Posts Tagged ‘running shoes’

Catch the interview with Richard Westbrook, a man and his streak: 

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10155424744030082

The last premiere day is today, Tuesday, April 21 at 8pm and again the following morning at 3:30am on channel PBS30.

TIA-Web-Carousel-April-2015

“Join host Alicia Steele for This is Atlanta, PBA’s Emmy and Telly-award winning magazine program. This is Atlanta visits one-of-a-kind locations in the metro area, dives into unusual hobbies, and brings you performances by some of the city’s most compelling artists. Each segment of the show is a mini-documentary that offers a fascinating look at the people who make Atlanta an exciting place to live.”    – http://archive.pba.org/programming/programs/thisisatlanta/

OK, I know, the title of this writing makes no sense. So, I will explain. “Kyotee” refers to the Nike Kyotee trail shoe. Nike, in their wisdom, has chosen to discontinue the shoe. Nike does that a lot.

            I own two pair of the Kyotees. The oldest pair is used for physical education teaching outside in the mornings when the grass is wet. They keep my feet relatively dry. Ah, but the other pair…they have been rediscovered by my feet.

            The Kyotee’s are a fat pair of shoes. They are trail shoes and have a thick sole, much thicker than any of my other running shoes. I run on the roads 95% of the time, so I started using the Kyotee’s in my rotation of shoes for my runs. I wasn’t using them much on the trails since I wasn’t getting to trails very often. The Kyotee’s give plenty of cushioning with their fat soles. They make the asphalt feel soft.

            As I was wearing them in my rotation every once in a while, I found them to be very, very comfortable. My feet enjoyed the softness of the fatness. After a few rotations, I started working them in the rotation more often. Then, I started looking forward to the “Kyotee” day.

            They felt so good on my feet and legs that I started using them on longer runs. This was an addition to the usual long run stable of shoes, Brooks Glycerin 9’s; Brooks Glycerin 11’s; and Brooks Flow’s with the Flow’s bringing up the rear. The Kyotee’s were coming up fast.

            Finally, I took the Kyotee’s for a 30-mile run to see if they would hold up and feel as good as they did on shorter runs. They hung in there. The fat-soled Kyotee’s felt great all the way through the thirty miles. Now, I’m thinking about using them in ultra races. Hmm…

            My go-to shoes right now for ultra races are the Brooks Flow 2’s. I wore them in the Last Annual Vol-State Road Race last summer and in a 50K on trails this last October. They performed with no problems. I wore the Brooks Glycerin 11’s last May in a 24-hour run with no problems in that one. But, the Kyotee’s make me rethink the “go-to” selection.    

            You know, one can become thoroughly confused by reading the shoe analysis reports in running publications such as Runner’s World and other running magazines. And, if you read the advertisements from the shoe companies about their latest models, that will only add to the confusion for the runner in search of new and better shoes. There is just too much conflicting information out there about which is best for the runner. Over there, they tell me that the zero heel drop is the best ever. Over here, they tell me that barefoot is the way to go; after all, it is all natural and what could be better than that? Then there are the guys telling me that their latest and improved model makes it best for comfort, protection, and durability. Oh! Don’t forget the shoe improvisers who want to get me into the wide toe box for natural function of the foot.

            If I didn’t know better, I would just flip a coin to pick a shoe. But, I do know better, so I tend to go with the simplicity approach. If it feels good, it is probably a good shoe for me. Not that I eschew the information about the new shoes, but I will put more stock in the information from other runners who have used the shoes in question…those runners in an on-line forum and who have no vested interest in anything connected to the shoe except, maybe, the money they paid for the shoes. These forums have positive and negative feedback about particular shoes. After reading the remarks, it is just a matter of deciding to try or fore-go the shoes.

            So, now I am in deep thought about the feeling I’m getting from the Kyotee’s. Should I stay with the traditional big company shoes such as the Brooks Glycerins or the little less traditional Brooks Flows and Flow 2’s? The Nike Free shoes have definitely been surpassed to leave that level of minimalism behind. Should I try the fatter soled shoes that promise more cushioning with some stability? Hmm…

            Hoka in the title refers to the Hoka One shoes. Some runners in the Last Annual Vol-State Road Race have worn the Hoka shoes. Just about all the feedback from those runners is positive. Durability seems to be the only question. At first, I looked upon the Hoka shoes as another gimmick, but after the Vol-State feedback, I began to give them more serious thought. I haven’t tried them; haven’t even thought about trying them. But, after rediscovering the feeling of fat shoes through the Kyotees, the Hoka shoes have entered my brain scan. If the Kyotees feel that good, would the Hokas feel even better?

            I don’t know. But, maybe, I will have to find the answer. Or, maybe not. The Washingtons, much less the Jacksons, might not agree.

            I will have to ponder on taking the step of trying the Hoka shoes. I’m still searching out feedback on these fat boys. So far, it is all positive except for the aforementioned durability aspect. I have a “Shoe Hall of Fame” on my website, www.westbrookrunning.com, in which a pair of shoes will make the hall of fame if they reach 500 miles. There are several pair of shoes residing in that Hall of Fame. The durability question of the Hoka shoes might prevent their entry into the Hall of Fame. That would be a big negative against the Hoka shoes. Decisions, decisions…

            That leads to the term, “Poka.” That term in the title doesn’t mean anything. “Hoka” just reminded me of the term, “Hocus pocus” which I would use before my lame magic tricks as a kid. “Hoka-Pocus” just doesn’t sound right, so there you go. “Hoka-Poka.”

            Come to think of it…That sounds a little strange also.

 

                                                                                                                                     Richard Westbrook

                                                                                                                                      November 5, 2014

This is a new category we have added. In order for a pair of running shoes to be inducted into the Shoe Hall of Fame, they had to have endured a minimum of 500 miles. This is far more mileage than large shoe corporations suggest for shoe termination. With each pair inducted, we will post a picture with the name of the shoe, it’s brand, and how many miles thus far they have conquered.

GOLD MEDALIST

20151208_130835

Brooks Glycerin 9’s – 2,692 MILES (As of 12.6.15)

SILVER MEDALIST

20151208_130958

Nike Free – 1,701 MILES (As of 12.6.15)

BRONZE MEDALIST

20151208_131042

Newton Gravitas – 1,435 MILES (As of 12.6.15)

HONORABLE MENTION

20151208_131121

4th: Brooks Flow – 1,072 MILES (As of 12.6.15)

20151208_1312020

5th: Nike Zoom Elite+4 – 1,019 MILES (As of 12.6.15)

20151208_131254

6th: Brooks Defyance – 996 MILES (As of 12.6.15)

20151208_131336

7th: Brooks Infiniti (#3) – 920 MILES (As of 12.6.15)

20151208_131459

8th: Brooks Glycerin 11 – 882 MILES (As of 12.6.15)

20151208_131547

9th: Brooks Infiniti (#1) – 877 MILES (As of 12.6.15)

20151208_131702

10th: Brooks Flow 2: 846 MILES (As of 12.6.15)

20151208_131807

11th: Brooks Infiniti (#2) – 783 MILES (As of 12.6.15)

20151208_131902

12th: Nike Kyotee – 774 MILES (As of 12.6.15)

20151208_132313

13th: Hoka Cliftons – 748 Miles (As of 12.6.15)

20151208_132456

14th: Nike Free – 736 MILES (As of 12.6.15)

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