vibrams 5 fingers

a last thought

1 to 20 of 28 messages
23/09/2012 at 20:36

After reading about all the pros (and cautionary advice) about VFF, I am now almost convinced that this is a good direction to move my run training in... especially because I do it for the pleasure, and I like the idea of having a more biologically natural running style. However, one last thought sticks in my head, and I wonder if anyone else has already thought about it:

If VFF are so great, and give such anatomical and possibly speed benefits, then why don't professional athletes wear them? Especially as athletes already tend to run mid - fore-foot, which I'm led to believe is the key to running with minimalist running shoes... it was just a thought!

Edited: 23/09/2012 at 20:38
23/09/2012 at 20:43
The pros would generally have near perfect running form so wouldn't need a shoe to help them with that. They also run in racing flats or spikes which are very minimal anyway. Maybe vibram don't pay anyone to endorse their product.
23/09/2012 at 20:44

I'm also wondering why sweatshop don't stock them... coud just be because Sweatshop don't think they're popular enough to sell next to other brands I suppose, or maybe because they aren't trained to sell them?! Or are Sweatshop not convinced that they are a good running shoe - that is my concern. Or maybe I'm thinking about this too much!

23/09/2012 at 20:59
If VFF are so great any has Vibram been pulled up for using fake or non-existent science to advertise them? They're being sued in Florida.
23/09/2012 at 21:03
Maybe if they stocked them it would go against all of the gait analysis stuff they promote in store. Although they said have the New Balance Minimus ones in there the other day.
23/09/2012 at 21:27
Cheaper to buy a pair of old school plimsoles for a fiver.
cougie    pirate
23/09/2012 at 21:32
It's all very well being biologically natural - but since when did humans run for leisure on concrete ? Conventional running shoes make more sense to me.
23/09/2012 at 21:59

i just find it quite strange that if i try running barefoot (in the house!) i put my forefoot first and i find it odd to try putting my heel first (and clear bad). Then the opposite happens when I put my nice cushioned trainers on and run.

I have read articles from people who have run the great north run (complete tarmac route) in VFF with no subsequent pain. I did the GNR a couple of weeks ago and had bad ankles/feet for a couple of days afterwards... it seems my currents training isn't strengthening my feet and ankles enough, my thought are that these cushioned shoes are supporting a bad an unnatural running style (at least for me).

23/09/2012 at 22:58
Ultra cougie wrote (see)
It's all very well being biologically natural - but since when did humans run for leisure on concrete ? Conventional running shoes make more sense to me.

You've never run on hard-packed earth after a hot spell that's as hard as concrete? Your body's perfectly capable of absorbing the impact of running on road.

catherine Tetard-Jones wrote (see)

i just find it quite strange that if i try running barefoot (in the house!) i put my forefoot first and i find it odd to try putting my heel first (and clear bad). Then the opposite happens when I put my nice cushioned trainers on and run.

VFFs are fun, but you don't necessarily need toe-shoes to encourage you to run with better form. I would suggest that trail-running encourages you to use many of the same elements as barefoot running. Finding shoes with a lower heel-toe differential will help, too. If your budget allows you to experiment, it might be worth moving to a lesser heel before trying no heel at all.

Really, the best thing you can do is simply to think about what you're doing with each step you take, since every step further ingrains a particular type of running form. If it means cutting down on speed/distance for a while, then so be it. It should be quite possible to run with good form in any neutral shoe (probably easier with one that doesn't have 4 inches of EVA foam stuck to the bottom, mind).

 

23/09/2012 at 23:02
VFF are just one option of going down minimalist route. I changed from conventional trainers to low-drop ones, with good effect on ITBS ( but bad on calf tightness for a long time) but I still value a bit of cushioning. A lot of people say that if you want to go minimal run with no shoes at all, as this will help learning good form better. Then you can run in anything you like
23/09/2012 at 23:26

i think atheltes wear what they're told to wear from their sponsor ie nike and addidas.

I wear luna sandals which fit perfectly you might find vff a bit of a weird fit....

as for tarmac... i have to agree with radcchio on that.

high heeled cushioned shoes are so wrong... you dont see a dog or horse running in high heels do you! lol

 

23/09/2012 at 23:26
VFF brilliant. They have those lovely individual pockets for your tooties. What more can you want in your cwistmas stocking. Hand over your 120 quid sucker for a pair of 2 pound fifty plimsols you could have bought at Marks and Sparks.
23/09/2012 at 23:27
Btw totally disagree with ultra cougie. They aren't the best things since sliced bread
23/09/2012 at 23:29

@avit - you don't see a dog or a horse running 10 miles on tarmac, and dogs and horses have different gaits, so your point is moot and, frankly, dumb.  Although humans have been running barefoot for millenia, they've done so on soft surfaces, unlike the tarmac and concrete we run on now.

23/09/2012 at 23:39

my point was that why go change something that has worked for millenia....

whatever i aint arguing with u about how hard dry ground is compared to tarmac-would we never have over frozen ground in the winter? thats pretty hard

Edited: 23/09/2012 at 23:40
24/09/2012 at 02:43

I dont really care if anybody else runs in minimalist shoes, barefoot or big cushioned shoes.  I run in vivo's and love them, however still do most of my miles in trail shoes and some in cushioned road shoes.  I like the variation of running in different shoes, but it has to be said, im no hippy but it just feels right running in barefoot shoes (even if my calves do hurt the next day).

24/09/2012 at 10:15

Run what you feel comfortable in, I have multiple pairs of hoka one one. Zero drop, but lots of cushioning.

 

24/09/2012 at 10:28

People heel strike in cushioned shoes because the cushioning absorbs the jarring impact of hitting the ground heel first, they don't do it so much in minimalist shoes because they realise how painful/unnatural it feels.

You don't need VFFs to change your gait but you might find they help purely because the absence of cushioning will make you more mindful of how you place your feet. I have some and like them because it's the closest thing to running barefoot that I'd consider in Central London. I haven't gone further than 8 miles in them, preferring to wear minimalist Saucony shoes for longer distances - that's more down to blisters/ friction from the road on the skin of my feet than pain in calves or other muscles.

Personally, I'd rather work on strengthening and conditioning my muscles and fix any issues/imbalances in my hips/pelvis than put on a pair of shoes that are the trainer equivalent of riding a bike with stabiliers, but to each their own.

24/09/2012 at 10:38

To answer the OP, two reasons spring to mind professional means possibly sponsored so, you'll go with the sponsors shoes. VFF's won't give you a speed advantage, so if you're already running fine in whatever you're allready running fine in, then there's no incentive to change.

I do love my VFFs though!

24/09/2012 at 13:41
Ian M wrote (see)

 VFF's won't give you a speed advantage


Surely they weigh less than standard race shoes, so should give a speed advantage?

1 to 20 of 28 messages
Previously bookmarked threads are now visible in "Followed Threads". You can also manage notifications on these threads from the "Forum Settings" section of your profile settings page to prevent being sent an email when a reply is made.
Forum Jump  

RW Forums