Of shoes and strikes...

My take: Minimal Shoes vs Running Shoes 

This post is long time coming, almost 2 years now. I have been contemplating jumping on to the minimal shoe camp. All the claims and scientific research had piqued my interest for some time now. However, Sports Science taught me to question everything. I could not simply jump from using a traditional running shoe to a minimalist shoe.

This minimalist shoe, is a classic conundrum. Especially to those with experience, dabbling in bio-mechanics and anatomy. Why a conundrum? I will explain later. Minimal and traditional shoes look very similar to the untrained eye, the science and rationale behind each type of shoes however are worlds apart.

Before we pry into the different type of shoes, we need to understand what exactly these shoes affect. Without going into technical jargons and textbook definition, in summary, these shoes influence the way our feet touches or "strikes" the ground. There are 3 types of strikes. Forefoot strike, mid-foot strike and heel strike.

Traditional shoes promote heel strikes , approximately 75% of shod runners heel strike (Hasegawa et al., 2007). On the other hand, minimalist shoes promote mid foot and forefoot strikes. This is where the conundrum begins. As textbooks have it, when running, a large amount of force (between 2 to 6 times bodyweight)  act on our joints at each point of impact. It only makes perfect sense that a traditional shoe, with higher cushioning on the heels to dissipate the impact is worn. However the traditional cushioned shoes only came about in the 1960s, prior to that all, all shoes resembled the minimalist fashion.

We ( the humans ) have been pretty much been running minimalist or rather the barefoot way till the arrival of the cushioned traditional shoes. In other words i believe our dependency on cushioned traditional shoes is a by-product of manufactured demand by MNCs **. For a better understanding of manufactured demand, check out the story of bottled water. I am digressing. Ok, the point here is that while the cushioned shoes seems logical and sensible, recent findings suggest otherwise. The lack of longitudinal studies on the cushioned shoes does not shed any light on the downstream effects it has on the feet and all joints working in tandem.

Once again allow me to paraphrase and water down the situation. According to studies, humans are primally designed to run barefoot/forefoot strike. Some how the recent arrival of the cushioned shoes somewhat is throwing a spanner into the works. The key issue at this point is about impact a.k.a Ground Reaction Force (GRF). The GRF generated for both styles of running are pretty much the same. Then what the hell is the problem? Well based on studies the key difference in the GRF is the presence of a Distinct Impact Peak in Heel striking. This has the potential to injure joints on the long run (no pun intended).

Thanks to all these information overload, i am now confused as to which shoe to buy with the allowance i got from clearing my IPPT. Do i get

1) the NB minimalist shoes, which looks damn cool. It will also go well with most of my outfits.

2) the Adidas cushioned shoes, which seems like the better choice considering i am a heel striker.

So this is the plan, before i comment, i would like to try barefoot running out first. I am going to skip the details and jump into my methods and conclusion. I am giving myself 6 months.

This is the averaged summary of the conditioning plan:
Frequency: 2 times a week
Distance : not more than 1.6km
Ground : Stadium track
Time of runs: evening
Warm up and cool downs: All done religiously. I sports science ok...

Month 1: Progress from barefoot walking to barefoot briskwalking. ( Distance-1km)
Observation: I still practice heel strike when walking. Knees and ITBs hurt like hell when i brisk walk for 1km. Lower back hurts like hells father too.
Note : Read up and implement proper barefoot running techniques.

Month 2: Progress from bare foot briskwalking to barefoot intermitten slow jog (Distance 1.6km)
Observation:  There's alot of gait reconditioning to do. Exhausted . Calves are working out a lot more.
Note: There seems to be a gradual decrease in my ITB related issue.

Month 3: Progress from intermitten slow jog to continous slow jog (Distance 1.6km)
Observation: Calves have conditioned well. They do not hurt as much. Overall posture is improving. Feeling very good. Runs are becoming enjoyable.

Month 4: Progress from slow jog to intermitten slow run (Distance 1.6km)
Observation: Increased frequency of pain on my anterior tibialis (Shin area).
Note: Observer posture when running and ICE the affected area appropriately.

Month 5: Maintain goals Month 4.
Observation: Frequency of pain in tibialis remains. Not used to having calloused feet. Feel like walking on orthotics with nodes protruding out.

Month 6: Maintain goals of Month 5.
Observation: Everything hurts haha.. Especially the metatarsal arches and anterior tibialis..Need to rest it out.

Conclusion:
1) 29 years of running heel strike cannot be changed over a period of months. I speculate that it might take me 2 to 3 years to properly condition.

2) Barefoot running is actually enjoyable at slower speeds. So for now, i am just going to go barefoot for walks.

3) There is a reason why the calcaneus is much thicker than my metatarsal bones. Though i ran better for a while in barefoot, with no sudden peaks in my GRF (which is damn good), my metatarsals could not bear the increased weight load.

In my perspective, if your current style of running has not or does not cause you any discomfort AND you are running without putting yourself at risk of imminent injury (be it short term or long term), just run on. If you have been always a heel striker, take plenty of time to slowly acclimatise your body to a change in gait.. Think in years.

As for which shoes i eventually bought... There was a sale and i bought both.