Earl Fee, Take 2 on shoes: ‘I have learned some useful things’
Earl Fee shares a response to some comments on his earlier essay critical of minimalist shoes. Earl writes: “When I read Steven’s response (from the CEO of minimalist Invisible Shoes no less) to my article I thought of the joke: Never ask a barber if you need a haircut. The subject of minimalist running shoes is a weighty topic. I am no expert in this area, although I have two good related chapters in my running books on running shoes and running form. My article was partly to perhaps help other runners avert some problems in adapting to lighter shoes in training. In retrospect and advice from others─ my aggressive approach (training in racing flats) in a short time instead of less intensity over a longer period could have avoided injury.”
Earl continues:
Since barefoot running is not practical, in my mind, for most runners (notice I did not include minimalist shoes as impractical), and since minimalist shoes may be too drastic an adventure for many at present ─ in my article for those who wanted to try a lighter training shoe, I recommended one between a minimalist shoe and a heavy trainer.
Although Steven is not keen on foot strengthening during the minimalist accommodation stage I notice many other are. For example, Mark Cucozzella M.D.─ a noted shoe expert, and minimalist runner who has done running gait analyses studies to reduce running injuries─ recommends during the period of adjustment to minimalist shoes to do general strength training and dynamic strengthening exercises.
I also believe in strengthening feet and Achilles for all runners─for a stronger, stable and springy platform and to help avoid injury to lower limbs.
Steven objected to my entire list of who might be suited or not suited to minimalist shoes. In particular I believe those with poor running mechanics (e.g., pronation and supination, etc.) will have problems without their previous cushioned support unless they adapt to the correct natural minimalist running form. This is something they would definitely have to work on during the adjustment phase.
Regarding minimalist running form. The following is not a critique, just an interesting observation. Recently, I saw a video of the feet of a Vibram shod runner (at long distance speed) in running motion. The required forward landing was not pronounced. It appeared to me the foot landing was nearly flat. The bottom of the shoe kind of skimming the running surface. In long distance running─landing too far forward on the foot would fatigue the calf muscles.
Re: callouses in barefoot running. I may not have used the right word. If there are no callouses developed (as Steven states) in minimalist running─then there are at least soft tissue adaptations which probably take many weeks to develop.
Re: my statement that running in a 9 to 10 ounce shoe used the same energy as running barefoot. This is easily seen from the graph from the Colorado U study which shows energy consumption on the vertical scale and shoe weight on the horizontal. It shows an upper straight line for minimalist shoes with no cushion and no support and a lower straight line for cushioned/support shoes.
(It actually shows about 4% lower energy for cushioned/support shoes compared to the no cushion/no support shoes for all shoe weights above 4 ounces per shoe.) I simply drew a horizontal line (a fixed energy line) from barefoot shoe weight of zero on the no cushion/no support line over to the cushioned/support line and it intersected at about 9.5 ounces per shoe. Hence I was not “misrepresenting.”
If I am wrong then all the test results are faulty. For lower shoe weights Dr. Roger Kram (author of the Colorado study) explains: “The cushioning in the shoes absorbs some of the impact energy, the muscles don’t have to work as hard, and the shoes confer an advantage that outweighs the disadvantage of additional weight.”
The Colorado study has its critics and its flaws. For example, lead strips of 150g were added to the lightest cushioned shoe to simulate a 300 gram shoe and 300g was added to the lightest cushioned shoe to simulate a 450 gram shoe. My concern would be that this is too far removed from adding this weight in cushioning gel or foam in the sole; hence there is less cushioning.
Also others have complained that adding lead strips to the “tops” of non cushioned and cushioned shoes has altered the moment of inertia (radius squared x mass) of the feet and the swinging leg. Hence it appears some aspects of the study could have caused more or less cushioning and more or less energy used than normal.
Therefore my observation above based on the study’s graph must also be considered somewhat inaccurate.
On another topic, for other’s possible interest: I rarely train in my spikes to avoid injury─saving them for competition.
But when I train for the hurdles I often wear them as it is important to duplicate conditions I rarely train in my training orthotics─since too heavy. And I wear my heavy orthotics during the day.
Fortunately for all─this is my last word on this article. I have to get back to my poetry. Thank you for the opportunity. I have learned some useful things. You are never too old to learn.
10 Responses
I simply don’t know where this debate takes us. There are no absolutes in this. I am a sprinter in my 50s and I train in the gym/doing drills etc in 5 Fingers shoes. I have for two years now. They are fine, comfortable and have done much for my foot/calf strength. Were I an 80 year old middle distance runner, however well versed in my own experiences, or in running biomechanics in traditional running shoes, I’d want to be wary of generalising about what others might expect to find from lighter shoes or a different running mode.
There is nothing inherently wonderful in the footwear Nike and their like have had us wearing these last 40 years or so: for most of us, it is just all we’ve used and all we know. The result of experimentation seems to be good for some, less good for others, and bad for some.
