Gordon Pirie Book

1246

Comments

  • The RC240s I have seem to have thicker cushioning in the rear than the forefoot but don't all running shoes? Other than that they are very flexible and minimalist so if that is what you want get them. I wore them in a couple of races at Xmas - a 5k and a 10k - had no problems and relative to what I expected set very good times. My calfs were a bit stiff for a day after the 10k. I normally wear them for shorter training runs.
  • I don't think its a case tensing and relaxing your calves. I pay them no attention at all, its just down to natural elasticity.

    I found a higher cadence helps to keep you off the heels because your knees are bent already for the next pushoff before you've even landed so unless the heel is unnaturally thick (i.e. by wearing deeply cushioned shoes) it's difficult to avoid landing on the forefoot.

    If you wear flat shoes and you increase your cadence, I think you'll find that you can't help but land on the forefoot. The problem, I found, comes when you get tired and slow down and you revert back to the bad old ways (particularly with a shoe with a higher heel).

    Initially I found the high cadence difficult to keep up for more than a couple of miles because it required more effort. But as I got fitter and more used to it it seems natural now.

    I didn't find the calves a problem after the first couple of weeks. Initially they were a little stiff afterwards but never painful.
  • Freakfoot -

    I'd agree with how Tom describes it. but there's a very simple answer to your question, namely -

    try running barefoot. you'll find that it's virtually impossible to land on your heels and if not impossible then certainly very painful.

    chances are you'll be running on your forefoot with good technique almost automatically. presumably because we evolved to run that way - until ultra-cushioned, high-heeled running shoes came along only a few decades ago.

    on the cadence issue, it's worth bearing in mind that efficient running requires a quick cadence and regardless of footstrike, you should be aiming to improve this. elite athletes run at around 180-200 strides per minute. generally speaking you should be aiming for 180, however slow you are running. you should try not to let your cadence drop even on recovery runs. OK, it takes getting used to but with work it becomes a habit and your running form will improve, along with your injury-avoidance, and hopefully your race results.
  • I agree. If you want to improve your running action try running barefoot on grass with no broken glass. tacks or thistles around.
  • or dogsh*t.







    unless you like that kind of thing.
  • TmapTmap ✭✭✭
    Gave this a go Friday.
    Focused on landing my foot underneath me, rather than stretching out ahead. Found I ran much more smoothly, and with a much quicker stride. Got home 7 minutes faster than previous best, with none of the soreness in my achilles I've had recently.

    In other words, running fast is about moving your legs quicker, not pounding the road harder. I suppose that's obvious when you think about it. Just like in Chariots of Fire.

    Thanks to all who made this thread so useful.

  • Dear all,

    barefoot running articles led me to have a try - first on grass and then on concrete - try running on your heels then! Convinced, I switched from heel to f/foot strike over 12 weeks by running/walking sessions with progressively longer runs. This was last autumn. I completed the Grim race (8m xc) in Feb using forefoot strike wearing Walsh pbs. I have a pair of Lightfoots as well, and Tiger Paws for the road. Running cadence came out at 180 + without trying. Can't stand clumpy shoes anymore. I'm 54 yo and weigh 12 stone. I thoroughly recommend the switch - go for it!
  • mulemule ✭✭✭
    Are there any reliable and respectable sources, not linked to running shoe manufacturers who dispute Pirie's assertions about forefoot striking?

    Has anyone tried running barefoot / socked on a treadmill? I'm not going to risk it on the local playing fields.

    Cheers,

    Sam Meldrum
  • ChaosChaos ✭✭✭
    I've not come across anything actually disputing it as a mechanism for efficient running, however in Bob Glovers books he is fairly insistent that it is not something that is natural for everyone. There again it is also a topic he just flicks past and clearly hasn't spent much time studying.
  • I've searched the web for studies advocated one method over the other and haven't come across anything. The best I found was a scientific study that concluded that impact forces were 'different' between forefoot and heel strikers.

