Racing Flats vs Cushioning
2 watchers
Sep 2012
11:19am, 2 Sep 2012
17,967 posts
|
eL Bee!
DeeGee - if you're running better in the flatter shoes, stick with them. I changed overnight from the Nike Vomero which was a cushioned monster to the inov-8 f-lite 230 as my 'do everything' shoe - up to marathon distance and beyond! |
Sep 2012
11:38am, 2 Sep 2012
14,018 posts
|
Fenland Runner
I agree with you eL Bee which is why I'm so wary of the Hoka's, which look like the most cushioned monsters I've ever laid my eyes on!  All this zero drop nonsense seems irrelevant when they look like spare tyres from a car! |
Sep 2012
3:54pm, 2 Sep 2012
7,949 posts
|
Liliaicha
Hokas are cushioned monsters, but they still have a very low heel to toe drop!
|
Sep 2012
6:40pm, 2 Sep 2012
12,571 posts
|
DeeGee
Video inconclusive. Running uphill into a water station. Still, the Brooks feel better. Now, is there a similar shoe that I can alternate?
|
|
Sep 2012
7:07pm, 2 Sep 2012
17,968 posts
|
eL Bee!
FR - The Hoka makes no sense to me - it'll dull proprioceptive feedback meaning that you'll impact the ground harder even though you don't 'feel' it AND it'll increase leverage during groudn interaction with the height. Feet may hurt less, but I suspect that other injuries will become more prevalent with them. |
|
Sep 2012
7:22pm, 2 Sep 2012
8,062 posts
|
James1982a
Just a thought for those who know about such things - an article about which racing flats / minimalist / barefoot shoes to consider would be very useful with some info on sizing etc
|
|
Sep 2012
7:27pm, 2 Sep 2012
733 posts
|
RunningInCircles
We train our legs to be stronger in order to run. We do we feel the need to biomechanically assist our feet so much. Are they beyond training, or should we go the whole way and assist the rest of our body? gra-zone.blogspot.co.uk Complicated shoes seem to puzzle me more and more. Not saying I know better than anyone, just don't get it. That said, anything that doesn't injure you and gets you running is obviously ok for you. |
|
Sep 2012
7:56pm, 2 Sep 2012
1,244 posts
|
IanThinkRunning
The Hokas look like running shoe hell to me. It's wear all naughty running shoes go to die. Seriously though, they are monstrosities and make absolutely no sense whatsoever. Injury waiting to happen - badly. Zero drop is irrelevant when the sole looks like something from Tommy - the Rock Opera. Loads of cushioning and height are a recipe for disaster. Proprioception will be badly affected and leverage due to height will be an issue. Expect really bad ankle turning as result of people falling off these cushioned stilts! Running in circles. The best way to assist the bio-mechanics of our feet is to allow them to function as they were intended. Put as little as possible between feet and the road while affording just enough protection from environmental hazards is key. Just running in minimal shoes or barefoot isn't the whole thing though. Running technique has to be good but good running technique is assisted greatly with a nice minimal shoe. Technique should be put first though and to get good technique, good posture has to be there too etc.... |
Sep 2012
8:11pm, 2 Sep 2012
5,018 posts
|
Chrisull
Proprioception is king, I've never given 2 hoots about the foot drop differential, feeling the ground beneath your feet is what matters. I must say even on an unforgiving hard road, I feel better afterwards in the H streets, that to my normal Mizunos, the feet tingle - perhaps mental, but it just feels better and running in flats feels better. Have had criticism for running marathons in them, but my two fastest marathon times have been done in H streets. I wish they lasted a bit better for me, as I over pronate on my right, I tend to scuff it down the side once every so often (not that much), but having run marathons in them, a few scuffs and they get threadworn quite quickly. Ian - I'm not sure I have good posture, or great technique, but I don't get injured (fingers crossed), I try and keep my cadence up and my stride short looking ahead, staying relaxed and hoping the rest will follow. Was noticeable today when I was running the latter stages of a race with another and my cadence was in bursts way above his, and when I could keep it up, I'd pull away, but keeping the cadence there (I'm guessing it was closer to 200, as I'm normally 170-175 when I'm "unconsciously" running) was more than my endurance could do! |
|
Sep 2012
8:21pm, 2 Sep 2012
1,245 posts
|
IanThinkRunning
Chris, yes the sweet spot for most people cadence-wise is 175-185 but it depends on speed to some degree. A full on sprint would see me at about 195 to 200 cadence for example. Sounds like you are doing a lot of positive stuff regarding posture and that will help your form even if you aren't particularly conscious of it. The scuffing does point to a very minor issue or two though but hey, if you aren't getting injured and you are happy then that's great - don't bother changing anything! Happy running! I've worn H streets and similar for years now and they are good. Only issue I have is width of toe box. That is why I like VIVOBAREFOOT stuff because they have successfully addressed the toe box issue in my opinion and it allows the foot to splay nicely and function properly. |
Related Threads
-
The vaporfly thread
Apr 2024
-
Minimalist Footwear Thread
Mar 2024
-
Cross Country Spikes
Jan 2024
-
Shoe advice please!
Sep 2023
-
Advice - Saucony Guide or Omni?
Aug 2023
-
Sportsshoes.com
Aug 2023
-
Hoka One Ones....
May 2023
-
Mizuno Wave Inspire 5 vs newer models
Nov 2022
-
New Balance Off Road shoes.
Sep 2022
-
Running shoe recommendations please
Sep 2022
