Barefoot running, anyone?

Dan Stumpus said:

A very interesting scientific review article on barefoot running, courtesy
of an alert runner on the ultra list:

The article is [censored].

Some of the problems of the study are discussed in the reviewers comments

http://www.sportsci.org/jour/0103/cb.htm

This "survery" is essentially a survey of the work of Steve Robbins, who is a
controversial anti-shoe crusader. Most of the cites in the body text are either
of Robbins' work, or the Yessis book. The Yessis book in the bibliography is
*not* a peer reviewed journal article -- indeed, as far as I know, Yessis has
yet to publish a peer reviewed journal article, despite billing himself as some
sort of science guru.

Quoted message said:

Wearers of expensive running shoes that were promoted as correcting
pronation or providing more cushioning experienced a greater prevalence of
these running-related injuries than wearers of less expensive shoes (Robbins
and Gouw, 1991).

This study is controversial. The main problem with it is that one can't make
an inference of causality.

Quoted message said:

In another study, expensive athletic shoes accounted for
more than twice as many injuries as cheaper shoes, a fact that prompted
Robbins and Waked (1997) to suggest that deceptive advertising of athletic
footwear (e.g., "cushioning impact"😉 may represent a public health hazard.

This was also controversial. There were problems with the methodology of this
study.

Quoted message said:

Measurements of the vertical component of ground-reaction force during
running provide no support for the notion that running shoes reduce shock.
Robbins and Gouw (1990) reported that running shoes did not reduce shock
during running at 14 km/h on a treadmill.

There are different ways to measure "shock". It doesn't increase shock at the
hip joint (probably reduces it). The places that are likely to be affected are
the achilles tendon and the foot. Both Lyndon and Dave in this forum have
experienced foot injuries that resulted from wearing shoes without adequate
cushioning. Dave was subsequently able to transition to wearing very light
shoes -- but the point is that training in flats is not going to reduce the
load on your achilles tendons, calves or metatarsals. Anyone who's run in flats
before knows that they increase, not reduce, load on the calf muscles and
achilles tendons.

Quoted message said:

Bergmann et al. (1995) found that
the forces acting on the hip joint were lower for barefoot jogging than for
jogging in various kinds of shoe. Clarke et al. (1983) observed no
substantial change in impact force when they increased the amount of heel
cushioning by 50% in the shoes of well-trained runners.

The increase in heel cushioning is another issue -- suggests a point of
diminishing returns. Everyone is different, but I'd argue that nearly everyone
has a point at which more cushioning is unhelpful. For Dave, a flat is good
enough. For me, barefoot is fine on grass, but I want lightweight trainers
or flats on pavement. On a track or treadmill, flats are fine.

Quoted message said:

Wearing shoes increases the energy cost of running. Burkett et al. (1985)
found that oxygen consumption during running increased as the amount of mass
they added to the foot increased; shoes and orthotics representing 1% of
body mass increased oxygen consumption by 3.1%. Flaherty (1994) found that
oxygen consumption during running at 12 km/h was 4.7% higher in shoes of

I suspect this is a selective overview of the literature. Daniels suggests in
his book that barefoot running results in poor economy for most runners. My
personal experience is that there's a point of diminishing returns -- if I drop
from an 8oz flat to a 5.5oz flat, I don't get the 2.5 seconds per mile I'm
supposed to get from this. In fact, if it were true, runners like Deena Drossin
would insist on lighter shoes instead of putting up with clunkers like the
Asics Gel Magics.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Dan Stumpus said:

A very interesting scientific review article on barefoot running,
courtesy
of an alert runner on the ultra list:

The article is [censored].

Some of the problems of the study are discussed in the reviewers comments

http://www.sportsci.org/jour/0103/cb.htm

Thanks for pointing out the "advocacy research" angle.

We really need some prospective studies (as the article pointed out).

I remember some Nike research of years ago which found that shoe weight was
less and less of a factor as you ran faster -- the weight effect at
5min/mile was small compared to the effect at 8+ minutes/mile. For this
reason, I ran ultras in my lightest shoes back then, since my mountain 50
mile pace was about 8:00/mile.

