by Jim Hixson, CSCS
Minimalism isn’t going away. Too many runners have discovered for the first time what it’s like to run injury-free. They have awakened to the joy of a midfoot strike instead of heels hitting first, something that conventional running shoes with stiff, outsized crash pads pretty much guaranteed. But in the macro sense of things, minimalist runners make up a rather small percentage of all runners. Some estimates put the number around 10 percent, which means that the other 90 percent are still hooked on traditional shoes or are currently in thrall with maximalist footwear.
In part one, “Why Minimalism Went Flat,” I examined the reasons why minimalism has lost its luster, and why the trend towards maximalism has taken a literal foothold among the running shoe companies. Big shoes are in. In a big way. In this second part of the series, I look at the seemingly elusive concept of correct running technique and its relationship to footwear
Most of the online and Facebook responses to part one were positive, although there was also criticism. Pete Larson, of Runblogger, wrote a rebuttal on his site: “Of course, one can ask, “Minimal, maximal, traditional, who cares? It’s just shoes, and being able to enjoy running is what it’s all about.”
Two assumptions are seemingly present in Pete’s statement: (1) running shoes don’t have an effect on a runner’s biomechanics; and (2) even if shoes did affect biomechanics, a runner’s form has no positive or negative effects on the sheer joy of running.
On the contrary, I would argue that shoes do have a significant effect on running form and form matters, because the way you run is connected to the effects running has on your body and your performance.
Pete went on to say, “If everyone who went minimal had an incredibly positive experience, the trend would not have gone flat. Is there still a market for minimal shoes?”
Yes, there is actually a market for minimal shoes, but most seem to be bought online, simply because many brick-and-mortar retailers have lost interest in what they always considered to be merely a marketing opportunity, rather than an attempt to improve the running experience. I believe Pete actually sells minimal shoes through Runblogger, and a brief look at comments on this website would indicate that many readers are still avid proponents of minimal shoes.
Pete continues, “There is no convincing evidence that one type of shoe is better than any other, and in the absence of such evidence the best approach is to simply find what works best for you.”
This is simply not true. You cannot run in a pair of shoes that changes the natural position of the foot to the ground, restricts the natural movement of the foot, and causes the intrinsic foot muscles to atrophy, and then claim that these changes are positive, or even neutral. Most running shoes treat the foot as a single segment, rather than an articulated structure that provides us with essential information from changing surfaces. External support, such as a shoe, always changes biomechanics.
Foot strike is only a part of the big picture
The emphasis of proponents of minimal shoes should be less focused on foot strike and more concerned about the big picture – running properly, because correct technique is necessary to achieve the three goals all athletes have in common: injury prevention, increased efficiency, and improved performance. Foot strike is important, but correct positioning of the foot at the time of initial contact is more often a result of running with good technique, rather than the cause. Of course there will always be slight differences in technique between individual runners, just as there are between individual freestyle swimmers or baseball pitchers, but the basic biomechanics are the same for each set of movements.
It still seems remarkable that the argument of many opponents of minimal shoes is that there is no “natural” way to run; rather, each individual has a unique style that should rarely be altered. Nobody would ever consider arguing this point about any other athletic activity, because it’s nonsense. Try to convince a sprinter that running heel first, bent over at the waist, with a rotating torso is just as good as running with a midfoot/forefoot strike, a slight lean from the ankles, and with a proper arm drive and she will give you an incredulous look before dismissing everything you have said in the past or will say in the future. Nevertheless, discussions about correct form seem to be poorly informed.
If you think that runners are aware of these topics and other issues connected with running shoes and form; and of the correlation of form with injuries, efficiency, and performance, I have an anecdote that might be an antidote to that misconception.
At the Running Event in Austin,Texas in 2010, I had a chance to have a short conversation with Chris McDougall. I told him how much I liked the two chapters in Born to Run, one on the evolutionary history of running and the other on the development of the traditional running shoe. He told me that he enjoyed writing both chapters, but almost left them out of the book, because he thought most runners already knew this information. Of course, he soon realized that he was mistaken and probably would have added chapters on the science of running had he written the book after he had done more research and had more experience running in minimal shoes and barefoot.
Every sport has to determine and describe the correct movement patterns for that particular sport, and running is no exception. For doubters, who claim that each individual does and should run uniquely, they need to explain why it is possible for coaches in other sports to describe the correct technique for such complex activities as:
- sprinting
- race walking
- cycling
- swimming
- weightlifting
- throwing
This list could go on for several pages, but it’s obvious that other sports don’t have an issue with describing and coaching correct technique. Running is not a unique activity, in the sense that it is controlled by the same laws of physics as other sports. In a Runner’s World interview in 2010, Alberto Salazar said to Amby Burfoot:“There has to be one best way of running. It’s got to be like a law of physics. And if you deviate too much from that – the way I did in my career – it can be a big handicap. You can be efficient for a while with bad form – maybe with a low shuffle stride – but eventually that’s not good for your body. It’s going to produce tightness and muscular imbalances and structural problems. Then you get injuries, and if you’re not careful – if you don’t take care of muscular and structural issues – the injuries can put you into a downward spiral. You show me someone with bad form, and I’ll show you someone who is going to have a lot of injuries and a short career.”
Steve Magness, a former assistant coach under Salazar at the Oregon Project, now the head cross-country coach at the University of Houston, wrote about the difficulty runners have with the topic of correct running form in “Running with Proper Biomechanics,” a post on his Running Science blog:“Distance runners and coaches seem to hate the topic of running form. Most subscribe to the idea that a runner will naturally find his best stride and that stride should not be changed. However, just like throwing a baseball or shooting a basketball, running is a skill that must be learned. The problem with learning how to run is that there are so many wrong ideas out there. This is partly due to the complexity of the process and partly due to a lack of understanding of biomechanics. It’s my belief that the wide range of ‘correct’ ways to run has led to this apathetic attitude towards running form changes by most athletes and coaches.”
Magness goes on to write about the effects of shoes on gait and the influence of using other runners as models, both topics that are essential to discuss, if the importance of minimal shoes is ever to be understood.
It should be emphasized there are slight differences in the form of even elite runners running with correct technique, just as there are slight differences between two professional baseball pitchers, or two Olympic freestyle swimmers, but the biomechanics are the same.
I found this nugget on Tracy Peal’s “The Educated Guide to Better Sports Blog”: “We can run better. Instead we become movement victims, choosing our running style by copying someone who copied it from someone else, and so on, until we’re running with no quality. Instinct falls prey to imitation.“Not so with animals. Percy Cerruty, renowned Australian running coach of the 50s and 60s, observed that ‘amongst the other things I learnt from the study of the racehorse was that they all moved exactly similarly: that a silhouette of another – extent of leg-throw – movement of legs – head and neck angles and relationships – all identical. Whether heavily built or lightly, long in the legs or not so long, tall or short.’ So, if we accept that all species of animal move similarly, it would suggest that evolution is really about changing variables to match the situation as a subplot to finding the most suitable way to get from Point A to Point B.”
The world’s best runners must remain uninjured, perform at a high intensity, and use less energy than their competitors in order to survive and succeed. When we look at them, we notice obvious similarities in a majority:
· Initial contact with the midfoot/forefoot close to the center of mass;
· Relatively brief ground contact resulting from quick development of force;
· Relatively high cadence (180 ± 10);
· Upright body position with slight forward lean from the ankles;
· Slight knee bend of the supporting leg;
· Relatively large range of hip movement through proper extension and flexion;
· Compact arm swing initiated by the shoulders with minimal rotation and no crossover of the midline;
It’s true that some elite runners violate some of these principles, but none violate many of them and perhaps most, especially those from East Africa, who grew up running barefoot, follow all of them. These distance runners wear minimal shoes when competing– spikes or racing flats.
What then is the basic argument for wearing minimal running shoes?
In 2014, the coauthors of the American College of Sports Medicine position paper, “Selecting Running Shoes”, Dr. Kevin Vincent and Dr. Heather Vincent, husband and wife, were interviewed by Dr. Mark Cucuzzella about their recommendations, which were very different from the 2011 position paper, “Selecting and Effectively Using Running Shoes”, which was written by different authors. The early paper recommended selecting shoes based upon foot type and recognized the “normal foot hits on the outside of the heel and rolls inward (pronates)”. Kevin Vincent acknowledged that he and his wife had been convinced that this paradigm was correct, but once they began doing research on the topic, they changed their mind, and their new views were expressed in the 2013 publication.
Kevin told Mark: “We have evolved from traditional thoughts on running and running shoes to advocate a more ‘natural’ form of running whereby the shoes don’t dictate how you run and how your foot responds to the ground. We have noticed that when we film runners in a thick-soled shoe, they drive their heel into the ground, but if I take their shoes off and make them run down the street in their socks, they instinctively adopt a light, efficient mid/forefoot strike. I then ask them, ‘Why do you run differently just because we put a shoe on?’ The body instinctively knows how to run to minimize forces, so why does it change because of the shoe? The simple answer is because the shoe protects runners from poor gait choices by minimizing the pain of the heel strike, but causes multiple other gait problems that don’t become apparent until overuse injuries occur.”
Running is a basic form of locomotion for humans and for millions of years we have run without external assistance, often on hard and rough surfaces in unforgiving landscapes. Running in a minimal shoe does diminish the information you sense from the ground, but also allows you to protect the feet from sharp objects, rough surfaces, and extreme weather. Since minimal shoes preserve your ability to move with very little restriction, wearing them is likely to allow us to run with correct technique, and running with proper technique reduces your chances of injuries, increases efficiency and improves performance.
The characteristics of traditional running shoes work against this ability and can actually cause injuries in the short term and dysfunction over the course of a running career. Why would anyone wear traditional running shoes? Why would anyone want to run with poor form?
I studied videos of runners in the human performance lab of the former head of Biomechanics and Engineering for the US Olympic Committee, Dr. Bill Sands.
What you see is that in all but the most elite runners, EACH different shoe that a runner would wear would affect their gait, sometimes dramatically.
And I never saw a minimalist shoe that “encouraged a midfoot strike,” as many claim to do. In fact, I often saw the opposite, where accomplished barefoot runners would put on shoes advertised as “barefoot”, and start heel striking and overstriding… and not even know they were doing it!
How? Because the amount of feedback they were getting from the ground was reduced enough by these “minimal” shoes, to allow them to return to previously built movement patterns (habits) without noticing.
