Don't Bother With Runner's World Shoe Recommendations

I love reading Runner's World magazine. I like the features on running gear, various running events around the world and the back story on people that are big in the running community. Since subscribing to it a few years ago, I always took their running shoe reviews with a huge grain of salt, and eventually came to read them so I could get all of my eye-rolling for the month done in one quick session. Now it seems Runner's World itself has said as much.

Christopher McDougall, author of the Born To Run, has posted some information from Runner's World itself that indicates not only that some of the shoes it has been recommending may exacerbate injuries, but that every shoe posted is basically recommended for at least one type of person. In other words, there are no bad shoes!

This was from a 2008 shoe review:

We’ve reported in the past that a more stable shoe will help relieve the pain you feel just ahead of the heel. But recent research has shown that stability shoes are unlikely to relieve plantar fasciitis and may even exacerbate the symptoms.

Whoops! Sorry about that readers.

The founder of Runner's World started the shoe review as a way to help readers find shoes that would help them run better and be worth their hard earned money. Now, the reviews are little more than advertising. In fact, I'd go so far to say they are nothing but advertising. He states the reviews are "a grading system where you can only get an A."

Your body was designed to run. Man has been running for thousands of years with sandals or in bare feet. For 99.9% of running, you don't need much more on your feet than to protect them from the surface you are on, and that is surprisingly little. A thin 2mm strip of rubber in a pair of Vibram Five Fingers, huarache sandals or any number of other minimalist shoes is all you need.

Well, that and good form, something modern day shoes discourage! Heel striking is increasingly looked at as a fundamental problem in running, and it is something that wasn't done until the mid 1960's. It is almost impossible not to heel strike when you have a shoe that has a thick heel. It is going to touch the ground first, and that inch of foam isn't going to do anything to protect your joints and muscles for thousands upon thousands of steps.

The vast majority of people don't need anything to correct our strides either. Motion control, stability, etc. Those are all marketing terms. Runner's World is figuring this out, or it already has and just isn't willing yet to tick off all of its advertisers just yet. Most shoe stores don't like this trend either, though the smart ones are getting behind it.

I sincerely hope in 5-10 years, we'll look back on the "modern running shoe" and laugh like we currently do about decades old fashion. After all, current running shoes are little more than a fashion statement. They aren't doing anything for your health.

Luna Sandals From Here On Out?

Less Is More - Luna Original Sandals

After deciding traditional running shoes weren't for me a few years ago, I switched to Vibram Five Fingers and have put over 3,400 miles on them in about 2 years. I couldn't go much more than 13 miles in them without a nice set of callouses though from the 3-5 points they rubbed on. I then started wearing Injinji socks, which drastically reduced the problem. Still, running 40-50 miles a week left me with small callouses on the outside of my big toes, which would start to burn a bit on runs over 15-16 miles and be seriously annoying by mile 20, and by mile 30, I was done.

A fresh pair of socks would usually take care of it, but Injinjis are too expensive to be replacing every 200 miles for me, so I recently decided to try something different.

The ultimate minimalist shoe is the huarache sandal. This is little more than a rubber sheet with laces of some sort. I ordered a pair from Luna Sandals, the company run by Barefoot Ted. I got a pair of the originals with the suede footbed and ATS laces, a combination that looked to be the best for the type of daily street running I do.

After A 7 Mile Run

I immediately put them on after they arrived this past Wednesday and decided to see what they felt like. I took them out for a 2 mile test run and they felt good. I must have stopped about 10 times in the first mile tweaking the laces though, adjusting them so my feet stayed securely in the middle (front to back, side to side) of the shoes. The second mile I ran straight through.

I thought I had them adjusted right until the next morning when I went out for a longer run. The right one fell off before I had passed 100 yards. I tweaked them again about 4-5 times and by just over 0.6 miles, had them where I wanted them. I ran the next 6.5 miles with no issues.

I went for a longer run on Sunday. I had a better feeling for how they should be on my feet, though I still don't have them exactly right. I had to adjust them about 5 times over 16 miles, though only the first adjustment was necessary. On all of the others, I was just fine tuning and experimenting. I am getting to where I can diagnose the issue and know exactly which straps to pull on and tighten or loosen to move my foot around.

The point is though, I ran over 16 miles with absolutely no issues at all, and nearly a mile of that was on a mulch-covered trail I discovered today, something the Luna Originals weren't designed for. I could have easily gone further but decided not to push it. Without taking my shoes off and carefully examining my feet, I couldn't be sure there were no early stages of a blister or raw spot on the skin. Over 10 hours after the run though, my feet feel fine.

I was worried the buckle, which is like a miniature buckle on a backpack to adjust the straps, would rub a raw spot on the top of my foot. When I took the sandals off, there was definitely an indention where it had been, but it wasn't raw and didn't hurt anymore than the indention my iPod arm band leaves on my arm, which is to say, it didn't hurt at all.

It is still early of course, having only done two real runs in them in the last five days, but I can say that I've never felt this good after a run as far as shoe comfort goes.

Some may ask why I don't just go barefoot? I do a few barefoot runs each month, but I find I am spending way too much time watching where I step, to the point I lose what is going on around me. Not only do I need to watch out for glass, rocks and other debris, there are cars, pedestrians, cyclists and pets I need to watch out for. Barefoot running requires too much focus on the ground. Having a thin layer under my feet allows me to only worry about larger debris. I still cannot tromp around like I had a pair of Brooks Beasts on. The Lunas give plenty of ground feedback and I can still feel even the smallest branches and debris the size of an apple seed, it just isn't annoying like it is when barefoot. That allows me to focus more on my surroundings.

Does that mean I'll never wear VFFs again for a run? Maybe. Right now, something would have to go seriously wrong though for me to go back, at least for street running. As an added benefit, my feet don't sweat, which is likely a big reason for the lack of blisters. Water+skin+fabric is the worst thing for any type of repetitive exercise lasting over an hour.

For trails, I'll still take my Vibram Spyridon LS shoes for now. If I continue to get better at lacing them up and not fooling with them during the run so much, I can see getting some of the trail sandals, which simply have a thicker sole and an aggressive tread.

As an interesting aside, all of the Luna Sandals still use outsoles made by Vibram, which is what the company has been known for for over 80 years. They never made shoes until VFFs in about 2005. No matter what my decision, I'll still have Vibram technology with me.