Just for grins I'm going to do some uphill work alternating barefoot and
shod, and compare times.

- Dan

Dan Stumpus said:

Thanks for pointing out the "advocacy research" angle.

We really need some prospective studies (as the article pointed out).

I remember some Nike research of years ago which found that shoe weight was
less and less of a factor as you ran faster -- the weight effect at
5min/mile was small compared to the effect at 8+ minutes/mile. For this
reason, I ran ultras in my lightest shoes back then, since my mountain 50
mile pace was about 8:00/mile.

Also, there's probably a surface/footwear interaction. For example, for me,
running barefoot on grass feels very nice, but running barefoot on the road
probably wouldn't. I usually run in flats when I'm on a track, and would be
tempted to use my waffle racers for a trail run.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

"David Geesaman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Dan Stumpus" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Measurements of the vertical component of ground-reaction force during
running provide no support for the notion that running shoes reduce
shock.

Shock is not a force. A 180lb runner will exert the same force no
matter if they run wearing steel plates or pillows. So measuring force
will not show you the reduced shock felt by the runner. Whoever wrote
that statement is either grossly ignorant that they shouldn't be making
snippets, or not be conducting experiments.

Dan, I'm not referring to you about providing the snippets, rather, the
author of the content.

Dave

"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 2005-05-27, David Geesaman <[email hidden]> wrote:
This is not correct. Force equals mass times acceleration. A pillow will
take longer to compress than a steel plate => the change in velocity is
spread out over a longer time => less acceleration => less peak force.

Quoted message said:

So measuring force will
not show you the reduced shock felt by the runner. Whoever wrote that

It might or might not. Depends on how/where you measure force.

I needed to clarify that - if they don't explcitly say peak force, I
can't assume they've done that, or done it with sufficient sampling
resolution.
Plus, most runners will significantly change their running motion if
they switch from shoes to barefoot - and each runner produces signficantly
different impact shock. So it's subtly tricky to make such an experiment
usefully good for comparison - and considering the source I'll bet it was
nowhere near this carefully constructed

Dave

David Geesaman said:

"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 2005-05-27, David Geesaman <[email hidden]> wrote:
This is not correct. Force equals mass times acceleration. A pillow will
take longer to compress than a steel plate => the change in velocity is
spread out over a longer time => less acceleration => less peak force.

Quoted message said:

So measuring force will
not show you the reduced shock felt by the runner. Whoever wrote that

It might or might not. Depends on how/where you measure force.

I needed to clarify that - if they don't explcitly say peak force, I
can't assume they've done that, or done it with sufficient sampling
resolution.

Well right, you'd need to look at the abstract at least. FYI there are authors
less controversial than Robbins who have also measured these forces.

There are problems with Robbins' arguments but it's probably an
oversimplification to say that he just did his measurements incorrectly. His
articles are published in peer reviewed journals. But it's easy to be misled
if you only read articles by one author (Robbins). I don't think it's not so
much that Robbins' work is "wrong", it's more that he doesn't want to tell the
full story (because he has his own case to make)

Quoted message said:

Plus, most runners will significantly change their running motion if
they switch from shoes to barefoot -

Yes, right. This is why you don't get a zillion times more shock when you run
barefoot. That's why you've got to measure these things -- because we have our
own internal shock absorbing mechanisms that interact with the footwear.

Quoted message said:

and each runner produces signficantly different impact shock. So it's subtly
tricky to make such an experiment usefully good for comparison - and

High variance doesn't mean that you can't do measurements. But actually, the
variance isn't as bad as you might think, experimenters get significant effects
in these biomechanical subjects without enormous pools of subjects.

Quoted message said:

considering the source I'll bet it was nowhere near this carefully
constructed

Well, again, Robbins does get published in journals which would require
clearance from reviewers who may not agree with his views. So he does have
to avoid obvious flaws in methodology. I think his interpretations are more
controversial than his measurements.

