I you're running faster than 8:00/mile then yes, it matters. I'm not sure why we're even debating this. Name one wr that's been set in the last 20 years that was done in anything but a spike or flat.
I you're running faster than 8:00/mile then yes, it matters. I'm not sure why we're even debating this. Name one wr that's been set in the last 20 years that was done in anything but a spike or flat.
Once you're up into your 40s, your legs will be negatively affected having to absorb too much pounding from minimal shoes (as Jack Daniels says in that article).
Can you direct me to where he says that?
hhnhn wrote:
gap.coaching wrote:Here is a simple test to find out if lighter shoes make a difference for you. Run a 8 x 1/2 mile hill interval workout on a hill that is at least a 6% grade. Recover on the downhills. Start the 1st interval in your lightest shoes. After the second interval switch to your heaviest shoes. After the fourth back to your lightest shoes. After 6th back to your heaviest shoes. I like the new balance 5000s (about 3 oz.) for my light shoes as they still provide a lot bounce and protection. For the heavy shoes I use the addias energy boost (about 9.5 oz.). I found 8 to 10 seconds difference for each interval between my light shoes and the heavy ones. On a hilly race course the lighter shoes can make a dramatic difference for me.
There is no way 6 ounces slowed you down 10 seconds on a half mile. That's all in your head.
For 1/2 mi repeats it could be a substantial difference to switch from a flat to a show with such a huge heel. Changing your stride for such a short distance could be big.
lil tank wrote:
Do a few ounces really make that much difference with speed?
Yes, but only to OCD weirdos. Fortunatley for shoe companies, there are tons of them in the distance running world.
NJ Possible wrote:
hhnhn wrote:There is no way 6 ounces slowed you down 10 seconds on a half mile. That's all in your head.
For 1/2 mi repeats it could be a substantial difference to switch from a flat to a show with such a huge heel. Changing your stride for such a short distance could be big.
And that has nothing to do with weight.
t94bell wrote:
Yes, in a mile race the difference can be up to two seconds.
For a pound yes. For a few ounces no.
hhnhn wrote:
t94bell wrote:Yes, in a mile race the difference can be up to two seconds.
For a pound yes. For a few ounces no.
I wear shoes that have a massive base to prevent pronation and the difference in weight between spikes and is this significant. This is why I said "up to" two pounds.
You are right I'm sure the placebo effect might influence you (smiling). My suggestion is for you do the test using the "double blind" methodology. You need to run it blind folded and have someone switch the shoes for you so you won't know which shoes you are running in. Of course you might need to have a "sighted" pacer with you to keep you on course. Have fun with it, you might surprise yourself (smiling).
G force wrote:
Once you're up into your 40s, your legs will be negatively affected having to absorb too much pounding from minimal shoes (as Jack Daniels says in that article).
Can you direct me to where he says that?
See the link posted by "Tom Waits" earlier in the thread.
I rotate shoes, light, heavy, medium, different drops. Since committing to that, I have no foot problems, and my chronic psoas pain magically disappeared. I also run on grass (but not weed) pretty regularly, which makes me feel springy on roads. I race in Pure Cadence. Proprioception is important: you know when shoes feel good, and, for me, they feel different on different days, depending on workload. I have 4 diff pairs in the rotation. In short, it isn't a simple trade off of weight for turnover.
Why not lose 5 pounds, run barefoot with a 40 pound vest on and then just run PR's on pure hate??
Leadfoot wrote:
Harry Pi wrote:Wouldn't it make more sense to drop 5 lbs before worrying about a few shoe ounces?
Why not drop 5 lbs AND lose a few shoe ounces?
Harry Pi wrote:
lil tank wrote:Do a few ounces really make that much difference with speed?
Wouldn't it make more sense to drop 5 lbs before worrying about a few shoe ounces?
Rember Newton? F=ma? Rearrange that to a = F/m. Mass is the property of stuff that resists acceleration. The big difference between a few ounces at your foot and a few lbs around your waist is that your foot is going through large acceleration cycles, more than your body. And limbs are in rotational motion so the distribution of mass matters in addition to mass itself. The more mass that is far away from the points of rotation (knee/hip) the more resistance to acceleration.
So yeh, a few ounces matter.
.middle professor wrote:
Harry Pi wrote:Wouldn't it make more sense to drop 5 lbs before worrying about a few shoe ounces?
Rember Newton? F=ma? Rearrange that to a = F/m. Mass is the property of stuff that resists acceleration. The big difference between a few ounces at your foot and a few lbs around your waist is that your foot is going through large acceleration cycles, more than your body. And limbs are in rotational motion so the distribution of mass matters in addition to mass itself. The more mass that is far away from the points of rotation (knee/hip) the more resistance to acceleration.
So yeh, a few ounces matter.
That is a good explanation. However, does anyone in here really think heavy shoes make no difference in running speed and duration???
The difference between a 5 oz racing flat and a 12oz training on race performance is ....a lot. It's not merely in ones head. The physics explanation above explains most of it. But those clunky training shoes with all that midsole do not allow the foot to move as freely.
As someone already mentioned, you don't see the fastest runners fooling around in clunky running shoes when they need to run as fast as possible.
hhnhn wrote:
There is no way 6 ounces slowed you down 10 seconds on a half mile. That's all in your head.
Exactly, it did
subfive wrote:
middle professor wrote:.Rember Newton? F=ma? Rearrange that to a = F/m. Mass is the property of stuff that resists acceleration. The big difference between a few ounces at your foot and a few lbs around your waist is that your foot is going through large acceleration cycles, more than your body. And limbs are in rotational motion so the distribution of mass matters in addition to mass itself. The more mass that is far away from the points of rotation (knee/hip) the more resistance to acceleration.
So yeh, a few ounces matter.
That is a good explanation. However, does anyone in here really think heavy shoes make no difference in running speed and duration???
The difference between a 5 oz racing flat and a 12oz training on race performance is ....a lot. It's not merely in ones head. The physics explanation above explains most of it. But those clunky training shoes with all that midsole do not allow the foot to move as freely.
As someone already mentioned, you don't see the fastest runners fooling around in clunky running shoes when they need to run as fast as possible.
Intelligent debate at last. I thought this thread was doomed until now.