Also, I strongly believe that changing my running cadence from around 80 to over 90 is the single biggest factor that helped me. At 80 single foot steps per minute it's easy to get sloppy or heal strike, but at over 90 i'm almost always at least midfoot if not forefoot striking. Losing weight and focusing on form seemed to help as well but if the my cadence is high everything seems to fall into place. FWIW, I have also noticed that once I get over 97 I'm pretty much on my toes only and I fatigue easily for long runs. My sweat spot seems to be 95 for running hard and 92 for running easy.
I constantly battle with myself over this. I get real sloppy with my run cadence when I fatigue. I see race pics on the run and my stride seems decent enough early on and then I start heel striking more and more as the run goes on. It was very, very evident at IMTX. I guess survival mode trumped any semblance of technique.
I'm making quite the effort now to keep my run cadence above 90. That's my mid-season adjustment. I 100% agree with you that it's actually pretty hard to heel strike with a cadence in the 90's. You just can't have a long enough stride to do so. I find doing a minute cadence count every 10 minutes or so helps reinforce the technique.
@Bob, counting every 10 minutes or so is a great strategy and actually give you something else to do during the run besides think about the pain you are in :-)
I personally have a garmin foot pod I use for cadence. I check it during IM runs and full marathons to make sure my cadence isn't slipping through the race. Its also a great tool for post race analysis.
My experience with Newtons: back in '07 PnI were asked to coach the squad of CEO Challenge athletes going to Kona. The organizer hooked up a sponsorship with Newton and mailed everyone a pair of shoes. He may as well have shipped them a grenade because it instantly injuried about half of the athletes, about 4-5 weeks before Kona. That speaks to the patience required to make a change like this, as Chris discusses.
Even though I'm a pretty dedicated Newton fan now, I would totally agree. Dropping Newtons on the unsuspecting is dropping little hand grenades...I think even worse than other minimalist shoes.
For me, they are great. Light, last forever without losing comfort, make me run the way I want to, etc etc etc. But Chris's point is well taken, and I reiterate to anyone considering them to make that experiment AFTER your season, not now. Looking for a minimalist shoe now? Follow the suggestions of other people on this thread.
For some medical reasons, I have to run in shoes with a low heel, and some small amount of pronation control. The list of shoes I've had success with include
I'm in the Ovwa right now, switching to the K-ruuz back and forth, and really loving the Ovwa. It's a terrific shoe. For anyone looking for a low drop shoe, the measurements provided at runners warehouse are very helpful, as are the 'if you like this shoe, you might also like this other shoe' recommendations.
@SCOTT, I need to check with my hook up to see what we can provide EN with -- it was an insider deal.
So far 2 runs in the Kwicky Blade Lights...very fast. I have one more run in them today and then, gasp, going to try them on Saturday for my half Iron. My big concern is that I run "heavy" as the day gets longer; IOW my form deteriorates rapidly while miraculously my speed stays up. That said, I put out 3 miles at sub-6:20 pace yesterday as part of a hard brick workout and they felt pretty responsive. Will have more info at the end of Saturday!
I have done about 6 runs now in a pair of Asics DS Trainers and I love them. They are noticeably lighter than the Asics GT-2140, 2150, and Gel Cumulus I have used for the last 18 months.
@ Chris - I just picked up a pair of DS Trainers 15. Got a great price 'cause they were nasty lime green - $40 off! Ran in them twice so far this week. Noticably ligher like you said. I've been running in GT 2xxx for 8 years and these are the first shoe I've found that matches in comfort.
The only temporary drawback is some fatigue in my arches. But I expect that to subside as my feet get used to doing the work my old shoes did. I hope to be aclimated to them in time for IMLP. If not, there are always the 2160's
Not much to add, but my path started in 2002(ish) picked up running and was weighing close to 200lbs. Starting running in Mizuno Wave Creation with great success, as the lbs melted away and my desire to spend 120.00 on shoes, I switched to the lighter Wave Rider then a few years later switched to my current shoe Wave Precision. I also race 10K and shorter in Wave Ronin. I guess I did right by accident as this switch about 5oz total happened over a course of years.
After reading this thread I may stretch out some runs in the Ronins...I do feel fast in those shoes.
Update: I don't think my Nike LunarElite's are going to work for me, at least not right now. After my runs in them I am sore in my ankles and achiles. Not injured sore, just a sore I don't need to be managing in the middle of IM training where every workout is important and I don't have much room to move stuff around. Pretty sure I'm going to continue running in the Asics Nimbuseseses and pick up the light shoe mojo stuff after Wisconsin.
Rich: sounds good. that type of sore you describe is the good kind, so definitely consider it as a good sign that you'll adapt well once wisconsin is done.
Just read through this whole thread. I would keep in mind that Ryan Hall's long run shoes are the Asics Cumulus and he is pretty light and efficient. It is a major mistake to risk injury at this point in the season. It's time to sharpen up what you've got. That said: Keep an eye out for the Asics 33 series. http://www.asicsamerica.com/33byasics/.
Just read through this whole thread. I would keep in mind that Ryan Hall's long run shoes are the Asics Cumulus and he is pretty light and efficient. It is a major mistake to risk injury at this point in the season. It's time to sharpen up what you've got. That said: Keep an eye out for the Asics 33 series. http://www.asicsamerica.com/33byasics/.
But Ryan Hall is running at least 2x the weekly volume that any of us run. I know people do this all of the time but you simply can't compare what swimmers, cyclists or runners do to what triathletes should or shouldn't do in this context. It's just a completely different sport.
@ Chris - I just picked up a pair of DS Trainers 15. Got a great price 'cause they were nasty lime green - $40 off! Ran in them twice so far this week. Noticably ligher like you said. I've been running in GT 2xxx for 8 years and these are the first shoe I've found that matches in comfort.
The only temporary drawback is some fatigue in my arches. But I expect that to subside as my feet get used to doing the work my old shoes did. I hope to be aclimated to them in time for IMLP. If not, there are always the 2160's
I also scored a deal, $70, and now that I know I like them, I am going to order another pair or two since they're still on sale. Sometimes it's a good thing to wear a size 15 because they can sometimes be the only sizes left.
I would bet Ryan Hall's weekly mileage is more like 3-4X what we are doing, but I also bet he and other pros run the majority of their mileage on soft surfaces because they can. The reality for most of us is that we are running wherever it is convenient, and that usually means the concrete jungle. I rarely have the time to drive 25 minutes to the trail, run for two hours, then drive back home.
I've been trying the Brooks T7's for the last month as a real lightweight alternative to the (already lightweight) Brooks Launch. The T7 weighs 6 ounces. Not a very forgiving shoe, IMO. It's kind of a harsh run. The Launch are so much more comfortable. The Kinvaras are also much more comfortable but I'm not used to that 4mm drop yet. I was hoping to be able to use the T7 at Musselman but I'm not going to push it. I could run the 13.1 in 'em but I'm going to feel it. Not worth it. They may end up being my tempo training shoe or I'l get more acquainted with them as time goes on.
Got a new pair of Zoot Ultra TT 4.0 as well to wear sockless for sprint/oly races.
Bought the Mizuno Elixir 5's last summer as a light weight shoe to race a 1/2. Loved them! This spring as I ramped up mileage, I found them to be a bit shy on cushioning and wanted more on long runs. So, I bought the Mizuno Wave 14, a more cushioned, but Nuetral shoe. Feels plush, but a bit heavy. After reading through this topic, I tried an experiment on the last 2.5 hour runs. Run 1/2 of it in one shoe, then switch and see what the difference is. When I started in the Elixir, it felt fine, put on the Wave at the 1/2 way point and immediately noticed the lack of stability and extra cushioning. No way I want to run a marathon in this shoe. When I start in the Wave and switch to the Elixir at the half way point, I immediately notice the lighter weight, the stability and the hardness of the shoe. Wouldn't want to endure that for an IM marathon but would choose it over the Wave. I find this type test helpful to see how a shoe feels once some fatigue sets in. They all seem OK for the first few miles. So, yesterday I went to Runners Warehouse and looked for some light weight shoes with stability and cushioning. Settled on the Zoot OVWA or whatever. Doing LP in a few weeks and want to get this shoe debate put to bed. Will provide feedback once they arrive.
Dave, it's simply a matter of adaptation but it takes time. I used to do the IM run in Asic Kayanos but now I can do it in a 7.5oz shoe (Karhu Racers). Going to a lighter shoe isn't really a process you should think in terms of weeks but more like months or even much longer. So, keep in mind that one's success in making this change is highly dependent on the plan. I'm willing to bet that most everyone who said, "It didn't work for me," probably lacked the proper plan and/or the patience required to make the change.
Been running in Asics 2xxx for ever and just got a pair of DS Trainers. First run on Monday was 7 miles and my feet were achey and sore but not bad. Wednesday the 4 mile brick was much harder. Well, last night I went back to my 2140's for the 2.5 hour long run.... feet started to ach after about 4 miles and still hurt.
My right arch is very sore and I hope I didn't do any real damage - IMLP is only 22 days away! Just to be clear, I will NOT be running in the DS Trainers untill I am fully recovered from IMLP.
Time for me to jump in. Lots of good intel here and sound advice.
@CoachRich - you know as well as anyone you don't make big changes mid-season prepping for your A race. Fortunately (or unfortunately) depending on how you look at it, I get to interact with 1000's of "triathletes" and/or "runners" on a weekly basis. Yes, a shoe can make you faster (ie..less weight lifted, etc) but a shoe is a tool and if you don't know how to use the tool effectively you risk serious injury. Just like a band saw!!
At the end of the day shoe manufacturers (based partly on faulty science) decided 20+ years ago that we humans needed a shoe to make running "easier" so everyone could do it. Getting 220+ "fatty" off the couch for the local 10k was not going to happen with a 6oz performance shoe so "shoes that were better for us" came to pass. Faulty thinking. Conventional wisdom is that less shoe = healthier runner. BUT, just like getting into any kind of training program you can't go out for a 10 miler off the couch, you gotta ease into it.
Running with less shoe is a great goal but why a goal is equally important. If it is to be "cool" then bag it. If you are looking to improve as an athlete and make the most of your genetic programming then moving towards less is more!
Getting your feet closer to the ground is what the whole thing is about. The delta between how far your toes are from the ground and your heel is about 12-14mm across traditional running shoes. Basically your neutral cushioning shoe or stability shoe. Keep in mind that when manufacturers advertise these heights and when you cut these shoes in 1/2 and actually measure them there can be some substantial differences. We cut up a lot of shoes!!
Running shoes are an individual choice and what works for Bobby might not work for Billy, but it is rarely the "shoe" that is the difference. The difference is in running gait, body weight, history of running, current condition, etc, etc, etc.
I have seen guys that are 250+ running in our racing flat and no problems what so ever. Conversely, I put a sumo wrestler at the LA Marathon in our motion control shoe and his feet hurt! Guy was 400+ and took 8+ hours, but got it done.
I won't be the "shoe guy" that advocates for one brand over another because of x, y or z. Product for speak for itself. Our does.
What Bryan said -- it's as much your mechanics as it is your shoe. I am now running exclusively in the KSwiss Kwicky Blade lights for the last 5 weeks and the technique matters. The longer I run, the more I break down "form-wise" and the more I am sore from the runs. I ran 15 the other weekend and was pretty sore for a few days.
I can't stack back to back 60'+ runs right now...so I am opting for shorter runs with some more tempo. I think as time goes on I'll be in a better place, but I do plan to go back to a more traditional shoe after LP for a while.
Got the new Zoot OVWA's in on Tuesday this week. Short test run in them Tuesday evening. Felt great ent out for a 1 hour run last night, felt great again. Feeling confident, went for a 1:30 run in them tonight. Decided to try the no sock thing. Big dumb mistake. About 2 miles into the loop, I could feel the blisters coning on my arches. Should have turned around and put on the socks, but I was running well and way up in the group of about 20 runners I run with on Thursdays. Decided to tough it out. About mile 8, the shoes became bloody as the abraisons ate through the skin. Like everything about these shoes, except the really are not a sockless option for my feet. It was very humid and they were soaked, but remained relatively light. I felt like I was working around zone 2, but Garmin said I was doing zone 3 pace. Like the light weight.
@Scott, I was thinking of ordering some of the above mentioned shoes, but it appears that a lot of them are out of stock everywhere. Never thought it would be so hard to find a size 10 shoe for >$100!
@Scott, I was thinking of ordering some of the above mentioned shoes, but it appears that a lot of them are out of stock everywhere. Never thought it would be so hard to find a size 10 shoe for >$100!
@Al O.- I've recently made a similar move. Nike Free Runs previously, now transitioning to the Minimus. BUT. my experience is going the opposite way. I find that my pace is slower. Now, I've only been running in them for 3 weeks. Mostly for warmups and cooldowns. Though I did try to finish an Oly tri in them and that didn't go well. Not putting all of the blame on the shoe, lots of factors went into the poor run, but it was a bad choice on my part.
Here's where I'm at... Do I keep training in them to improve my efficiency and then put some more traditional lightweight shoes on for a race? Or, do I train and race in them? I'm going to do a 5k run test this week in my Free Runs and see how that goes. Then, may repeat that next week in the Minimus and just try to keep the tests as consistent as possible.
Looks like K-Swiss has released different models of the Kwicky Blade Light. One is blue and one is rainbow. I was able to get a size 10 of the blue model off the K-Swiss site. The yellow version seems to be in limted quantity still.
Looks like this lighter shoe thing may be working for me!
My main focus has been to get my cadence up from a typical 87 to 90 or above. I've got the Garmin footpod and I set my watch to display cadence on the main screen. Watching the number makes a huge difference. When I'm on the treadmill, I strap the watch to side bar and stare at it several times a minute. Running slowing makes it hard to hit the cadence number, but as soon as I hit 8:00 min/mile, it's easy to hit 90. All out intervals are at the 92-93 range.
I've always be a heavy heel striker and have gone through the outsoles/midsoles every 300 miles or so.
I turned my lightweight racing flats over the other day, and not a dent in the heel. Some forefoot wear, but it looks like pretty even wear across the shoe. It's pretty amazing to change a 30 year running style in such a short time.
Looking for thoughts on judging shoe wear. I've typically replaced the shoes because it's obvious the outsoles are worn through. The shoes I have are a very light EVA on the outsole and midsole, so I must be compressing the midsoles, but I don't feel like they are wearing out. Are you replacing shoes on a regular basis, just because they are old and not because they appear to be worn out? How many miles are you getting out of lightweight shoes that show no signs of wear on the outsole? Do the complete minimalist shoes wear out?
I ended up ordering a pair of K-swiss Kwicky Blade Lights off their website ($$$) and got them today. Only color in my size looks like I'm sticking my foot in "Finding Nemo" 's arse! haha
I'll try them over the next few weeks and see how they feel. If they're good, then I'll order another pair and rotate between them for IMAZ training and racing. My Nike Frees will have to take a back seat, they don't drain, and the solid cotton upper makes them stifling hot.
Comments
I constantly battle with myself over this. I get real sloppy with my run cadence when I fatigue. I see race pics on the run and my stride seems decent enough early on and then I start heel striking more and more as the run goes on. It was very, very evident at IMTX. I guess survival mode trumped any semblance of technique.
I'm making quite the effort now to keep my run cadence above 90. That's my mid-season adjustment. I 100% agree with you that it's actually pretty hard to heel strike with a cadence in the 90's. You just can't have a long enough stride to do so. I find doing a minute cadence count every 10 minutes or so helps reinforce the technique.
I personally have a garmin foot pod I use for cadence. I check it during IM runs and full marathons to make sure my cadence isn't slipping through the race. Its also a great tool for post race analysis.
Even though I'm a pretty dedicated Newton fan now, I would totally agree. Dropping Newtons on the unsuspecting is dropping little hand grenades...I think even worse than other minimalist shoes.
For me, they are great. Light, last forever without losing comfort, make me run the way I want to, etc etc etc. But Chris's point is well taken, and I reiterate to anyone considering them to make that experiment AFTER your season, not now. Looking for a minimalist shoe now? Follow the suggestions of other people on this thread.
Asics DS Trainer
Mizuno Wave Elixir
K Swiss K-ruuz
Zoot Ovwa
I'm in the Ovwa right now, switching to the K-ruuz back and forth, and really loving the Ovwa. It's a terrific shoe. For anyone looking for a low drop shoe, the measurements provided at runners warehouse are very helpful, as are the 'if you like this shoe, you might also like this other shoe' recommendations.
So far 2 runs in the Kwicky Blade Lights...very fast. I have one more run in them today and then, gasp, going to try them on Saturday for my half Iron. My big concern is that I run "heavy" as the day gets longer; IOW my form deteriorates rapidly while miraculously my speed stays up. That said, I put out 3 miles at sub-6:20 pace yesterday as part of a hard brick workout and they felt pretty responsive. Will have more info at the end of Saturday!
I have done about 6 runs now in a pair of Asics DS Trainers and I love them. They are noticeably lighter than the Asics GT-2140, 2150, and Gel Cumulus I have used for the last 18 months.
The only temporary drawback is some fatigue in my arches. But I expect that to subside as my feet get used to doing the work my old shoes did. I hope to be aclimated to them in time for IMLP. If not, there are always the 2160's
Not much to add, but my path started in 2002(ish) picked up running and was weighing close to 200lbs. Starting running in Mizuno Wave Creation with great success, as the lbs melted away and my desire to spend 120.00 on shoes, I switched to the lighter Wave Rider then a few years later switched to my current shoe Wave Precision. I also race 10K and shorter in Wave Ronin. I guess I did right by accident as this switch about 5oz total happened over a course of years.
After reading this thread I may stretch out some runs in the Ronins...I do feel fast in those shoes.
Update: I don't think my Nike LunarElite's are going to work for me, at least not right now. After my runs in them I am sore in my ankles and achiles. Not injured sore, just a sore I don't need to be managing in the middle of IM training where every workout is important and I don't have much room to move stuff around. Pretty sure I'm going to continue running in the Asics Nimbuseseses and pick up the light shoe mojo stuff after Wisconsin.
Rich: sounds good. that type of sore you describe is the good kind, so definitely consider it as a good sign that you'll adapt well once wisconsin is done.
GH
But Ryan Hall is running at least 2x the weekly volume that any of us run. I know people do this all of the time but you simply can't compare what swimmers, cyclists or runners do to what triathletes should or shouldn't do in this context. It's just a completely different sport.
I also scored a deal, $70, and now that I know I like them, I am going to order another pair or two since they're still on sale. Sometimes it's a good thing to wear a size 15 because they can sometimes be the only sizes left.
I would bet Ryan Hall's weekly mileage is more like 3-4X what we are doing, but I also bet he and other pros run the majority of their mileage on soft surfaces because they can. The reality for most of us is that we are running wherever it is convenient, and that usually means the concrete jungle. I rarely have the time to drive 25 minutes to the trail, run for two hours, then drive back home.
Got a new pair of Zoot Ultra TT 4.0 as well to wear sockless for sprint/oly races.
Dave, it's simply a matter of adaptation but it takes time. I used to do the IM run in Asic Kayanos but now I can do it in a 7.5oz shoe (Karhu Racers). Going to a lighter shoe isn't really a process you should think in terms of weeks but more like months or even much longer. So, keep in mind that one's success in making this change is highly dependent on the plan. I'm willing to bet that most everyone who said, "It didn't work for me," probably lacked the proper plan and/or the patience required to make the change.
Been running in Asics 2xxx for ever and just got a pair of DS Trainers. First run on Monday was 7 miles and my feet were achey and sore but not bad. Wednesday the 4 mile brick was much harder. Well, last night I went back to my 2140's for the 2.5 hour long run.... feet started to ach after about 4 miles and still hurt.
My right arch is very sore and I hope I didn't do any real damage - IMLP is only 22 days away! Just to be clear, I will NOT be running in the DS Trainers untill I am fully recovered from IMLP.
Time for me to jump in. Lots of good intel here and sound advice.
@CoachRich - you know as well as anyone you don't make big changes mid-season prepping for your A race. Fortunately (or unfortunately) depending on how you look at it, I get to interact with 1000's of "triathletes" and/or "runners" on a weekly basis. Yes, a shoe can make you faster (ie..less weight lifted, etc) but a shoe is a tool and if you don't know how to use the tool effectively you risk serious injury. Just like a band saw!!
At the end of the day shoe manufacturers (based partly on faulty science) decided 20+ years ago that we humans needed a shoe to make running "easier" so everyone could do it. Getting 220+ "fatty" off the couch for the local 10k was not going to happen with a 6oz performance shoe so "shoes that were better for us" came to pass. Faulty thinking. Conventional wisdom is that less shoe = healthier runner. BUT, just like getting into any kind of training program you can't go out for a 10 miler off the couch, you gotta ease into it.
Running with less shoe is a great goal but why a goal is equally important. If it is to be "cool" then bag it. If you are looking to improve as an athlete and make the most of your genetic programming then moving towards less is more!
Getting your feet closer to the ground is what the whole thing is about. The delta between how far your toes are from the ground and your heel is about 12-14mm across traditional running shoes. Basically your neutral cushioning shoe or stability shoe. Keep in mind that when manufacturers advertise these heights and when you cut these shoes in 1/2 and actually measure them there can be some substantial differences. We cut up a lot of shoes!!
Running shoes are an individual choice and what works for Bobby might not work for Billy, but it is rarely the "shoe" that is the difference. The difference is in running gait, body weight, history of running, current condition, etc, etc, etc.
I have seen guys that are 250+ running in our racing flat and no problems what so ever. Conversely, I put a sumo wrestler at the LA Marathon in our motion control shoe and his feet hurt! Guy was 400+ and took 8+ hours, but got it done.
I won't be the "shoe guy" that advocates for one brand over another because of x, y or z. Product for speak for itself. Our does.
Ogs
I can't stack back to back 60'+ runs right now...so I am opting for shorter runs with some more tempo. I think as time goes on I'll be in a better place, but I do plan to go back to a more traditional shoe after LP for a while.
Might mention that the K-Swiss Kwicky Blade Light is ion-masked (hydrophobic) and won't get wet.....
If I can get my hands (feet) on some, I'd be willing to test that technology out!
I've been looking for 10's also. No luck.
Here's where I'm at... Do I keep training in them to improve my efficiency and then put some more traditional lightweight shoes on for a race? Or, do I train and race in them? I'm going to do a 5k run test this week in my Free Runs and see how that goes. Then, may repeat that next week in the Minimus and just try to keep the tests as consistent as possible.
Looks like K-Swiss has released different models of the Kwicky Blade Light. One is blue and one is rainbow. I was able to get a size 10 of the blue model off the K-Swiss site. The yellow version seems to be in limted quantity still.
www.kswiss.com/item/52.46/02652-428..._Lime.html
My main focus has been to get my cadence up from a typical 87 to 90 or above. I've got the Garmin footpod and I set my watch to display cadence on the main screen. Watching the number makes a huge difference. When I'm on the treadmill, I strap the watch to side bar and stare at it several times a minute. Running slowing makes it hard to hit the cadence number, but as soon as I hit 8:00 min/mile, it's easy to hit 90. All out intervals are at the 92-93 range.
I've always be a heavy heel striker and have gone through the outsoles/midsoles every 300 miles or so.
I turned my lightweight racing flats over the other day, and not a dent in the heel. Some forefoot wear, but it looks like pretty even wear across the shoe. It's pretty amazing to change a 30 year running style in such a short time.
Looking for thoughts on judging shoe wear. I've typically replaced the shoes because it's obvious the outsoles are worn through. The shoes I have are a very light EVA on the outsole and midsole, so I must be compressing the midsoles, but I don't feel like they are wearing out. Are you replacing shoes on a regular basis, just because they are old and not because they appear to be worn out? How many miles are you getting out of lightweight shoes that show no signs of wear on the outsole? Do the complete minimalist shoes wear out?
tom
I'll try them over the next few weeks and see how they feel. If they're good, then I'll order another pair and rotate between them for IMAZ training and racing. My Nike Frees will have to take a back seat, they don't drain, and the solid cotton upper makes them stifling hot.