This is often true, which is why many runners switching to minimal shoes without any barefoot experience become hurt, although even barefoot runners can experience gait changes when wearing shoes. The sensors on the sole of the foot, and even on the top of the foot, provide information that is necessary for the body to safely prepare for impact. In Pete Larson’s video of the NY Barefoot 5K a couple years ago, he estimated that 20% of the barefoot runners were running heel first. For some people that observation was proof that there is no correct way to run; my conclusion was that muscle memory has a tremendous effect on a runner’s gait even after they’ve stopped wearing traditional shoes. I believe that some barefoot running, well, as much as possible, is necessary to have correct form. Sometimes it’s not possible to be barefooted, just as it’s not always possible to be barehanded. Ideally, when we have to wear shoes we are able to preserve the mechanics we have when we are barefooted. This doesn’t always happen, as you mentioned, so it’s always necessary to be attentive and monitor our form when running in minimal shoes. I can’t think of any possible reason to wear a traditional shoe. If you really want to read a good criticism of minimal shoes, be sure to check the research of Steven Robbins, Md @ http://www.stevenrobbinsmd.com
Dear All,
Congrats for this brilliant article. Everything is in it. Keep up the good teaching work to heal the running community from bad running form.
Cheers.
Barefoot Pat
Totally agree, I was running with thick shoes before 2011. I actually had no problem except I wanted to run faster. It took me 3 years to switch to barefoot. My running form have change a lot. I had no choice, when I went barefoot on ciment there’s only one way to run, and it was not like before! My speed is still not as good as before, my Achilles are not strong enough for fast running but I’m concentrating more on long slow runs. I enjoy running a lot more now, the feeling is wonderful.
If a person is running in minimal shoes, even in Vibram FiveFingers, and is overstriding or making contacting with the heel too high from the ground, usually simply running on concrete for a few minutes will correct that fault. The plantar surface of the foot is durable, but also very sensitive, and can easily detect excessive sheer forces quickly. You can see a minority of barefoot runners striking heel first, due to the deep muscle memories of running in traditional shoes, but you won’t see barefoot runners running with their heels high off the ground and striking midfoot. That style of running will remove skin, even durable plantar skin, very quickly. The ability of the foot to serve as an early warning system is underrated.
Jim, another GREAT article. I always treasure your insight and advice. It surely has helped me!
Your statement towards the end of the article that “wearing [minimal shoes] is likely to allow us to run with correct technique” I think needs a lot more justification before the truth in it can bloom. It suggests that minimal shoes alone will correct poor technique, but (I’m sure you know this) slipping on a new pair of Vibrams after years of wearing thick-soled, supportive shoes, and then going for a run, could well result in a sudden injury.
This is precisely what happened to me. The very day following my first run (1 mile but fast for me) in a pair of minimals I was hit by painful PF in my left foot. A simplistic logic might well conclude that the minimals were the cause of this (and I’m sure that this is partly why minimal show sales haven’t ‘taken off’). A lot of my running friends saw my injury, took one look at my minimal shoes and said “Bin ’em” (ie. consign them to a waste processing facility).
But it’s only because I had read so much of the biomechanical theory and practice behind minimals prior to buying them that I refused. I had not simply bought them because they were ‘the latest thing’. And so my logic tells me the contrary to everyone else’s logic: the minimal shoes only revealed (and took painful advantage of) the flaws in my mechanical running technique. A visit to a physiotherapist to treat the PF revealed my left calf muscle to be much shorter than my right muscle. Had I known this prior to donning my minimals I might have thought twice about going for what I thought was going to be a harmless try-out run to begin the transition to barefoot.
Personally, therefore, I would recommend that before you do any running in minimals you (a) try walking in minimals/barefoot (and we all do a lot more walking than we do running), and (b) make sure your musculature is in reasonable shape and hasn’t been f***ed up by years of shoe wearing. Get yourself checked out by a physiotherapist, or at the very least find all the muscle stretching exercises you can find on youtube and copy them (gently at first) and make damn sure that you’re symmetrical!
As far as I’m concerned, supportive running shoes were weakening my left calf for years, and for the next few months I’m going to pay for that. But, much as I would love to wear my minimals, it will be a while before I run as nature intended.
In 2011, Pete Larson filmed runners at the New York City Barefoot Run (There were actually 169 barefoot runners and 42 runners wearing Vibram FiveFingers). It’s safe to assume that nearly everyone, possibly everyone, running in that race had grown up wearing shoes and had worn traditional running shoes until they switched to either minimal shoes or barefoot (or both). The video revealed that almost half of the runners wearing VFF were striking heel first, as were 20% of the barefoot runners. From these observations some people have concluded that there really isn’t a universally preferred way to strike, but I would claim that this video record is evidence that simply wearing minimal shoes, or even running barefoot, will not cause changes in footstrike, or techniqe.
Four factors have to exist for changes in your running technique to occur:
– understanding of correct form;
– evaluation of your own form;
– intention to change (commitment); and
– attention to form during the transition (monitoring).
Significant muscle imbalances are the result of years of any athletic activity with poor technique. With traditional running shoes the soft heel cushioning prevents the runner from receiving the immediate sensory information associated with poor technique (pain). As a result, muscle memory is acquired and has to be eradicated.