The main problem I have with the overall thrust of the "barefoot running"
review paper that Dan posted is that it (a) does not represent a terribly
balanced overview of the literature, in particular it focuses not just on the
data/experiments, but also on the *interpretations* of a very opinionated
researcher, (b) too much reliance on the Yessis book, (c) seems to selectively
ignore other findings that the barefoot running crowd find inconvenient (for
example, one paper found that the adaption to stiffness in surface optimises
running economy, at the expense of shock absorbtion)

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

"David Geesaman" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Dan, I'm not referring to you about providing the snippets, rather, the
author of the content.

Thanks, but I understood that as the mere conveyor of (bogus) snippets, I
might be gullible, but not culpable. I thought it would generate some good
discussion, and it has.

I've been interested in shoe weight/construction vs. performance for years,
as probably every mildly competitive runner has been, and there is so little
definitive and believable research out there.

The notion that you gain even 1% efficiency by going barefoot has to be
wrong: That would correspond to 15-20 seconds off the10k world record.
You'd think that it would be a slam dunk, but since it hasn't happened, it's
probably not true.

-- Dan

Donovan,

Nice reading your thoughts. Here a post from 1998 on barefoot
runners. Many of those who shared have moved on. Two of rec.running
contributors have died. Madeleine Page of cancer. A wonder individual
who confronted without demeaning or marginalizing the individual. And
Abhay Thatte who died in a fall when doing some mountain running. I
believe he worked for the city of Portland and was in his mid-30's. He
could easily irritate and anger others which he did regularly. He
remained a free spirit and an equal opportunity offender.

Ozzie

From: [email hidden] (Ozzie Gontang)
Newsgroups: rec.running
Subject: Barefoot Runners and shoe companies
Date: 8 Apr 1998 13:24:22 GMT
Organization: Int'l Association of Marathoners
Lines: 226
Message-ID: <[email hidden]>
Reply-To: rec.running
NNTP-Posting-Host: line02.cs5.electriciti.com
Xref: electriciti.com rec.running:98074

From my archives of rec.running I wanted to share some observations of
Michael Berrow on barefoot running. Awhile back I posted a jpeg of 5
world class runners several of the world record holders back in the 70's
and 3 of the 5 were barefoot in a race.

The reason for bringing this up, is the question I continually raise
about
running form and style being extremely important. For me the problem
remains the same for the majority of the urban dwellers. We have bought
in and believe that we are suppose to land on the heel first in long
distance running. We perceive that heel running means landing on the
back
of the foot first...which is translated as the back of the heel...which
is
further translated as the back of the heel of the shoe. So I continue
to
contend that landing on the back of the heel of the shoe is overstriding
and a deceleration with each and every step...causing untold injuries
over
time.

To address these injuries we invest in shoes which are scientifically
tested to absorb shock, but at what cost to the human foot within the
shoe. For me it's a matter of what cost to the human brain and human
processes of critical thinking.

But as I have said, it is important for us to support all the shoe
companies and their employees the world over. It is important for us to
support the families and loved ones of all the orthopedic surgeons,
chiropractors, physical therapists, athletic trainers and those having
to
do with the commercial ventures associated with running. It is
important
for us to support the employees of all the catalogue shoe and clothing
companies. For they like us need to make a living.

Also it is extremely important not to think about form and style too
much
because I wouldn't have a place to come and talk about the emperor's
clothing. All the other repliers of r.r wouldn't have a community to
openly share their own folklore and wisdom and seek their own answers as
they continue to practice their walking, running, standing and sitting.

Anyway, I repeat the old adage I think it's from Will Rogers, "It ain't
what ya know that gets you in trouble, it's what ya know that just ain't
so." If I ask those in the US what color a Yield sign is, and you give
me
the color I've written at the bottom of this post, then we might want to
continue the dialogue about what barefoot world class runners know that
we
don't. And for me it doesn't mean that we have to run barefoot...only
run with the form that allows us to run as easily and gracefully as
barefoot runners.