There have been Masters world records set in minimalist shoes, there have been people injured wearing the same type of shoe. Please keep an open mind. For some, “if you always do what you always did, you’ll always get what you always got”. For others, experimentation, change, adaptation, improvement or reversion, etc are all a natural part of life. Hardly seems worth debate!
again i will point to the mere fact that infinitely more people beyond the age of 22 run than in years past. I remember what running shoes consisted of in the 60s & 70s. Not much and painful even for high school runners. I do not like Nike and refuse to wear their shoes. I won’t say which shoes i do wear. In addition other professions besides runners utilize the benefits of modern running shoes. Dance shoes are minimalist shoes(flat thin leather sole with anti skid rubber)after a short time your feet ache, (so does dancing barefoot) when your feet hurt you switch to RUNNING shoes. In rehearsals or class you are limited to an hour or two max in your dance shoes. then most dancers switch to running shoes for the padding. Ballet dancers dont because they walk& dance with a stiff kneed gait where they merely slide their feet to walk because that is what they do on stage. But all other dancers use running shoes to save their feet and and ankles. Older runners and many older dancers exist today thanks to the efforts of the large shoe manufacturers. There are fringe elements in every endeavor who denigrate the norm to elevate themselves. Fine. But don’t try to urinate on my leg and tell me it’s raining. I can look at the sky and know it ain’t true…
I forgot to mention that so many dancers use running shoes that Capezio dance shoes released what they call a Dans sneaker to cash in on dancers habits. If dancers only wear your shoes an hour a day & running shoes for the other 7 you lose money to the running shoe company. If dancers reject minimalist shoes and barefoot and go to MORE padding why would a runner go the other way? These people are paid professionals, (not paid by shoes manufacturers) and have chosen to reject minimalist for their health & career. Certainly more unbiased evidence than someone who is PAID or derives their income from promoting minimalist shoes.
Hi Earl,
Thanks for posting this.
To clarify: I’m not against foot strengthening. I recommend it as an adjunct to barefoot/minimalist running. However, no amount of strengthening will be adequate preparation for barefoot/minimalist running. And, I’d argue, the best strengthening exercise is barefoot running itself, assuming you land with a forefoot strike.
And your observation about people in Vibrams running with incorrect form is something that I’ve been observing for years, something Pete Larson from http://www.runblogger.com documented at the NYC Barefoot Run, and something the American Council on Exercise found in their test of VFFs. My explanation: there’s enough padding in VFFs to reduce or eliminate proprioceptive feedback (aka pain), allowing runners to use VFFs with the same form they had in padded shoes.
-S
For what it’s worth, I’ve been going barefoot for the past 6 months. I walk around all day with no shoes. I go shopping, to the bank, and I work in the studios sans shoes and all of the problems that I used to have with my feet are all gone and I can run pain free now for the first time in 6 years.
But when I TRAIN, I wear training shoes. I run 6 to 10 miles a day and there is NO WAY I can do that barefoot at the pace I go and when I do 400 or 200 repeats on the track, I’d be an idiot to try to do them without shoes.
I haven’t tried minimalist shoes and at this point don’t want to. After I train, I take my shoes off and do an easy mile cool down and spend the rest of the day barefooted. I think minimalist shoes are supposed to simulate running barefoot but I save a hundred bucks by actually going without shoes.
When you are a jazz musician, you can walk around without shoes and people expect you to be a little eccentric. So far no one has complained but the preacher looks at me kind of funny though. But as long as my feet feel good, I really don’t care.
Earl points out, “that he rarely trains in spikes to avoid injury.” Over the years, I have encountered multiple coaches that have their athletes avoid running entire workouts in spikes for two reasons; first, spikes offer almost no protection against the soft tissue damage that is a by-product of intense speedwork and second, doing the majority of -or a portion of- workouts in heavier training flats (9.0 – 13.0 oz) should result in athletes gaining both a physiological and psychological boost when they lace up their lighter spkies (4.5 – 7.0 oz) to train or race.
Nolan smartly points out, “that he opted to keep his $$$ by simply cooling down barefoot.” My coaches in the ’80’ & ’90’s were big on cooling down barefoot or in socks on the track, turf or grass.
Different things may work for different people, but in my opinion, minimalist & barefoot running offers none of the manmande protection or energy return that cushioned shoes provide when running on hard manmade surfaces. Additionally, masters athletes may put themselves at risk for injury when combining non-cushioned shoes and the worn-down cartilage that most people experience as part of the natural aging process.
Earl now says, “The subject of minimalist running shoes is a weighty topic. I am no expert in this area…”
I guess he shouldn’t have written that first article then!
Just because you can run fast doesn’t mean you know what you’re talking about. lol
An asside to Matthew: I hope I can speak a little for Earl when he says, “I am no expert in this area.” Since Earl was a nuclear engineer, he is more than capable of dealing with the required mathmatics, statistics, and experimental design of a research paper, just as other other trained scientists and engineers do. In fact, he never oversteps his bounds on his statements, on the one hand commenting on the physical parameters, logic, and conclusions of the studies he cites, and on the other hand, his experiences as an athlete. He does not presume in any of his writings to be a physiologist or anatomist. I really do not see how he has misrepresented or distorted any of the data or studies that he cites or comments on. People might be interested to know that biomechanical engineers with like backgrounds work with physiologist and anatomists all the time in medicine, sport, and rehabilitation, resulting in a collaboration that did not exist decades ago.
It’s funny to me there’s a JF (Just Fabulous) ad for high heel shoes on the left side of this page…lol.
Personally, I’ve come to think of sprinting in spikes as “technology-enhanced” running, in the grip of the speed obsession. If that’s the objective, why not just jump on a bicycle and race around the track? I think all track meets should be run barefoot on grass; barring that, in minimalist shoes. Then it’s all about the act of running, not being obsessed with records, medals, glory, profits, etc. I’d rather see a Usain Bolt run the 100 in 10 flat barefoot or in five-fingers than 9.4 in the latest Puma advertising platform. Now that would be sport even our remote ancestors (the ones who ran across the African plain for their lives, barefoot) could respect. Anyway, I have decided to run all the races remaining to me in my Vibram 5-finger shoes. Guess that makes me a fool in the eyes of the hyper-competitive (what’s their point, anyway?) I prefer to think that it’s because I like the act of running for its own sake. Call it the minimalist approach.
Leave a Reply