One of the best articles I ever read on the topic!
I had massive hip and knee problems after 20 years of jogging in padded shoes.
I switched over to minimalist shoes and all pain was immediately gone, I feel I can run until I am 100 now (I am 50…I started minimalist 3 years ago.).
So, why don’t all people switch?
– They don’t feel the need when there is no pain yet.
– With padded shoes, jogging/running is so easy. Put them on, start running….no style to be learnt. People do not feel the shocks in their knee- and hip-joints.
– Minimalist/barefoot style is not so easy – it has to be learnt, like Tennis, or Skiing. It took me at least 6 months.
– You have to build up leg muscles for it (because your muscles do all the work, and not the soles anymore).
And above all, don’t forget there is a massive industry behind padded shoes. My minimalist shoes still look brandnew (after 3 years), it looks like I will never need new ones again.
Your comments are accurate. Your third point: “Minimalist/barefoot style is not so easy – it has to be learnt, like Tennis, or Skiing,” is easy for many people to dismiss, since running is “natural”, but might actually be the first point we should make when we talk about running technique. Running is a very complex athletic activity; even if almost everyone can run, most run poorly and some should never run, at least not in their current physical condition. Throwing is also completely natural, but if you have 10 people throw a ball, it is immediately clear that there is a wide range of ability/skill among the 10 people, and most will need significant instruction to throw properly. When you hear that some naturally barefoot runners running on soft surface run heel first, the conclusion shouldn’t be: “See, even naturally barefoot runners sometimes hit heel first,” but: “Even naturally barefoot runners sometimes need instruction to run correctly.”
Main reason for using padded shoes is psychological. Humans tend to choose path of less resistance and they hate to be wrong. Eternal search for magic pill. It is far easier to buy new “magic” shoe then correct yourself – which takes time, willpower and admitting that You are doing something wrong. It requires (please don’t hate me) higher level of intelligence in form of strong analytic mind.
I started my transition to barefoot/minimalistic after 6 months of rock climbing which strengthened and widened my foot so most of my shoes became to tight. I started researching what happened to my foot and learned that most of my posture and back pain problems were result of incorrect walk style. I started walking barefoot whenever i could, managed to buy Road Glove 3 and spent a lot of hours on internet in search of proper walking patterns. In a few months i was able to walk for 20 kilometers straight without any pain or discomfort. I live in Bosnia and where is hard to buy minimalistic shoes (way to high import taxes) so i can afford only one new pair per year and because of that I must wear “regular” shoes at winter and at work (suit and tie environment). It became like walking on nails.
It took me a lot of time and work to learn to WALK properly (i am yet to become runner – hopefully). In modern society which is based on rush and quick fixes most people are not ready to allocate their time and mind to learn to walk or run in a way their weakened body is supposed to. They just want to buy a promise of shoe that will do all work for them.
Even the best runners in the world are always seeking to better: more efficient, faster, more powerful, and more durable. These athletes are already very skilled, so the gap between optimal performance and current performance for a recreational runner can sometimes be daunting; however the changes are worth the effort and there is no time limit.
Jim,
One of the best articles I’ve read on this subject! Simply said, to be good at anything, form and technique matter.
And while there has been a fair amount of discussion around improving running form and technique in recent years, we could all benefit by spending more time understanding, identifying, and addressing the root causes of our form failures. Why do we really have knee pain, hip problems, PF or other injuries? Often, our ‘poor running form’ stems from a limited range of motion or a strength imbalance in another part of the body. How can we identify that? What can we do to treat that problem? How does that affect/shape our training? I’m happy to say that Topo Athletic will be publishing some thoughts on this subject in the coming months on our own website — stay tuned.
Wearing thick cushioned shoes may relieve the symptoms for some who suffer aches and pains while running. I’m sure it’s helped some folks to get out the door, and that’s a good thing. But in the end, it never addresses the root cause of the problem, and in fact, it may obscure the real issues.
Personally, I believe that insulating and casting the foot in thick cushioned shoes over a longer period of time may lead to muscle atrophy in the feet, reduced range of motion, reduced proprioception, and/or muscle imbalances that show up in other negative ways down the road. I prefer shoes that take the best of minimalism — a roomy natural toe fit, low drop, lightweight… while adding some underfoot protection that doesn’t completely insulate the body from environmental feedback. And btw, if that feeling is new to you, listen to your body and take ample time to adjust/adapt. Maybe that is “middle-ism”, but for me it’s a practical solution when combined with good running form and full body training.
The quotes from Salazar are terrific. Some of us spent years trying to imitate his form, if we only knew… Again, great article!
Usually we treat the symptoms rather than the causes of dysfunction, but only when biomechanical flaws are addressed directly can long-term improvement occur. With the body one weakness, imbalance, or improper movement can affect many other areas, or even be the effect of a dysfunction in another area. If we could recognize proper distance running technique, the way we recognize proper sprinting technique, we would have a model against which to judge and compare our own technique; then we could begin to make substantive changes. Of course, that model already exists, as your reference to the Salazar quotes indicates. Cerruty made the same point earlier: “…all species of animal move similarly.” The question shouldn’t be: “Why should all runners run with the same technique?” but “Why shouldn’t all runners run with the same technique?”!