Observations and research and comments from:
[email hidden] (Michael Berrow)
Newsgroups: rec.running
Subject: Barefoot Runners and shoe companies
Date: 9 Aug 1996 16:12:32 GMT

A while ago I found an interesting product mentioned at:

http://outside.starwave.com/magazine/1295/12r_boom.html
- - - - - - -
Nike Air Rift
The racy Air Rift, inspired by Kenya's barefoot Rift Valley
runners, has a cushy midsole--and not much else. The four-way
stretch upper covers enough of your foot to keep the shoe on,
and the split-toe design lets your big toe push off
independently--almost as if you weren't shod at all. A pair of
thonglike Rift socks is included in the package. $85.
From Nike, 800-344-6453.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I wondered about these "barefoot Rift Valley runners" and
wondered what had propelled Nike to create such a thing.
It seems the barefoot Kenyans have been winning races all
over the world. They grow up running barefoot long
distances to school, to herd cattle and so on.

I read a report on the 23rd IAAF World Cross Country
Championship held on 25th March 1995 at Durham, England,
which stated:
"The Junior Mens race was next which again was dominated
by Kenya and Ethiopia with many of the leading runners
choosing to run barefoot"

I finally saw them running in a documentary a month or so
before the Olympics. It was the most graceful thing I've
ever seen. They seemed to just *flow* throught the air.

However, part of the documentary showed a white (western)
coach out there training them. He had all the guys in that
clip wearing athletic shoes !!. (Oz: I think he's an Irishman
who's a Catholic brother or priest)

I looked out for barefoot runners in the Olympics but
did not get any trace of one (plus NBC was *very* bad
at covering events at which Americans were not expected
to win).

I've done some further research ... and here is what I've found
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

3000 metre steeplechase
.... the "barefoot" Christopher Kosgei of Kenya

In a Reuters news release ...

NAIROBI, June 26 (Reuter) - Some of the world's most talented
track athletes have descended on Nairobi for three days of
Olympic trials widely regarded by the competitors as tougher
than the Atlanta Games next month. .....

"Kiptanui, the greatest 3,000 metres steeplechaser of all time,
should book his place for the only major gold medal he has
yet to win against the challenge of his Armed Forces'
colleague Joseph Keter, barefoot Christopher Kosgei, twice
world silver medallist Patrick Sang, Bernard Barmasai and
Johnstone Kipkoech"

- - - - - - - - - - - -
Other web surfing produces ....

Christopher Kosgei
Stockholm 10 Jul 8:06.86
Yes .. 8 minutes and 6.86 seconds.

not as fast as ...

the World Record holder
Moses Kiptanui KEN 7.59,18 95/08/16 Zurich

but faster than the guy who got the gold in Atlanta.

Joseph Keter KEN 8.07,12 96/08/01 Atlanta OG

apparently Kiptanui was having an "off" day there
because he got ....
Kiptanui KEN 8.08,33 96/08/01 Atlanta OG

In another place we find confirmation
that Kosgei runs barefoot ...
--------------------------------------------
St. Denis Meet Results by Paul F. Houde

MEETING DE L'HUMANITx IAAF GRAND PRIX II
SAINT-DENIS, FRANCE (suburb of Paris)
MONDAY, June 3 1996

from AFP-Reuter-Minitel France

3000 m steeple:

1. Christopher Kosgei (Ken) 8:12.29 barefoot again !
2. Brahim Boulami (Mar) 8:18.49
3. Patrick Sang (Ken) 8:18.59
4. Matthew Birir (Ken) 8:18.68
5. Richard Kosgei (Ken) 8:21.36
6. Johnstone Kipkoech (Ken) 8:21.83
---------------------------------------------
TRACK & FIELD: Kenyans in top form
(c) 1996 Reuter Information Service

BRATISLAVA (May 29, 1996 - 18:30 EST) - Three men set year's
fastest times at the Slovnaft international athletics meeting
on Wednesday.