    I suppose it's not an easy thing to prove one way or the other. I made the switch in August last year and I'm convinced now, I'm faster, I run more miles and I haven't been injured since and I do all my running in racing shoes.
  • Interestingly (perhaps) everyone on this thread who has switched to forefoot running claims to have benefitted from doing so. Have any switched and found problems?
  • I got the impression that Glenn had tried it but wasn't convinced. I don't know about ay others.
  • My experience is the same as TB's - to make the switch you have to be careful and patient, put up with some aches and pains, then rebuild your mileage conservatively. I differ on one point though - as I said before, I can run comfortably barefoot on all surfaces - inc concrete - using Forefoot strike - don't even think of doing it on your heels cos you're not designed for it.
  • Its just taken me an hour to read through this thread.Where has it been hiding, if only I had found it a month or so ago,is it too late to try it for london. Think so. I have always felt more comfortable when running up on the balls of my feet but it didnt feel natural i now think it may have been the shoes rather than me.
    I will go and do acouple of shorter runs using the technique and see what happens to me,
  • popsiderpopsider ✭✭✭
    I've recently taken the plunge and now do 90% of my training in racing flats - having previously done the odd run in them and using Air Skylons for most of my road running. I'm wearing NB RC240s. I am a little concerned that I am wearing a shoe that RW says are for top runners to wear in short races whereas I am not a top runner and am using them all the time but time will tell.

    How many others are doing your training in racing shoes and what shoes are you using? How have you got on?
  • Jim, I'd forget it until after London - you don't want to be distracted from the goal that you've just invested many months training into.

    Afterwards, though I would thoroughly recommend it. It takes a little effort, mainly concentration rather than physical effort, but the results are well worth it. It's certainly easier with shoes with a low heel, so if you don't have any already I would recommend getting some. There's a good review in this months RW of racing shoes and performance trainers - I think most would be suitable but look for a low heel and a flexible forefoot. Disregard that nonsense about 'Don't even consider these if your not faster than Paula Radcliffe or weigh more than Zola Budd, etc.'. I think you can run in barefeet if you do it properly.
  • TmapTmap ✭✭✭
    I have derived benefit simply from shortening my stride and increasing the speed of my leg turnover.

    However, I have recently got quite serious shin splints, I suspect from trying to land on my foot when I get tired towards the end of long runs or the day after a big one.

    There again, I have hurt my hamstring from reverting to stretching out a bit more to avoid this.

    Hmmm...

    If it ain't broke....
  • Popsider, I'm running in Tiger Paws on road and even on some trails. XC I use Walsh and Lightfoot. My only concern about the Tigers is durability - I would prefer a tougher outsole. Any views on low heel lightweights with carbon soles for road - do they exist? I'm no "top runner" or anorexic whippet but I don't feel I can run correctly (forefoot strike) in anything other than flats - so far (6 months after changing at 30 mpw) so good.
  • Peter,

    'If it ain't broke....' theres a lot to be said for this. In my case I suffered a lot of injuries beforehand and (touch wood) have been injury free since.

    Shinsplints is usually caused by lack of cushioning, are you landing on the balls of your feet with the heel off the ground and the knee bent. In this position the leg is a perfect spring with the calf muscles acting as a shock absorber. The foot should be directly under your hips at the point of impact and not extended forward.

    When I first changed over I often reverted to a lazy heel strike (especially downhills) on longer runs which wasn't pleasant in racing shoes. To counter this I avoided long runs until I could maintain the form for the duration by building up from shorter runs again.

    If your happy with your current form, i.e. few injuries and reasonable pace theres not a lot of point in persuing it.
  • Lowgrade and Popsider, I'm using Saucony Team Taya which have a thick carbon rubber outsole. I've done 200 miles in them and they're scarcely worn. Before that I had some Tiger Paw's and they wore through to the midsole after about 300 miles.

    The Saucony's are definately more durable but then they're heavier than the Asics and stiffer aswell. I prefered running in the Asics, although I'm not unhappy with the Saucony. I'd be tempted to try the Saucony static racer next time as that's between the two. Although I've set my heart on some RC150 if only I could find a pair.
  • Dont know where you live TB, but I looked at some RC150s in Run & Become in the smoke.
  • popsiderpopsider ✭✭✭
    I reckon now they've been featured in RW there will be a lot of demand for them.
  • I'm in Derbyshire, our local running shop tends to have very few racing shoes which is why I ended up with the Saucony's.

