leona Posted May 14, 2014 Share the problem is lack of common sense... i have 2 pairs, they are ugly as sin but they are so nice to wear. i started in big bouncy running shoes then gradually got less and less heel/toe diff til i was in bare foots.. seems just common sense to me.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TALUS Posted May 14, 2014 Share For the record: I am not for or against "barefoot running". I just think that very few people will do it the way the proponents sugests it be done. ThePubSA and eeeek 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyatt Earp Posted May 14, 2014 Share For the record: I am not for or against "barefoot running". I just think that very few people will do it the way the proponents sugests it be done. Very true . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyatt Earp Posted May 14, 2014 Share Before this gets into a barefoot vs cushioned debate, with the respective proponents defending their positions religiously, note that according to the article the reason for the settlement was because Vibram said the shoes WOULD improve posture, etc. rather than COULD. There's probably a bit of a causation vs correlation debate on the benefits but this suit isn't really evidence against barefoot running. However the one article that made its rounds around Facebook indicated that barefoot running was a load of crap and she made those statements and wrote her article based on the court case. Edited May 14, 2014 by Wyatt Earp Captain Fastbastard Mayhem and kennyg 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fantana Posted May 14, 2014 Share I don't run with VFF but with NB Minimus which is a minimalist with a Vibram sole. The transition period is tough, and long. But totally worth it. The transformation of your leg muscles and running style is astounding.  It seems that in our society everything must be a quick fix or ultra luxury, anything that requires a little perseverance is labelled as ineffective. Danger Dassie, thoughtforfood, Wyatt Earp and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted May 14, 2014 Share I don't run with VFF but with NB Minimus which is a minimalist with a Vibram sole. The transition period is tough, and long. But totally worth it. The transformation of your leg muscles and running style is astounding. It seems that in our society everything must be a quick fix or ultra luxury, anything that requires a little perseverance is labelled as ineffective. As someone who, when running "traditionally" impacts his knees to such a degree that the damage that is already done intensifies (numerous torn meniscus injuries, sprained ligaments and so on) this intrigues me.  From your experience - how long does it take one to adapt to the newer style? Given that I need to build from the ground up anyway, it makes sense that I may as well try a new style to see if it makes a difference in the long run (excuse the pun) and, to my (uneducated) mind, a shorter stride, forefoot strike would do less damage to the knee than a longer stride with heel strike. Less direct, and less force - more reliance on muscular support than the "traditional" style... Thoughts? Wyatt? Brian? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rata Del Spruit Posted May 14, 2014 Share  As someone who, when running "traditionally" impacts his knees to such a degree that the damage that is already done intensifies (numerous torn meniscus injuries, sprained ligaments and so on) this intrigues me.  From your experience - how long does it take one to adapt to the newer style? Given that I need to build from the ground up anyway, it makes sense that I may as well try a new style to see if it makes a difference in the long run (excuse the pun) and, to my (uneducated) mind, a shorter stride, forefoot strike would do less damage to the knee than a longer stride with heel strike. Less direct, and less force - more reliance on muscular support than the "traditional" style... Thoughts? Wyatt? Brian? In my experience of trying to transition (in desperation due to loads of rugby related injuries) the single best piece of advice has been to maintain a cadence of around 180. As you say, it shortens the stride, keeps your centre of gravity in a good place and promotes a better posture. I think the result is naturally a better foot strike but even if you still heel strike a bit, you're not over striding and straining your joints. Heel striking isn't the definitive evil it's made out to be (for most people) but is often a symptom of other bad habits and form. As the guy that originally studied and promoted forefoot running said, the foot strike is merely the last stage in the complicated process of running form rather than the sole bit to focus on.  TL;DR: I haven't got a clue, I'm just running. Raab and Captain Fastbastard Mayhem 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyatt Earp Posted May 14, 2014 Share In my experience of trying to transition (in desperation due to loads of rugby related injuries) the single best piece of advice has been to maintain a cadence of around 180. As you say, it shortens the stride, keeps your centre of gravity in a good place and promotes a better posture. I think the result is naturally a better foot strike but even if you still heel strike a bit, you're not over striding and straining your joints. Heel striking isn't the definitive evil it's made out to be (for most people) but is often a symptom of other bad habits and form. As the guy that originally studied and promoted forefoot running said, the foot strike is merely the last stage in the complicated process of running form rather than the sole bit to focus on. TL;DR: I haven't got a clue, I'm just running. A cadence of 180 footdoc 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rata Del Spruit Posted May 14, 2014 Share  A cadence of 180  It's not as bad as it sounds. I also thought WTF when I heard it but 30 strikes in 10 seconds actually turned out to be pretty close to my comfortable pace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mats Posted May 14, 2014 Share   A cadence of 180  Would love to see it for myself.My cadence on my polar was never even close to that. But then again i am just a below average jogger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyatt Earp Posted May 14, 2014 Share It's not as bad as it sounds. I also thought WTF when I heard it but 30 strikes in 10 seconds actually turned out to be pretty close to my comfortable pace. OK, if you say so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rata Del Spruit Posted May 14, 2014 Share  Would love to see it for myself.My cadence on my polar was never even close to that. But then again i am just a below average jogger. It's really not that bad. We gave it a test in a group run we did, three guys and four girls and the rhythm felt pretty natural for most of us, especially the girls, we all hit it within a matter of strides. Even when we started doing intervals we were maintaining pretty close to that cadence, roughly 26-30 per 10 seconds. Perhaps you have a longer more powerful stride but it's certainly not an extreme cadence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyatt Earp Posted May 14, 2014 Share It's really not that bad. We gave it a test in a group run we did, three guys and four girls and the rhythm felt pretty natural for most of us, especially the girls, we all hit it within a matter of strides. Even when we started doing intervals we were maintaining pretty close to that cadence, roughly 26-30 per 10 seconds. Perhaps you have a longer more powerful stride but it's certainly not an extreme cadence. How are you checking your cadence ?If you are counting it per step, it would actually equate to 90. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rata Del Spruit Posted May 14, 2014 Share  How are you checking your cadence ?If you are counting it per step, it would actually equate to 90. Sorry, yeah, I'm referring to it in the sense of steps per minute rather than full revolutions. Wyatt Earp 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted May 14, 2014 Share Sorry, yeah, I'm referring to it in the sense of steps per minute rather than full revolutions. LOL. I'm having visions of Wil-e-coyote and the Road Runner... Meep Meep! Rata Del Spruit 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rata Del Spruit Posted May 14, 2014 Share  LOL. I'm having visions of Wil-e-coyote and the Road Runner... Meep Meep! You'd have thanked me when you set your 15 minute 5k PB Captain Fastbastard Mayhem 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now