Kevin Paulk Interview

[Andrew A.]

Bill Rodgers and the Perfect Running Shoe
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/23/bill-rodgers-and-the-perfect-running-shoe/

[Andrew A.]

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/07/barefoot

[Andrew A.]

http://petemagill.blogspot.com/2009/07/expensive-shoes-behind-running-injuries.html

[Andrew A.]

http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_12887617

[Double]

I have never ran with, known, or seen anyone who resembled a runner go barefoot in my life in person.  Not that there's anything wrong with that. 

[Andrew A.]

There is a high school in my part of town which has a FieldTurf infield that I like to go run barefoot on, though it has been locked recently for construction.  The Stanford runners of late are known for that, it was by studying them that Nike came up with the concept for the Free shoes.

At Stanford University, California, two sales representatives from Nike were watching the athletics team practise. Part of their job was to gather feedback from the company's sponsored runners about which shoes they preferred.

Unfortunately, it was proving difficult that day as the runners all seemed to prefer... nothing.

'Didn't we send you enough shoes?' they asked head coach Vin Lananna. They had, he was just refusing to use them.

'I can't prove this,' the well-respected coach told them.

'But I believe that when my runners train barefoot they run faster and suffer fewer injuries.'

Nike sponsored the Stanford team as they were the best of the very best. Needless to say, the reps were a little disturbed to hear that Lananna felt the best shoes they had to offer them were not as good as no shoes at all.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1170253/The-painful-truth-trainers-Are-expensive-running-shoes-waste-money.html

[lookforward]

Just found this forum.  If anyone cares to see VFFs in action, this guy (http://sasha.fastrunningblog.com/blog-07-24-2009.html)  is racing/running in them. Has run a full marathon recently in his VFFs.  Note his shoe mileage... his VFFs have over 2,000 miles on them!  Better value, stronger feet, more fun... I may be trying on a pair soon.

[Andrew A.]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/30/business/30shoe.html?_r=2&em

[Andrew A.]

adiZero Insider Interview
http://www.runningwarehouse.com/interviews.html?ccode=INT002

[Andrew A.]

http://petemagill.blogspot.com/2009/09/morning-read-barefoot-running.html

Magill's take closely mirrors my own.  While far too many runners run in overbuilt shoes that enable weakness and do not run barefoot nearly enough (myself included), there seems to be a bit too much of a rush to the opposite end of the spectrum.  Shoes like Vibram FiveFingers intrigue me, yet I doubt I would ever be inclined to run in them -- perhaps shoes more like those in the adiZero line and/or cc flats, thoughtfully engineered running shoes that protect without being too much.

[Ryan]

Likewise, I've not convinced myself to make the jump to the FiveFingers. I've been intrigued by them and other minimalistic shoes, enough to even look at some of them, but I haven't been able to convince myself to buy them yet. The adiZero MANA has treated me very well and I'm giving the Asics Hyperspeed a trial now (like it so far). These shoes give you many of the positive aspects of minimalistic running without, in my opinion, going to an extreme I'm not yet ready to wrap my head around.

That said, I do need to get back to doing some barefoot running, too. I haven't done any in quite some time.

[Andrew A.]

Going in a slightly different direction: http://wpblogs.runningtimes.com/blogs/talktest/2010/01/27/no-point-in-shoe-awards/

I see the merit in the author's contention, yet it may not really go far enough.  What are running magazine/website shoe reviews, really, if not vaguely disguised infomercials?  Would a publication (print or online) really honestly pan a shoe made by a prominent advertiser (or, going further, a potential advertiser) and risk offending and jeopardizing that ad account?  Or do they tend to employ euphemisms to cover up shortcomings found by testers?  The other part - and what along with a lack of uniformity renders user reviews posted to forums and blogs more or less useless - is the question of whether there is truly any objectivity (not just credibility) employed in surveying shoes.  Consumer Reports did a review of running shoes years ago which was panned for lacking applicability to the act of running.  That would be the one organization that could be counted on to do a credible, objective, and uniform job of reviewing products, yet the reviews produced were not useful enough to runners to guide them in what shoes they would be able to enjoy running in.  Granted, I do have a couple decades or so of experience to guide me at this point.  I do find that there is little at all new under the sun anymore.  Running stores, whether online or down the street, do a good job categorizing shoes into categories that have sufficient boundaries.  There is little trick to finding a stability shoe in the 10-12 oz. range or a lightweight cushioned shoe in the 8-10 oz. range or a motion control shoe.  The chief difference lies in the fit (e.g. I have a hard time finding a fit I like in Reebok shoes yet know that I will always like the fit and feel of Asics shoes) and in the ride, and you cannot know either for a make/model of shoe you have never tried before until you put them on and go run in them.    And then when you have determined that the DS Trainer or the Wave Elixir works well for you then you can stick with them as long as you like -- manufacturers rarely ever eliminate a shoe completely from their product line, they may rename and/or retool it but chances are there will always be a shoe basically similar to the one you like for years to come.  It also means that you can look at some of the objective criteria provided by shoe manufacturers and stores - like 8-10 oz. with medial posting or other engineering for stability - and look for that in models from other manufacturers if the update of the shoe you like proves to not be to your liking. 

[Ryan]

Interesting take. I do see the author's point. As I've argued for years, there is no one shoe that is right for everyone. For just the reason the author points out, we are all different people of different builds, there can be no one shoe that is right for everyone.

I also agree with your point. I have seen how magazines operate. I am aware that there is a wall, often even literally, between editorial and advertising. I understand that the writers and editors do not work in any way with the people who handle advertising. However, it would be naive to think that an editor or writer does not at least subconsciously consider who pays the bills. When is the last time you've seen a running magazine completely pan a shoe from a major manufacturer with a big advertising budget? This has nothing to do with running magazines and shoes, though. When is the last time you've seen a car magazine completely pan a car from a major manufacturer with a big advertising budget? Sure, they pick out small things (the laces are a bit long on these shoes, the steering wheel is a bit small on the base model of this car) but there are products out there with big flaws (this shoe has a sharp pressure point that hits all but those with the highest arches right in the middle of the arch, the brakes on the car have subpar performance in certain conditions) and I can't recall the last time I've seen a review in ad-supported media that pointed out such a flaw.

[Andrew A.]

Definitely, and the point I took too many words to try to get to is that shoe reviews are vastly overrated, except possibly for runners who are in their first year or two of running and have no background at all for figuring out such things -- though for neophytes it is likely far better to make regular visits to reputable running stores where the staff could best guide and educate them. 

[Ryan]

Agreed. If you have been running for some time, chances are you know what you need in your shoes. If you haven't been running for long or you still need to figure out what you need, then get yourself some one-on-one assistance. What's written in a magazine isn't going to make much of a difference to the former and isn't going to be of much help to the latter.