Posts Tagged ‘Athletic shoe’

HUSH PUPPIES TO…

Posted: July 22, 2013 by smrtnsasy in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
0

I was in college when I started to run seriously.  Before that, I only ran when I had to (except for a “volunteer” mistake in high school) and stopped as soon as possible.  I think that was about 100 years ago.  Seems like it, anyway.

But, I remember that first serious run.  It was winter, and there was some left over snow on the ground where I was at the time in Clarksville, Tennessee.  I was going to run around the main campus of Austin Peay State University.  As far as I could calculate the distance of that long run, it was a half-mile.  I know what you’re thinking… that was a big jump to run that far.  But, I was fearless.

I dressed for the cold weather, and, then got to the most important part of the preparation.  That would be the shoes.  I needed shoes that would give me some cushioning, friction in the snow and ice, and comfort.  Being a physical education major and knowledgeable about athletics, I immediately dug out my trusty pair of “Hush Puppy Desert Boots.”  These remarkable shoes were deemed “desert boots” because of their design which consisted of a thick crepe rubber sole and a suede leather upper that reached up to the little bump on each side of the ankle.  Those babies were just what I needed for the snow and ice.

That run progressed into many more consistent runs and into the spring.  I had noticed that some of my peers who were distance runners in track didn’t do their runs in Hush Puppies.  They had shoes with three stripes on the side.  They looked a little more streamlined than my clunky Puppies.  I explained my running in Puppies and asked about their shoes.

When they got up from rolling in the floor laughing to the point I thought they were going into a seizure, they told me to get “real” running shoes.  That would be the Adidas Italias.  They were white with green stripes.  The sole was slightly grooved and was about half as thick as my Puppies.  The problem was that I could not buy them in Clarksville.  So, I had to go to a sporting goods store in Nashville, Tennessee to find them.  And, they were the only store that had them in western Tennessee.  But, I found them.  I got ‘em.  Then, I felt more like a “real” runner.

The Italias did feel different from my Puppies.  They felt better.  They were lighter, and the cushioning was denser and more responsive.  I was just worried that the thinner sole would wear out a lot sooner than the Puppies.  My track friends told me that they just used theirs’ for running and not for walking to class and stuff.  That would make the shoes last longer.  So, that’s what I did even though I knew I didn’t look as cool without the Italias on my feet.  With my strong runner’s self-discipline kicking in, I wore my Puppies to class.  My Italias were worn only for running where I was looking cool to all those who saw…well, to hardly anyone.

Other running shoes were out there.  New Balance had a leather upper and ridged-sole shoe that looked like a fake golfing shoe.  Converse had a crepe-rubber soled shoe with a cloth upper.  Puma had a shoe with a sole as hard as a rock.  Then, there were sneakers, tennis shoes, bowling shoes, and army boots that filled the gap.

I continued in this mode until I got my first teaching and coaching job in Ft. Walton Beach, Florida.  During this time, a local sporting goods store gave me a new pair of running shoes to wear and then recommend them to the team I was coaching.  Those shoes were the first Nike shoes with the waffle soles. They felt great.  My runners loved them.  Before long, just about everyone who ran had feet encased with Nikes.Nike+Logo

That started the fast train of evolution in running shoes.  Nike gained in popularity.  Adidas and Puma fought to hold them off in sales.  Tiger, as they were called then, became Asics and claimed a steady niche in the market.  Reebok had an on-off affair with popularity among distance runners.

Nike sponsored research in runners footstrike and biomechanics of the running gait.  Information was gathered from the running camps around the nation.  Soon, they sponsored camps and continued their research.  Other companies followed suit.

The result of this was that the running shoe became a thick soled, higher heeled behemoth.  All companies had their model that seemed to follow the same prototype.  One radical model came out and lasted only a few years and was very different than the direction of the popular shoes of the time.  That was the Lydiards which were designed by New Zealand Coach Arthur Lydiard.  He had the idea that the shoe companies were ruining the running shoe by making them too protective and interfering with the natural action on the human foot during running.  His shoe had the heel and forefoot close to the same level instead of the heel jacked up higher than the forefoot.  The sole was thinner.  The shoes were more expensive than the popular lines and lasted only a few years.

My running was mostly in Nikes.  I am probably an efficient runner because I have had very few injuries during my many miles.  I think this was the case in spite of the shoes I was wearing.  Presently, my shoes of choice in no particular order are Brooks Flow, Brooks Flow 2, Newton Gravity, and Brooks Glycerin 9.  I’m still running in Nike Free covering three models.  But, I seem to gravitate toward the Brooks and Newtons.

Brooks_LogoV_BlueBlack1

One of my favorite books (running or otherwise) is Christopher McDougall’s Born To Run, A Hidden Tribe, Superathletes, and the Greatest Race the World has Never Seen.  In this book, the evolution of the running shoe was addressed by Dr. Daniel Lieberman, a professor of biological anthropology at Harvard University.

