Overdone it?

981 to 1,000 of 15,521 messages
18/09/2013 at 10:04

That makes sense - still a bit late to be buying new shoes now so I guess I'll just have to deal with this further handicap!

Quite nice to think though that when I stop getting faster I can just buy some racing shoes and knock 90 secs off my HM PB

Edit: Yes just one - when they get wet I store them in the boiler room so they are dry for my next run. (I do keep my previous pair too but stop using them for running once I have my new pair).

Edited: 18/09/2013 at 10:06
18/09/2013 at 10:05

Well, I'll always win in the shoe weight category of top trumps as I'm a size 5.

18/09/2013 at 10:18

Skinny, this feels like de-ja vu on my thread from a couple of years ago when i "discovered" the racing shoe phenomenon.

They're lighter, and obviously the less weight you carry around, the quicker you will go.

And also, it's all part of the race day mentality. Get the lightweights on, get the running vest on, and you're ready for business.

18/09/2013 at 10:25

Coach - pleased you turned up as I wanted your input - unfortunately I'm going out now for a meeting but please pop back later - I have lots of 'race' shoe questions!

18/09/2013 at 10:26

Nice maths Skinny, seems like it is a load of nonsense. As I mentioned before I think the 'gains' are largely psycological.

This article suggests a couple of minutes for Mo over the marathon...

http://www.runnersworld.com/elite-runners/nike-making-custom-marathon-shoe-for-mo-farah?page=single

I have looked at Saucony shoes in the past but a bit worried that the change in heel drop would injure me.

Edit: I have 4 pairs of running shoes and have ordered some more to start 'breaking in'. Someone told me that you shouldn't run in the same pair of shoes on consecutive days as the foam etc hadn't had chance to 'recover' sufficiently so didn't provide the cushioning it should and can lead to injury. anybody know if this is true? 

Edited: 18/09/2013 at 10:32
18/09/2013 at 10:38

if you're doing decent mileage, it certainly makes sense to "rotate" shoes.

I'll generally have 2x Wave Riders for day to day running, Adizero Adios for faster training/races, and XC shoes...for either appalling weather/snow/woods only/xc racing fare.

Currently, just to complicate it, i'm alternating 4 pairs of Wave Riders, but two have done 570miles, so are very near the end...

Tommy, gains in lighter shoes certainly aren't just psychological. Check out the front runners in your next race, and ask if they're doing it for kicks, or gain.

18/09/2013 at 10:44

Lit, i suspect them shoes are the running equivalent of Jim Carey's Mask

Edited: 18/09/2013 at 10:46
18/09/2013 at 10:56

To clarify my previous statement, I think the gains for me personally are largely psychological but for the faster types at the front of races, the benefits are probably greater.

 

18/09/2013 at 11:26
Tommy2D wrote (see)

I have looked at Saucony shoes in the past but a bit worried that the change in heel drop would injure me.

but don't the adizero manas that you race in also have a lower heel drop?

18/09/2013 at 11:38

Mana's have an 8mm heel drop (I think) which is quite close to my Nike's (12mm) and my Adidas Tempo (10.5mm). I was slightly concerned that dropping down to 4mm would be a bit much. In fact when I first wore the Mana's I got really tight calfs and thought I'd never be able to wear them, I'm sure I would get used to them over time, but will probably stick with Adidas for the time being as they seem to fit me well.  

18/09/2013 at 11:52

It probably depends on how you run as well. I don't see why you'd change just for the sake of it if the shoes you've already got are working well for the things you use them for. I do love my Kinvaras though.

18/09/2013 at 12:25

Whoops, that should say calves not calfs.

18/09/2013 at 13:49
Stevie G . wrote (see)

Skinny, this feels like de-ja vu on my thread from a couple of years ago when i "discovered" the racing shoe phenomenon.

They're lighter, and obviously the less weight you carry around, the quicker you will go.

And also, it's all part of the race day mentality. Get the lightweights on, get the running vest on, and you're ready for business.

Okay - firstly I'm going to discount the race day mentality - I have a race day vest, you put a number on your vest on race day and I have race day socks plus the other runners at the start all get my race day head on. But here are some questions that would effect my decision.

1) When you first ran in racing shoes what was the distance, what was your PB prior to that run and what was the time you ran?

