Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 35 of 35

Thread: Running Shoes

  1. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    165
    Obviously maximalist shoes don't suit everyone, but I stick to my original assertion that they will probably be helpful if you can run on soft surfaces without injury, but get injured running on the road.

    Hoka make a range of shoes, with varying drop, varying degrees of stiffness and varying degrees of medial support. Plus you can add more variables by using them with aftermarket insoles. So it's not like I'm saying 'buy Dynafit Mercurys.'
    Last edited by Oceanic; 08-20-2017 at 03:03 PM.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Land of the Long Flat Vowel
    Posts
    1,092
    Best thing I've done in terms of running is lots of steep hills in somewhat minimalist shoes (Inov-8 Roclite 295 mostly). Great fun, and my knees and feet are in really good shape. (I'm ancient - 53yo)

    It also built up the muscles in my feet to the point that I now have good arches, and my feet have gone from 284mm to 277mm in length. Much easier to get a good fit in ski boots now.

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    30,885
    IME the dynafit Mercury is an awesume boot but thats cuz it fits me
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    165
    I originally typed 'it's not like I'm saying buy Dynafit Vulcans' but changed it 'cause I didn't want you to feel like I was accusing you of something.

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    30,885
    Yeah same boot ... I got them too eh
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    slc
    Posts
    17,891
    Quote Originally Posted by creaky fossil View Post
    I can't imagine there's a lot of replication/consistency involved. most people being tested will switch from habitual/natural to "I'm being watched" sorts of performance alteration. seems to me a modern 21st Century data fetish thing, using gait analysis to sell running shoes.

    I think it may be more useful for leg/foot discrepancies, my PT used gait analysis after my ACL recon to work against a favoring sort of off-kilter gait. it showed us how my post-op leg/foot hit the ground differently at strike and through the stride.
    This is pretty much my take on it. Probably mostly bullshit, but useful for some people in some situations. At least as much art as science and very practitioner dependent.

    Quote Originally Posted by XXX-er View Post
    If you are saying some kind of stride analysis is of no value I would disagree
    I said there are no RCTs showing consistent benefits, not that it is of no value ever. There are probably no RCTs showing a benefit to professional ski boot fitting either, but there are clear benefits to boot fitting. The difference is that most people seem to think that there is a high degree of robust, proven science behind gait analysis but that is far from true and people should be aware of that.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    4,644
    So we're all in agreement: go to a good boot fitter and a good running shop ... both of which use available tools to dial in the gear that's right for you.

    BTW, I agree with your "I'm being watched" comment, vis a vis possible alterations in technique. Having said that, there are things about your biomechanics and morphology that you just can't hide.

    ... Thom
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    13,243
    Quote Originally Posted by Dantheman View Post
    FWIW, to my knowledge there are no independent randomized controlled trials that show that gait analysis is effective.
    Not surprised. IME for the best shoe fitters it's more art than science.

    For the past 20 years, on the advice of old timer ultrarunners, I rotated between 2 or 3 different shoes day-to-day, each with slightly different support (i.e., different density medial posts) per the idea that "motion control" shoes can result in neglect of developing stabilizing muscles, so if motion control works for you, mix it up lest you might need more and more motion control as time passes. The ideal is to go the other direction, i.e., the need for less motion control as time passes. Cushioning is a different matter, albeit related. I think I did it right, eventually evolving to a stride that required shoes with less and less medial support, which allowed me to add more cushioning as my osteoarthritis worsened with age.

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    30,885
    Quote Originally Posted by DIYSteve View Post
    Not surprised. IME for the best shoe fitters it's more art than science. ..
    the shoe guy I and a lot of people swore by had been a gifted runner slated for big things probably a scholarship at a good school in Cali and the olympics,

    buddy had a motor cycle accident, was in a coma for 3 weeks, was never the same, the doctors told him he would be lucky to walk again (scars on his leg were fugly) but he proved them all wrong cuz he was able to run again and also became THE man to fit shoes in town

    but he entirely disagreed with the medical community (which was how he was able to run again) and he gave advice contrary to the local sports physio guy who made the foot beds

    I listened to buddy and it worked for me
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    in the shadow of the white rocks
    Posts
    3,282
    Quote Originally Posted by DIYSteve View Post
    Not surprised. IME for the best shoe fitters it's more art than science.

    For the past 20 years, on the advice of old timer ultrarunners, I rotated between 2 or 3 different shoes day-to-day, each with slightly different support (i.e., different density medial posts) per the idea that "motion control" shoes can result in neglect of developing stabilizing muscles, so if motion control works for you, mix it up lest you might need more and more motion control as time passes. The ideal is to go the other direction, i.e., the need for less motion control as time passes. Cushioning is a different matter, albeit related. I think I did it right, eventually evolving to a stride that required shoes with less and less medial support, which allowed me to add more cushioning as my osteoarthritis worsened with age.

    This- rotate your shoes. I'm a PT & ultra runner & test for Gear Institute......

    2 things that make a show "work" -
    A) does it for your foot?
    B) does the rebound/ cushion match or mismatch your foots myokinetics (how your foot likes to move & rebound)?

    & all those studies: my take is that they all use a 2x2' force plate to land on & measure strike force. It's a lot easier to target the plate with a toe strike (you can see your toes). Your heel, not so much & ppl end up overstepped to hit the target.

    & what to RCTs show, maximalist shoes really result in a more forceful strike to sqwuish the shoe under the body- who knew? Mostly art!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •