Category: Barefoot Running

The BBC’s Made of Stronger Stuff podcast just dropped an episode called “Feet.”

Overall… GREAT.

It starts with the simplest idea, the arch in your foot is there to support your body. Spot on!

Well, there are actually 3 arches in your foot, but they’re referring to the one we normally think of — the longitudinal arch — when we use the term “arch.”

Next, it talks about the evolution of the foot and the arch… fascinating.

From there it goes into more of what we know about the benefits of natural movement and barefoot running, much from Harvard’s Dr. Daniel Lieberman’s research, and from Christopher McDougall’s book, Born To Run.

And they debunk some myths, like, “pronation is bad.” (It’s a natural part of the spring-like mechanism in your leg.)

They even use a phrase I coined when referring to “normal” shoes: Foot Coffins.

So, I like that. 🙂

Then it gets into barefoot running and, overall, LOVE IT.

But there are a few points I think they got wrong that I want to highlight:

1. Suggesting that during the “barefoot running boom” which kicked off in 2009, injury rates “went through the roof.” This isn’t accurate. Aside from vague definitions of what constituted an injury (e.g. calf soreness isn’t an injury), no study compared injury rates from new barefooters to new shod runners.They did make the point that you want to transition slowly to build foot muscle strength (and we know from Dr. Sarah Ridge’s study, that merely walking in a minimalist shoe builds foot strength as much as doing a foot exercise program), which is great, but…
2. They say that it takes “3 months, minimum” to build the requisite strength to run barefoot (or in a truly barefoot or minimalist shoe). This isn’t accurate either. First, transition times vary, person to person. For some, it’s just a week or two. For others, longer. Physical therapist, Jay Dicharry has said that the changes to the soft tissue, if you’re someone who needs it, takes 6-8 weeks. In short, There’s not one fixed amount of time, and 3+ months is, definitely on the long side.Secondly, transition time depends heavily on what you do TO transition. If you follow the instructions here, by starting SMALL, you can reduce that time greatly.
3. This one’s no big deal, but they imply that the Tarahumara are always barefoot. Actually, they spend more time in their tire-tread sandals, especially when running. On the other hand…
4. This is the biggie that they got wrong — when asked about picking “the best shoe”, the advice is “Listen to your body. If it’s comfortable, it’s good for you.”This is patently false if you’re talking about a cushioned shoe.

   That shoe can FEEL great, but be BAD for you. Research shows that cushioning, which FEELS great, doesn’t, well, cushion. Runners in highly cushioned shoes often put more force into their bodies and land harder on the ground (in part because their brains are trying to get some feedback from the ground, which the cushioning removes).

   Here’s a brief physics lesson for you: “Pressure” is not the same as “Force.” You can think of pressure as the total amount of “push”, and force as the speed with which that “push” is applied.

   Well, cushioning can spread out the pressure, so your feet don’t feel it as much, but it doesn’t change the force. And since most runners in cushioned shoes land on their heel with a relatively straight leg, the force then bypasses their built in shock absorbers — muscles, ligaments, tendons… and the ARCH — and goes straight up into their joints.

The flip side, of course, is that many people feel the comfort of Xero Shoes immediately, but for different reasons. Namely, the wider, foot-shaped toe box, the flexible sole that lets your feet move naturally, the non-elevated heel which doesn’t alter your natural posture, and the fact that you can get ground feedback through the sole, which your brain needs to help you move most effectively and efficiently.

Overall, though, the podcast is definitely worth a listen. It’s only 35 minutes long… unless you listen to it at 2x speed, which I do 😉

If you check it out here, let me know what you think in the comments, below.

If you haven’t seen the videos of the Boston Dynamics robots, you MUST.

They’re simultaneously, amazing and spooky (especially the videos of Spot, the robot “dog.”

My favorite is the one below, because Atlas the robot has almost PERFECT running form! Check it out:

I’ll admit it.

I love being right.