Jim great post. yes the shoe affects the joints and with a heel or arch adversely affects forces in the hip and knee (see pubmed articles from Dr Casey Kerrigan and Jay Dicharry). also remeber the foot has 33 joints which all move in at least one plane….so that is 33 to the 33rd power of unique positions. So probably thee is something important there. these multiple joints without large surface area allow the forces to be regulated while adapting to the ground as opposed to the large surface area joints of knees and hips which have one articulation. keep the thoughts flowing Jim.
Finally if one develops arthritis in a major joint, as I did (large toe MTP both feet), one cannot run. then there is no joy. i went back to figure it our after this in 2000. Mark
Hey Jim,
I appreciate your passion and agree with some statements, but I do not believe the science supports many of your claims:
do weak feet lead to injury?
don’t the majority of elite runners still heel strike?
doesn’t the science clearly show injury rates are the same amongst heel strikers and midfoot strikers?
Also, 2 of the 3 runners (Bekele and Geb) photographed with such beautiful form have missed major chunks of time with pretty severe injuries despite that lovely form.
I think running is a sport where injuries are going to happen no matter what. Of course imbalances play a part, but I think that’s far more due to lifestyle than footwear.
As a retailer, we continue to sell a few minimalist and lightweight models (far more than the average store), but I have to remind everyone here that retailers sell what people are buying.
I sold 30 pairs of Vibrams per week when they were hot. When we finally decided to cut the brand a couple of years ago, we were selling a few a month.
I agree with Pete. Find the shoe that works best for you and go for it.
I was a snob for a while about staying in minimalist shoes, but now don’t care what shoe I run in as long as I can run. (which right now happens to be an Altra Paradigm, a Hoka Clifton, and occasionally a Brooks Ghost).
Shout out to Tony Post and the Topo crew though. They have managed to make an amazing shoe in the Fli-Lyte. Finally a shoe with a wide toebox and snug heel that looks really good (and at a great price)!
My customers love the feel of the Altras but about half of them can’t buy because they look so ugly. Such a shame. I hope someone at Altra is listening. They are amazing shoes and I wish we could sell them better.
Eric thanks as always for comments. i have a store too and like you mix it up. new Altras look great 🙂 ….and yes they are shaped like a foot which is key to health of feet.
interesting w Geb and Bekele. these folks are amazingly strong FF strikers and if they apply any positive power on landing there is huge stress on achilles….which has literally been their Achilles heel. to set world records you live and die on the edge. i would not suggest FF strike to most unless i knew they were not applying positive power on landing (as opposed to softening and loading the elastic). true barefoot on road teaches one not to apply power on landing but soften….it is a great and fun practice
Mark
Great points mark. Elite runners like them are bound to get hurt. And I agree that a FF strike should allow the heel to settle.
I read an article a while back by bobby mcgee that said Geb adopted a heel strike when he switched to the marathon out of necessity.
Hi Eric,
Your questions and my answers:
Q. Do weak feet lead to injury?
A. Weak feat are part of the chain of movement that is correlated with bad form, which, yes, is correlated with higher injury rates.(see: “The Foot Core System”, “Foot Strikes and Injury Rates in Distance Runners”, and “A Theoretical Perspective on Running-related Injuries”)It’s true there are no prospective (as opposed to retrospective) studies on the correlation between running form and injuries, although one is in review now. There are also no prospective studies on the correlation between bad lifting form in 1RM deadlifts and back/knee injuries.
Q. Don’t the majority of elite runners still heel strike?
A. No, especially if they’re not American who train in traditional running shoes, and it’s not connected with speed. Growing up running barefoot is correlated with running barefoot in a minimal shoe/racing flat as an adult. The East Africans often/usually run barefoot until they are in their teens; they overwhelmingly tend to run midfoot; they are the best distance runners in the world right now. Take a look at Kenenisa Bekele and try to imagine him running with a heel strike.
Q. Doesn’t the science clearly show injury rates are the same amongst heel strikers and midfoot strikers?
A. No (See first answer) Although both types of runners have injuries. they differ in kind, and midfoot runners become hurt especially when they run incorrectly (heel too high on landing and/or overstriding)
How did Bekele and Geb manage to set so many records with so many injuries? Geb’s were towards the end of his career and Bekele’s were past his peak. Their careers were much longer than runners who had poor form, such as Salazar.
I’ll finish this tomorrow!
Bekele looks like he is heel striking hard right here (of course hard to tell without force plate and such) but still– https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-GoW_fPIoA
(8:35 into the video)
I’ll try to upload this video to Final Cut, slow it down, and post it for everybody to judge.
Sweet. Ya it’s hard to tell from the real-time speed of the video but it looks like he’s running with a heel-strike in the pack. Towards the end of the race (around (1:01:05 when he breaks away to win he looks like he’s running more midfoot-forefoot but it’s hard to tell). The man is a LEGEND!
It’s very close, but I honestly think it’s the shoes, which are much more substantial than he usually wears. I uploaded 3 videos that are in slow motion, so you can decide yourself. Mo Farah is definitely a forefoot striker, unless he’s showcasing the Nike Pegasus 31; then his heel seems to strike first. It’s the shoes.
https://youtu.be/Bf2njpfpCw4
https://youtu.be/RQm7DUleuAc
https://youtu.be/i4c841d2JJE
Part 2
Eric,
You wrote:
“As a retailer, we continue to sell a few minimalist and lightweight models (far more than the average store), but I have to remind everyone here that retailers sell what people are buying.”