Dr. Lieberman said, “A lot of foot and knee injuries that are currently plaguing us are actually caused by people running with shoes that actually make our foot weak, cause us to over-pronate, give us knee problems.Until 1972, when the modern athletic shoe was invented by Nike, people ran in very thin-soled shoes, had strong feet, and had much lower incidence of knee injuries.”

He continued with the following, “Humans really are obligatorily required to do aerobic exercise in order to stay healthy, and I think that has deep roots in our evolutionary history.  If there’s any magic bullet to make human beings healthy, it’s to run.”

Evidence is given in this book pointing to the fact that as running shoes have become more “technologically”advanced, the incidence of running injuries has increased.  Perhaps, this has given fuel to the barefoot running craze we are experiencing now.  And, I’m sure, it has motivated the major running shoe companies to come out with their “minimalist” line in which the shoes have the heel lower to the ground and encourages the footstrike to be midfoot instead of on the heels. They also have less corrective measures built in to the shoe.  These lines of shoes are gaining in popularity.

In my constant layman’s research into ways to improve my running and my athletes’ running, I have evolved into some form or biomechanical changes that seem to help with consistency and injury prevention.  Along with this, I have gravitated toward the shoes mentioned earlier as my shoes of choice.  Even the old Lydiards that were previously mentioned as being radical to their times, were a favorite of mine.  I had to stop using them because they became unavailable.  But, it all fits in to where I am today with the running shoe.

I have always told my runners to go back to an old pair of comfortable running shoes when they suffer an injury.  I found out through experience that this would speed healing or do away with the pain entirely.  The old shoes would be worn down enough to actually promote a more natural footstrike.  The built-in corrections were broken down after so many miles.  The results were positive…probably not what the shoe companies would want to hear.  Again, this is a positive for the minimalist movement.

So, it kind of seems that a runner should get the shoe that seems most comfortable to him or her when they try them on and run a few steps.  And, the cheaper shoes may just do that…except for the Newtons with their freakish cost. But, the Newtons may last a lot longer than the other shoes.  I do not know that at this writing because I am presently using Newtons on and off so the mileage is not very high.  I do know  that I have just put 1000 miles on my first pair of Nike Frees…and I am still using those on and off…and they still feel good.

Nike Frees, 1000 mile shoes and still going

Nike Frees, 1000 mile shoes and still going

Hmm…That doesn’t fit in to what the shoe companies recommend as the life of their shoes.  Most of those recommendations tell us to stop our running in those shoes at about 300 miles.  Then, go buy another pair.  Maybe, they have a different motivation in the form of dollar signs.

I guess the bottom line is for each runner to analyze their running in relation to the shoes they are wearing.  Don’t listen to the shoe reps when they are telling you that you need a particular shoe to correct a myriad of problems you didn’t know you had.  That rep is telling you what he has been told to tell you.  You know your running better than they do, so do your own analysis, and you will probably be better off.  Might even save some money.

This is not to totally disregard all the professional advice given to runners about their shoes.  But, if all their advice was correct, why is the injury rate percentage for runners not getting less?  Why were the pre-1972 runners injured less?  Why do some primitive runners who do not have the “advantage” of the modern running shoes, seem to not experience stress fractures, plantar fasciitis, knee injures, and all that stuff the experts tell us we suffer because we pronate too much?

According to Dr. George Sheehan, each runner is an experiment of one.  We can usually determine our injuries and do what is required to solve the problem…without the super running shoe guaranteed to protect you from everything.  Just be a thinking runner and tap into what you feel.

Richard Westbrook

“As we become increasingly involved in technology, science, and business, we should not lose that instinct, that feeling for the earth. Running is a very beautiful way to bring out those healthy feelings.”

Bill Rodgers

Marathon runners

Related articles

IN NATURE

Posted: June 20, 2013 by smrtnsasy in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
6

            A few days ago, my granddaughter found an old 8-track tape in a closet and promptly asked what it was.  After being told, she wanted to hear the tape.  Of course, we did not have an 8-track tape player.  So, it went unheard.

            Then, later in the week, I went to Phiddipides at Ansley Mall to buy a pair of running shoes.  As I sat there trying on the shoes and gazing at the wall covered with shoes, I thought back to the time I evolved from the Adidas Italias to the brand new Nike Cortez.  The difference was like that between night and day.

            I thought about this because the shoes I was buying now were closer to being like the old Italias than they were to the Nike Cortez that revolutionized the running shoe industry.  And, I was buying Nikes.  This reflected a change in the running shoe business.