What am I right about this time?

The importance — or lack thereof — of shoes in Eliud Kipchoge’s sub-2-hour marathon performance.

I’ve talked about how shoes were NOT the delimiting factor in Kipchoge’s amazing run here, and in my podcast here, pointing out that the difference between his world record time of 2:01:38 in the Berlin marathon is only 4.58 seconds/mile slower than the sub-2, which was run with pacers, on a flat course (a.k.a. perfect conditions).

Well, guess who agrees with me? KIPCHOGE!

At Firstpost.com, sub-2-hour marathoner Eliud Kipchoge weighs in on how much of his success came from the Nike shoes he (and his pacers) wore for that event.

The answer?

Not as much as Nike or most commentators said.

More specifically:

“It is my legs that are still doing the running,” the Kenyan marathon runner told Firstpost in an email interaction when asked about the impact of his shoes in the eventual timing of 1:59:40 secs.

Agreed.

Running ~13 miles per hour for almost 2 hours is an AMAZING feat (pun intended).

But the way his accomplishment has been reported is mostly about how the shoes allowed him to do this.

And Kipchoge further downplays the role of shoes in his success:

“Innovations are part of sport and always have been. With running, the effect of technology will always be minimal especially if you compare it to other sports.”

Distance running coach, Dr. Phil Maffetone, thinks shoes DO matter, but not for the reason most people believe.

In his book, “1:59 – The Sub-Two-Hour Marathon is Within Reach,” Maffetone thinks the first person to run a sub-2 in a normal race will do so barefoot (I think his 2nd choice would be something like our Speed Force).

Some day, I hope we have the resources to pick the world’s best marathoner, support him (or her!) to train barefoot or in Xero Shoes, and show that lightweight (you can’t get lighter than bare feet) and natural (hard to get more natural than Xero Shoes) will “let your legs do the running” to a sub-2.

What’s the difference between “good running” and “bad running”?

Those of us who promote natural movement and barefoot running have some thoughts about that.

Typically, we talk about:

• Landing with your foot “under your body” (don’t reach out in front of your body with your foot — “overstriding”)
• Increase your cadence a bit (there’s no magic number, like 180 steps per minute, but increasing your foot speed without increasing your running speed makes overstriding more difficult)
• Land on your forefoot or midfoot (it’s hard NOT to land that way if you don’t overstride, and don’t point your toes to make this happen. BTW, some research suggests forefoot is better because it lets you use the “spring” in your foot’s arch)
• Keep your core engaged (you want to be a “tight spring”)

But what does SCIENCE say?

Well, take a look at this super-cool presentation by David Mark, showing some running analysis by biomechanist Dr. Aaron Beach

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-11/why-everything-you-thought-about-running-is-wrong/11775598

They use some great visualizations to compare Olympian Jenny Blundell to recreational runner, Ruby Cornish.

The only thing different in Beach’s analysis and recommendations from what I show above, is that he doesn’t suggest trying forefoot landings. But my bet is that if Jenny was a forefoot landing runner he’d comment on the value of doing so.

One other subtle thing is that he recommends that Ruby have more hip extension (or what some would call “backside mechanics”). This isn’t something to work on, but simply the effect of having a stride where your foot lands under — or close to — your center of mass, with the correct cadence.

It why we say that good runners “run out of the back.”

I think you’ll love the visualizations. Let me know what you think.

If you want to become a better runner… or start running enjoyably, then you’ll like this video introduction to Chi Running.

But, more, you’ll like the 3 Free Lessons you get from Danny Dreyer, creator of Chi Running, when you CLICK HERE

Birds of a feather may flock together, but do barefoot runners flock as well… psychologically, at least?

Nicholas Hanson and Janet Buckworth think they might, as they describe in the paper they’ve published in Sport Sciences for Health, “Personality characteristics of barefoot runners: openness and conscientiousness as the defining traits”

They put 692 runners through The Big Five Inventory, a psychological typing system. 238 of those runners identified as barefooters who’d done at least a half marathon in the last 2 years.

