run in whatever you want, just please stop crippling little kids with these stiff foot casts.

Jim Weber of Brooks on barefoot running.