That’s only true to a certain point. If you educate your customers, assuming you actually believe in the advantages of running more naturally than is allowed by wearing traditional shoes, your customers will soon realize that there are immediate advantages to making different choices. If you don’t educate your customers, and just encourage them to continue buying what they’ve worn for decades, you’ll sell what is marketed in the running magazines. As an authority you actually have a responsibility.
Both you and Peter Larson sell many types of shoes that you have bought from suppliers, and these companies have asked you to pay their bills. Those companies are inherently amoral, and simply want to maintain the status quo. Despite the creation of the Nike Free, even that company is not revolutionary at all, unless we’re talking about marketing strategies. With the traditional running shoe, which is an inherently flawed original design, these corporations created a product for which there was no need. Marketing is what solved that problem.
This is what Dr. Joseph Froncioni wrote in: “Athletic Footwear and Running Injuries” (2004):
“Oh…and one more thing: don’t listen to the guy at the running store. He’s there to sell shoes and is under the spell of the powerful shoe industry advertising machine. He has become well and truly brainwashed with the traditional concepts that we all need cushioning and arch support. He will try to dissuade you from buying a racing flat and he may even go as far as telling you that they are for elite runners and are meant to be used for one marathon only. Don’t believe him.”
I think he might have a point.
You also wrote:
“I was a snob for a while about staying in minimalist shoes, but now don’t care what shoe I run in as long as I can run. (which right now happens to be an Altra Paradigm, a Hoka Clifton, and occasionally a Brooks Ghost).”
It’s possible that a lifetime of running in traditional shoes has caused enough structural damage in some runners, that just being able to run in any type of footwear is cause for joy, but most runners, especially new runners, aren’t in that condition yet, and if they can run correctly, they should be able to avoid the fate of many older runners who started the sport just as the big shoes began to hit the market.
I was at a talk by Dr. Irene Davis yesterday and she stated that all healthy individuals who run should run in thin, minimal shoes after making a safe transition(the photo she showed in her slide was the Vivo Barefoot Evo). At one time, Dr. Davis was known as the “Orthotics Queen” at the University of Delaware’s running clinic – she’s at Harvard’s Sprague Natural Running Center now – but through her research and clinical practice she began to question her basic assumption: the foot is too weak to allow us to stand, walk, or run comfortably without external support. Once she realized that the body functions best in its natural state, she understood the detrimental effects support, restriction, and desensitization have on the foot and, of course, the entire chain of movement. Being an advocate for something which reduces injuries, increases efficiency, and improves performance isn’t snobbery, any more than advocating a diet that reduces the chances of high blood pressure and diabetes is snobbery. It’s a rational decision based on a logical investigation of the topic.
Great job on the article, Jim. It’s exactly what ChiRunning has been saying for 15 years now. Mark also makes the very important point to not engage force on the landing. Let the body take over and load it’s own natural elasticity.
Transition time is absolutely crucial for anyone switching from regular shoes to minimalist shoes. Also to note is the fact that minimal shoes aren’t always needed in all situations. As a runner becomes more acclimated to minimalist shoes, distance should be added very carefully, and ONLY when one’s running form can sustain it. My rule for ANY running shoe is: The LEAST amount of shoe you can SAFELY run in… given HOW you currently run, and the distance you are hoping to run. This definition has never failed me.
Thanks again, Jim and Mark. Keep up the good work!
Jim – a great article! So true.
I’d like to add my 2 cents ( 50 years’ running and 25 plus years’ coaching experience)
My running experience (career) started back in 1964, in a pair of high top basketball sneakers that had no arch support, and no thickness difference between the ball of the shoe and the heel. No cushioning, so we had to run to protect ourselves. The shoes became well worn down, and were replaced by another pair – again and again as I wore them out, throughout 4 years of high school cross country and track. My first pair of running shoes (to be used only for races), in 1967, had a minimal drop, and had a parallel tread design that was a sawtooth cross-section of raised rubber straight across the sole of the shoe from one side to the other. The first pair of quite cushioned shoes I had was in the early 1970’s with a thick heel, and significant drop to the ball of the foot. I liked the way it seemed to help “push” me forward and get me up onto my “toes”. I can not say, though, that it helped my running or speed, although I always placed quite well in competition. I have continued to run and compete throughout my life, choosing comfortable, cushioned shoes to train and race in, and by about 9 years ago, had started to develop knee problems. The orthopedic surgeon showed me damage to the meniscus in my knee, and said that he could repair it. Knowing that the body has the ability to repair itself, I chose not to go for surgery, but to do some cross training to strengthen my legs and the surrounding areas of my knees. Then I read “Born To Run”, and realized that my running form had been altered, beginning with the cushioned shoes back in the early ’70’s, causing the bone jarring shock from my heel up through my legs and joints. 5 years ago I started running in VFF’s. I foolishly went 100%, but by the 3rd month, my form was beginning to return to what I had in high school and college. Within a year, my times had dramatically dropped, I was again winning races, and once again LOVING RUNNING! My knees no longer bother me, and trail runs remind me of the old days of cross country running. I have a smile on my face and have really noticed how many uncomfortable runners are out there – plodding along on thick shoes, throwing their foot well ahead of their center of gravity, jarring their skeletal system. They are not enjoying themselves!
