I would suggest it's not even a worthy debate. My main observation is that there is no reason to believe it should even be discussed.The first step would be to come up with a reason to have a debate. This should come as measured observations from those who want to change, in a peer-reviewed manner.I have some personal opinions:- Your body finds the most natural running form, based on a number of variables, and type of shoes, or no shoes, is simply one of the input variables.- I've been wearing shoes since I was about 3 years old. Changing to a barefoot technique may take years or decades of "retraining", at a time when my feet are not growing.- Improving form should take a holistic approach, looking at many more factors than isolating how the foot lands.A lot of what I think about running technique and barefoot running is in line with what Ross & Jon say here:Running Technique:http://www.sportsscientists.com/2008/01/running-technique.htmlRegarding form, I liked what Matt Fitzgerald had to say in "Brain Training", about improving form. He described many elements of form, common to elite runners, and some "proprioceptive cues" and cross training exercises, to improve form, or delay the breakdown of form in longer races.
please consider wrote:
rekrunner,
it was suggested a few pages ago that this was not well put debate.
Maybe we could start a good debate now. Please suggest some titles.
Also I would like to take this opportunity to apologize to Malmo if his feelings were hurt.
In reading back and around threads, I found some things that he posted which really made me laugh, LOL.