            The way my mind works brought me to thoughts of technology in today’s world; the way we react to that technology; how we as runners fit into the world of advancing technology compared to the world of basic nature.  My shoe purchase reversed my direction from my recent running shoe trend in that I was going backwards compared to the obvious technology in most running shoes today and in the dominating philosophy of the major running shoe companies…including Nike.  It was like the running shoe companies were backtracking in their design and philosophy.

            This whole bubble of modernization and technology engulfs the runner of today just like it does everyone else.  Still, one of the major appeals of running for many people, including me, is the simplicity of the activity.  As they say, it is a sport that needs only good shoes and determination.  Even in our simplicity, we can see, use, or reject the oncoming technology.  An example is the GPS equipment that can tell the runner where, the distance, elevation, pace, and such of the run.  Just put it on your wrist and take off…it will do the rest. It is there to use.  Just take it or leave it.

            Another major appeal of running expressed by many people is the connection to nature.  This may partially explain why trail running is exploding in numbers.  There are those who run only on trails and race only on trails.  Then, there are those who will hit the trails just part of the time.  And, we have those who never run on trails.  We are speaking here of nature trails.  Those trails through the woods or in the open but are surfaced with earth and not pavement.  We are not talking of the multi-use trails that are paved to accommodate road bicycles, skates, and skis on wheels.  Such a trail is the very popular Silver Comet Trail from Smyrna, Georgia to the Alabama state line.

            One may think that a runner needs to be on nature trails running along with the sound of the wind rustling the leaves of the forest in order to be “in” nature.  Not so.  If you are “out there,” you are in nature.  As soon as the runner goes out the door, that runner is running in nature.  This fits one of Webster’s definitions of nature, the external world in its entirety.  That is nature for the runner.  This does not include running indoors or treadmill running, unless, maybe, the treadmill is outside.

            We, as runners, are active participants in nature.  The runner running in downtown Atlanta is running in nature just like the runner running the Appalachian Trail.  I run in nature when I run my familiar routes in my neighborhood…all on roads.

            One site of nature is no better than another site of nature.  It is just a different nature site.  The runner may prefer the sidewalk in the nature he or she runs through while another may prefer the local park with asphalt and grass trails; while another may choose the wooded trail with its roots and rocks and stream crossings.  All of it is nature.  The difference may be the intensity of the nature setting.

            The intensity of nature would be the degree of completeness of the environment that would reflect the lowest level of interference from man.  The Appalachian Trail would reflect less interference than the Silver Comet Trail.  So, one might think the A.T would be “more” nature.

            This might be true of the common pedestrian through such settings.  But, not for the runner.  A runner’s nature is where the runner happens to be running at the time as long as it is out there.  This is because the runner will be more aware of the setting being run through than anyone else passing through the same.  A runner is able to sense more because running will heighten the senses because of the body and mind’s reaction to the activity.  Any runner can tell of experiences in which their surroundings during the run seemed more intense with color, clarity, smells, sounds, and many other sensations that made the run memorable.  And, this is not uncommon.  In fact, it is so common that we hardly hear or read about the phenomenon as we did in the early running boom days.  It has become commonplace.  But, that doesn’t mean that it is not there and not important to enjoying the running.

            The runner is an athlete.  The runner is an athlete in nature.  The runner relates to nature in ways in which most other athletes can only read.  It happens to the runner in the cities, the forests, the deserts, the mountains, the parks, the beaches, on the sidewalks, the roads, the trails.  The sensations abound.  The senses are on high alert.  The mind is processing everything with more clarity than at other times.

            This makes the runner one with his or her nature.  That nature is anyplace and every place outside.  The runner becomes an animal in nature.  The more the runner feels like an “animal,” the more intense the running experience in nature becomes.  The runner may be unique in reaching this state of mind.

            The true runner has a calling to keep reliving the experience with nature.  This helps running become a way of life.  We runners need to keep our awareness of the experience alive.  We need to enhance our appreciation of the experience.

            On your next run, tap into the colors around you be it city or country.  Listen to the sounds be they city hubbub or forest rustlings.  Smell the odors from the pavement or the trail…see what you can detect wafting through the air.  Relate to the sounds of your breathing and your feet striking the surface.  Be aware of your body’s motion and position.  Let your mind absorb it all.  The mind will give you a high definition picture better than any modern product of technology.

            It will be your picture of your nature.  You will have it, enjoy it, and remember it.  You will repeat it.  Later runs will do that for you.  You will be an animal in nature.  You will be running and be a better person because of it.  If you are lucky, you will even be a better animal.

 Richard Westbrook

 

“Next time you go out, solo or with your pack, run with your eyes wide open. Play I-Spy if you have to. Notice the beauty of the moments, the scenery, the company, and the rhythm.”

                                                                                   Kristin Armstrong,

                                                                                   Author and runner

Related articles