Does running form matter? ABSOLUTELY! It’s bio-mechanics and physics!
I both train and race in my Vibrams, on all surfaces, including roads, asphalt, trails, mud, fields, rocks, roots, etc.
Great article. As a Podiatrist and founder of The Running Lab, the ONLY reason I have a job is weak feet. Can anyone argue with this analogy? “If you put your arm in a plaster cast or sling for several weeks it gets hideously weak; similarly, if you lock 66 awesome foot joints and 40 foot muscles into stiff, rigid, over-supported shoes, they get weak.”
Try putting your arm in a sling for 10 hours each day and then attempt to do push ups on Saturday.
The debate on shoes just goes around in circles. The problem is every study done on American runners is dealing with already weak, compromised feet. Of course runners get injured when you take their feet out of clumpy coffins (my slang word for modern running shoes) and put them into minimalist footwear; they already have weak feet and altered movement patterns.
Go to East Africa and watch bundles of school kids run 5 miles to and from school every day. They all run the same! If this is too expensive, watch a bunch of toddlers who have never worn shoes and tell me how many of them heel strike. Both of these populations use ALL 66 joints and 40 muscles within their feet to run.
Strong feet and good technique is the key. Running is a skill; and like any skill in life, it has to be earned. Buying Ballistic Rock Shields from Brooks and Fluid Axis Systems from ASICS will not improve your running. Drills, mobility and strength and posture (24 hours per day; not just when running) will.
I have an ebook titled, “The 7 Deadly Sins of Modern Running Shoes”. I do not want to steal anything away from Jim’s article but if he approves I will post the link later on.
We need to stop chasing shoes to fix our problems. It is what is in the shoe that matters.
Tim
Tim,
Wonderful comments (I promise I did not write them under your name!). Of course you can post the link!
You wrote:
“The problem is every study done on American runners is dealing with already weak, compromised feet. Of course runners get injured when you take their feet out of clumpy coffins (my slang word for modern running shoes) and put them into minimalist footwear; they already have weak feet and altered movement patterns.”
I’m not sure why people don’t realize this when they see the results from very small studies conducted over a short period of time with runners who have always worn traditional running shoes. When Pete Larson’s videos of the the New York City Barefoot Run showed 45% of runners in VFFs and 20% of barefoot runners running heel first, some people said: “Ah ha, these runners are running without any restriction, yet they run heel first; therefore, there is no natural way to run,” yet they should have concluded: “Muscle memory is so strong that even some barefoot runners will hit heel first.” Running shoes corrupt natural movement patterns.
Another comment you made is also very important:
“Running is a skill; and like any skill in life, it has to be earned.”
Running is a very complex basic athletic skill. It’s not as complex as pole vaulting or Parkour, but it’s certainly as complex as throwing and jumping. Of course, even a child naturally throws, and runs, and jumps, but a tremendous amount of time, effort, modeling, etc. is required to be proficient.
Steven Robbins and William A. Rossi should be read by anybody who believe that shoes are “neutral” and biomechanics don’t matter.
I look forward to ordering your ebook!
Hi Jim,
The ebook is a free download on my website:
http://www.therunninglab.com
I look forward to more articles in the future.
Kind regards,
Tim Bransdon
Well put!!!! Over the last 5 years of running barefoot, the one thing I find lacking in articles about barefoot running is that it is a rehabilitation of our feet! Our bodies! After a life time in shoes. It takes time and perservirance to Rehabitatate . It is not a transition. The word transition leads people to think they can just slip on a zero drop or barefoot style shoe and be faster and more efficient than in traditional shoes. Not true! It is a life style change and a skill to be honed. I appreciate your comments, perfectly said! Thank you.
Hy,
I loved the article.Gives me hope when media and brands start criticizing minimalistic shoes or even barefoot running. I love running in my 4mm Xero sandals but i also try to run barefoot too. At work i wear my five fingers or my vivos. But because of fastness at home when i have to gout out with my dog, i put on mycushioned sneakers. Church i visit with leather hard soled shoes. So and i noticed that in each shoe i walk or run differently. As mentionned in the article the mind adapatson the informations given from my feet. Always strange when i notice it especially when i run barefoot and afterwars go for a walk with my dog cushioned…
Best regards
Ralph from Luxembourg
A good article with lots of good comments. I’m a chiropractic student and feel like i should give my teachers and entire school a lesson on why you want to be barefoot as much as possible and wear shoes that don’t interfere with the foot.
Like Tim Brandson said, “If you put your arm in a plaster cast or sling for several weeks it gets hideously weak; similarly, if you lock 66 awesome foot joints and 40 foot muscles into stiff, rigid, over-supported shoes, they get weak.”
I don’t get how my teachers and colleagues don’t realize this.
My real bone of contention is how modern running shoes are referred to as “traditional”. There is nothing traditional about the rubber, amount of cushioning, posts, and other “motion control” devices manufactures use.
If you think about it minimalist shoes are closer to being traditional as they aren’t much more than rubber soles with covering. Not too much to get in the way of allowing the foot to work as it should.