Turns out, they say, that barefoot runners

…tend to be more open (imaginative, unconventional, curious) and less conscientious (responsible, dependable, orderly) than shod runners.

Think that describes you?

You can take the Big Five test and see… there are lots of sites that offer it (click here for search results)

(and, no, if you don’t fit the mold that DOESN’T mean you can’t run barefoot!)

Can you guess what these two athletes have in common?

Have you guessed yet?

The answer is as far on opposite ends of the athletes themselves as the athletes are far from each other in stature.

Here’s a hint: Krahn’s head… and Trengove’s feet.

The answer: FORCE.

Football players send a LOT of force through their helmets and into their heads, leading to concussions. Check out the Will Smith movie, Concussion, for a revealing look into this phenomenon.

Runners send a lot of force through their shoes, into their feet, ankles, knees, hips and back, leading to all manner of joint injuries. I think we should start calling these “foot concussions.”

The “solutions” offered to both athletes has been the same for decades: more and more padding, shock absorbing technology, high-tech materials to handle the high-impact forces.

And I put the word solutions in quotes because none of these interventions have eliminated, or even reduced, the problem.

But barefoot runners have been offering a solution is for both athletes:

To reduce injury, runners should take off their shoes. Football players should take off their helmets!

Harvard’s Daniel Lieberman showed how removing your shoes can lead to running form changes that reduce force through your joints. How does this happen? Because the form you adopt when running in padded footwear, ironically, puts MORE force through your joints. When you try to run barefoot with a “shoe wearing gait,” it HURTS… and so, to avoid the pain, you’ll learn to run with a gait that, instead of relying on footwear padding, uses the natural shock absorbers built into your body — your muscles, ligaments, and tendons.

(BTW, most “minimalist” shoes have enough padding that you don’t get the form-change inspiring feedback. That’s why Xero Shoes use our FeelTrue® rubber to give you just-right protection.)

Well, this just in from the “No surprise” category: “Helmetless-tackling training intervention reduced head impacts in collegiate football players within 1 season.”

I know you’ll find this screamingly obvious, but when football players take off their helmets so they can no longer use their heads as the front end of a battering ram, they naturally stop this concussion-causing behavior.

Duh!

So the REAL solution seems obvious. Why aren’t people rioting in the street for the eradication of helmets and 2″ thick padded running shoes?

I think there are two reasons, inertia and vested interests.

By “inertia” I mean that we’ve now had more than 2 generations of “we need better helmets/shoes.” That’s enough time to inculcate the idea that “more = better.” It takes time and effort to get people to stop believing “common wisdom” and change directions. It’s not easy to make a big boat do a U-turn. It took almost a generation to reduce the incidence of smoking after it was proven that smoking is bad for you.

Vested interests? Well this one’s easy. Big companies are making billions of dollars on head-smashing football games and on foot coddling running shoes. Billion dollar companies would rather argue that they’re correct — in the face of glaring evidence to the contrary — than say, “Wow, we’ve had our heads totally up our butts for the last 40 years and caused you all a TON of injuries. Sorry ’bout that!”

This is why any seeming “pro-barefoot” news is immediately jumped on by shoe companies, and why any news that could possibly be spun into “anti-barefoot” is, well, spun like a top, regardless of the facts. For example, shoe companies jumped on the class action lawsuit against Vibram as “proof” that barefoot is bad for you, when neither the suit itself or the fact that the lawsuit settled for essentially pennies, suggested anything of the sort.

What to do?

I wish I had a great answer, since getting people into footwear that supports natural movement and ground feel is our company’s and my personal mission.

I guess I’ll start by attending football games the same way I attend every day of my life: barefoot or in Xero Shoes

The content of this post does not constitute and is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Always seek the advice of a physician or other qualified health provider with any questions or concerns you may have about your health or a medical condition.