2) If I've trained in Brooks Ghost and then suddenly change on race day to something else does it not feel weird - I'm probably a mid foot striker so would wonder how it feels to suddenly be running with less shoe under my feet.

3) From comments above about heel drop and sore calves it does sound as if I would be more likely to get injured wearing racing shoes - true or false?

4) If I decided now that racing shoes were definitely required for 6th October would that be enough time to bed them in - or are we really talking about a decision for next year?

5) If Lit and Tommy want to answer question 1) too then that would all help to build a picture.

Its just really hard to decide what is marketing claptrap and what genuinely makes a difference. Reading the article about Mo Farah's shoes it states that they may knock off 2 minutes over a marathon - however these shoes are not just light but being custom designed for his feet and running style - so that suggests that the gain from non tailored racing shoes over a half marathon would be less than 1 minute - I'm not sure if that is worth the increased injury risk (if there is one?).

Cheers, Skinny

18/09/2013 at 14:08

Bah, was just answering most of those (in ill-informed way) when I lost the whole post. But question (1) doesn't really work because there are too many other variables.

18/09/2013 at 14:10

Also: race day socks? Loser.

18/09/2013 at 14:22
literatin wrote (see)

Also: race day socks? Loser.

They are lighter than my training socks and I reckon knocked about 53 seconds off my 10k time the other week

 

literatin wrote (see)

Bah, was just answering most of those (in ill-informed way) when I lost the whole post. But question (1) doesn't really work because there are too many other variables.


Hmm - okay then if I bought some racing shoes and went out and did a hard training session (wearing the racing shoes obviously!!) would I find that my pace zones had dropped by 3 or 4 seconds a mile? Surely there must be some way of feeling if they are actually faster or not?

Coach's point about all the fast runners wear them is not necessarily proof that you are faster if you wear them. It's likely that running is a bigger part of all their lives and they clutch at every straw for faster times and read the marketing claptrap etc and spend more money on their gear and are more likely to have more than one pair of shoes.

If wearing racing shoes does not increase the risk of injury and has a believable case for running faster then I'm up for buying some. 

18/09/2013 at 14:31

Okay, it's going to be a bit anecdotal, but I will say that wearing lighter shoes certainly feels faster. I think there may be actual scientific studies but you can look those up for yourself. I actually have three different types of road shoe that I wear regularly: Brooks Defyance (250g per shoe, 11mm drop), New Balance 890 (200-ish g, 8mm drop), Saucony Kinvara (175g, 4mm drop). I use the heavier, more cushioned shoes for longer runs or when I just want to plod along, the 890s for quite a lot of 'normal' runs and the Kinvaras for most quality stuff and races. But I can also report that if I wear the Kinvaras for 'easy' runs I am generally more likely than not to stray into the 'steady' zone.

Re. questions (2) and (3) I think that it is possible Tommy got sore calves at first because flatter shoes encourage you to land further forward on your foot and if he was not already doing this, it would be a bit of an adjustment. If you are already a neutral mid-foot striker you would be (I think) less likely to have a problem; I didn't.

18/09/2013 at 14:33

I am also assuming here that 'racing flats' and 'minimalist shoes' are more or less the same thing or similar. And also the 890s and Kinvaras especially have a surprising amount of cushioning considering how light they are.

18/09/2013 at 14:36

I began to consider something more lightweight, Skinny - but my injury episode has made me more wary.

I've for the most part got on quite well with Adidas Supernova Glides (the narrow Adidas fit seems to suit my feet), and some of the fellas over on the MG thread were recommending the Adidas Bostons as a transition step down towards a racing flat.

I've got about 300 miles on the Supernovas, so might change my mind again when the time comes, but less cushioning does equal increased injury risk as I understand it. 

Losing a block of training to injury is going to cost more time in the medium to long term than the few seconds here and there that a stripped down shoe will shave off your time - that's my current thinking at least for what it's worth.

18/09/2013 at 14:51

Lit - thanks for taking the time to give those detailed answers - really appreciate it.

http://www.runningshoesguru.com/2012/02/5-myths-about-minimalist-running-shoes/

I've read the attached too - sounds like it is too close to race day for this year and may need to be something I build up to over the winter - or I could buy some now and trial them in my 10 miler in mid November.

Edit:Bob x-post - yeah that's my current thinking too but I'm hoping Coach will persuade me that I am mistaken

Edited: 18/09/2013 at 14:52
981 to 1,000 of 15,521 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