I fully believe running is a skill that requires practice like any other skill. As we age and live in our modern world we forget how to move as we should. I am happy to see you writing about landing ff as i believe that is the correct and most efficient way to run. Ask someone to run in place and they will immediately bounce on their toes. I know research says landing doesn’t matter but i disagree. Landing ff allows you to load the tendons of the feet and get a free energy return. Heel striking doesn’t do this.
Michael Nelson
I used to always write “traditional” running shoes, but I stopped adding the quotation marks, even though they’re still in my mind when I refer to modern running shoes. Of course, most people see them as being “traditional”, because that’s all they’ve ever seen and worn. If you look at them from a truly traditional perspective, which is barefoot, they look very unusual. They represent another product that was created to fulfill a need that did not exist. Marketing created that need.
Yes, running is a skill, and a very complex skill at that. Just because running is natural and everyone, at some point in his or her life, has run, does not mean he/she runs well. Even though there would be a greater chance for someone to run well, if he/she had never worn shoes, not all barefoot runners run well.
Maybe, just maybe, the future “Born To Run” movie starring Matthew McConaughey as Caballo Blanco will revive the minimalist movement??
I am just now starting the transition to minimalist shoes and a mid/forefoot jogging style. I have been an over-striding heel striker for most of my 52 years. I thought it was ‘normal’ and was even somewhat proud of my long stride. Bruised my r heel about 25 years ago and am still dealing with the chronic PF in that foot. Hoping strength training and the new jogging form will make me a much better (and pain free) distance runner.
Where can I find some good minimalist shoes for a wide foot, in a Mens 5.5? Something in the 3E or 4E range. It’s tough….
I read Born to Run and tried to transition to VFFs several years ago. I took it slow (probably a total of 9 months), but honestly never got the hang of it.
A co-worker said it took him 2 years to transition. Now he runs ultras in Luna sandals. Impressive, but I don’t want to take 2 years.
I’m trying the different direction now with some Hokas. But I think the key for me is using multiple types of shoe to force the foot and gait to adapt continuously and strengthen throughout.
I must take one huge exception to this article though. Cerruty’s assertion that all animals run the same is obviously incorrect, and even the milder statement that all racehorses run with the exact same mechanics is patently false (and makes me question that guy in general).
For example in the area of leg throw (which Cerruty uses in his example) the two greatest race horses to ever live varied widely in leg throw (and therefore stride angle). Secretariat was 110 deg and Man of War 88 degs. http://www.somaxsports.com/photo.php?analysis=SecretariatSA (Can’t vouch for the accuracy of the other ‘microfiber’ mumbo jumbo on this webpage)
Other stats also vary widely…which is of course why they have races.
Finding this article was timely. I just went into a local running shoe store and was pretty much run out of there when I asked for a minimalist shoe. The salesman asked me,”Oh, you want a high-injury, low-return shoe? We don’t carry those. Runners need more cushion and don’t want the problems that come with minimalist shoes.” When I noted that it’s a matter of correct form and that people need to be educated when they buy those types of shoes, he told me that form didn’t matter, and that it really was a host of other factors, like running volume and terrain. I have been barefoot and minimalist for almost 6 years, running on roads and trails. No injuries here, thanks, except for blisters when I was first trying to nail down my form. FORM! 🙂
I ended up buying my new shoes online.
Thanks for the great article!
I found this article in an internet search as I attempted to understand why my recent trip to a running store for new barefoot shoes went the way it did. I have been running in minimalist or barefoot shoes (first the New Balance Minimus Trail then the Merrell Trail Glove and now on my second pair of Merrell Vapor Gloves) since 2012. I got interested in minimal/barefoot shoes when I first started running more seriously as an adult. I worked for months to build up distance, form, and strength on a very slow trajectory and found that I was injury free and invigorated despite the initial tight calves and sightly about achy soles. Until recently I had access to a physical Merrell store that has since closed so I was in for a shock when I went to a traditional running shoe store for the first time in about 3 years. I asked the clerk where I could find minimalist or barefoot shoes and she looked at me like I was speaking French. I asked for zero drop, just anything to get started. Then I pointed to my Vapor Gloves and told her I’d been running in these for 5 years, did she have anything like that. Surely she thought I’d lost it because she said, “Those? Well I definitely don’t recommend that.” She wanted me to remove my shoes (seriously they are a worn sheet of rubber of the bottom of a sock) and see how I walked so she could get me the right thing instead. I waited until another customer came in so I could slip away. A similar experience occurred at two other stores, even one of which I had bought my first pair of NB Minimus shoes all those years ago. I will be buying another pair of Merrell’s online (thankfully I have the model and size already nailed down on those) but it is disappointing that exploring different options in stores is no longer an option (I love my current shoes but you never know if something better made or more stylish may come out). That’s a long way of saying thank you for writing these articles so they I know I’m not losing my mind.
lea sorry for this and call or shop at our store 🙂 http://www.tworiverstreads.com
Fantastic article. I run in high school and I have been plagued with PF and shin splints. I have started trying to correct my for with strengthening exercises but I was wondering how much the shoes will affect my chance of getting injured in the future. If I do manage to make my form less impactful by not running on my heels, leaning forward, and increasing my cadence etc, will conventional blocky shoes still be harmful? Do more heavily used shoes make a difference?