    I do tend to visit London fairly frequently with work though, so I might have a look next time I'm down there. Which tube station is it near ?
  • Tom,

    Palmer St - a little alleyway off Victoria St and near St James Park tube and Caxton Hall. Its hard to spot but look for the guys in suits trying out running shoes outside! Website mailto:www.streetmap.co.uk will help
  • I found this post on the outdoors magic forum and thought it particularly pertinent to this discussion :-

    Running barefoot:

    * It was first pointed out in a 1987 paper that normally unshod humans don't suffer from overloading of the foot

    * When walking, habitually unshod humans attempt to grip the ground with their toes

    * When running, the medial arch flattens to reduce shock by storing energy in the (well-developed in habitually barefoot runners) foot muscles and via elastic stretching of ligaments.

    * This shock absorbing behaviour is related to from 'sensations' from the sole of the foot - the runner does it sub-conciously to reduce discomfort

    * Running with a thick soft sole stops the sole of the foot 'feeling' the ground and inhibits this natural shock-absorbing function.

    * The authors recommended that runners run barefoot after a period of progressive adaptation.

    * If a runner is unable to do this each day or cannot run barefoot for safety reasons, a less-yielding shoe should be worn to increase sensory feedback.

    * Foot position error was shown to increase 107.5% in subjects wearing shoes compared to barefoot runners

    * Shod runners could not distinguish between a flat surface and a 20deg slope (barefooters could)

    * It was argued that the use of footwear was largely responsible for ankle injuries as it reduced input from sole of foot 'sensors'.

    * Falling frequency inreases with increased sole thickness

    * Falling frequency decreases with increased sole hardness

    In summary, the authours recommend thin hard-soled shoes to improve stability.

    The paper highlight a number of points - the active shock-absorbing function of the foot, rather than thinking of the foot as a 'passive falling object', and the importance of sensory feedback frm the sole of the foot.

    Source: Norris, C.M. (1998) Sports Injuries: Diagnoses and Management, p.331-334, ISBN 0750628731
  • Hi, just noticed folks looking for RC150s, give the NB helpline a ring, they should be able to tell you who's got stock, or your local running shop should be able to order some. Number is on the website www.newbalance.co.uk (I'm just too lazy to look it up) if you don't have any luck post here again and I'll go chase someone in sales and marketing.
  • ChaosChaos ✭✭✭
    Good find, Andrew.

    What it doesn't appear to consider from the summary however is what effect different types of surface have on your running style.

    For instance if running on either grass or sand, the ground gives slightly as one lands on the outside edge. I understand this then has the effect of displacing a small amount of soil/sand to form a ridge underneath the ball of the foot which then provides the platform from which you push off.

    Running on very hard unnatural surfaces such as concrete obviously won't allow for this effect which may be another source of ankle injury / overpronation /etc. Perhaps a market for a shoe with very low cushioning to avoid the type of injury mentioned in the article, but a "medial post" type feature that compensates for very hard surfaces?

    Mark
  • Chaos,

    I can't see why 'over'-pronation is a problem when running on the forefoot. Since pronation isn't the primary method of shock absorption, I think under/over or 'normal' pronation is just an irrelevence.

    I overpronate quite badly, but since swapping to a forefoot style and racing shoes I find that it doesn't cause any problems at all. My shoes still show classic symptoms of overpronation i.e. they lean when placed on a flat surface, but so far I haven't suffered any injuries as a result.

    I could see that grip might be a problem on wet hard surfaces in barefeet which could be improved by wearing an extremely light shoe with a rubber grip but I can't see the benefit of a medial post ?

    I reckon the best bet would be a sock with a rubberised sole - except it would probably slip around the foot so would probably need some stiffness somewhere to keep the sole underneath the foot. I would happily run in something like that, but no shoe manufacturer would ever make it because they couldn't justify charging more than £10 for them since it would contain no advanced technology like gel cushioning, carbon fibre medial posts etc. My daughter's ballet shoes are £9 a pair and are well made from soft leather with a slightly stiffer leather sole. You can get mens sizes, fortunately in black not just pink, I'm half tempted to get a pair and then glue a rubber gripping sole on the bottom. I'll then charge £25 per pair - what do you reckon ?

  • Tom, Chaos, I've read so much on this subject and put both forefoot running and some barefoot running into practice successfully, that basically I believe that anything which interferes with how the foot naturally wants to run is wrong. We all have to compromise to a certain extent re safety (cuts and punctures)and potential frostbite - since few of us can hoof off barefoot down the golden sands outside our beach house in sunny California.

    Happy running.
Sign In or Register to comment.