Kenya's Christopher Koskei, silver medallist at last year's world
championships, clocked eight minutes 17.70 seconds in the 3,000
metres steeplechase, running barefoot ahead of team mates Wilson
Kipketer and Johnstone Kipkoech.
---------------------------------------------
Christopher Kosgei did *not* run in the 3000 Metre steeplechase
in the Atlanta Olympics (not on the team)
... Matthew Birir, Joseph Keter and Moses Kiptanui did.
Keter got the Gold and Kiptanui got the Silver.

NOTE that the barefoot Christopher Kosgei ran the
3000 metre steeplechase in Stockholm on 10 July in 8:06.86
... which is FASTER than the time (8:07.12) for the guy
(Keter) that won the gold medal in Atlanta !.

Keter is the only steeplechaser featured on the Nike @lanta
web page. Was he sponsored by Nike ?. Did Nike "sponsor" to
persuade faster *barefoot* Kenyans to not run that way
at the Olympics (with umpteen million people watching) ?
Who knows ?

Make no mistake, the shoe companies are into using this
vehicle in a big way to promote their products. Just checkout:
http://www.planetreebok.com/olympics.html

So, I can just picture the *science* guys reporting back
to the Nike boardroom ... "er, yeah ... it seems that
these guys do better barefoot because their feet move
naturally and they push off better with the big toe".

The board members turn ashen-faced and one says "Well,
go develop a shoe that still enables you to do that ...
meanwhile we'll have our sponsorship department focus
on making sure that the world doesn't see a barefoot guy
winning an Olympic track event. We can co-ordinate
with Reebok on this".

Maybe I'm being paranoid. Anyway, food for thought.-- Mike Berrow
--------End of Mike's Post-----------

Anyway about the Yield sign. If you said Yellow, you need to look
again.
It was in 1985 or 1987 that a federal law changed them. You begin to
see
what we're up against when dealing with the human mind and what we're
playing with when most people when asked will say, "Yellow."

So when it comes to running, the majority of people will say that in
running other than sprinting you're suppose to land heel first.

Anyway, if you hang around r.r long enough, the drip irrigation of the
mind from Mike, Miles,Charlie, Sam, Doug, Ray, Dave, zamboni, Richard,
Dan, Madeleine, GK, Denny, Rick, Russell, Chris, Oz, Abhay and all the
other generous contributors to the expansion, creation, discovery,
exploration of knowledge/scientia and the human condition creates an
interesting community within which to live and realize our
fragility/strength and the interconnectedness of those of us who run as
part entry fee into human race. Namaste (which means roughly, "I salute
the God in you."😉

--
In health and on the run,
Ozzie Gontang
Maintainer-rec.running FAQ
Director, San Diego Marathon Clinic, est. 1975

I went through three cases of fasciitis over ten years, as a heavy heel
striker, until I made the connection that my running style was the fault. I
know run like I'm barefoot, but with shoes, and have not suffered another
bout with the dreaded fasciitis since. I am also less fatigued after each
run.

"Ozzie Gontang" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Donovan,

Nice reading your thoughts. Here a post from 1998 on barefoot
runners. Many of those who shared have moved on. Two of rec.running
contributors have died. Madeleine Page of cancer. A wonder individual
who confronted without demeaning or marginalizing the individual. And
Abhay Thatte who died in a fall when doing some mountain running. I
believe he worked for the city of Portland and was in his mid-30's. He
could easily irritate and anger others which he did regularly. He
remained a free spirit and an equal opportunity offender.

Ozzie

From: [email hidden] (Ozzie Gontang)
Newsgroups: rec.running
Subject: Barefoot Runners and shoe companies
Date: 8 Apr 1998 13:24:22 GMT
Organization: Int'l Association of Marathoners
Lines: 226
Message-ID: <[email hidden]>
Reply-To: rec.running
NNTP-Posting-Host: line02.cs5.electriciti.com
Xref: electriciti.com rec.running:98074

From my archives of rec.running I wanted to share some observations of
Michael Berrow on barefoot running. Awhile back I posted a jpeg of 5
world class runners several of the world record holders back in the 70's
and 3 of the 5 were barefoot in a race.

The reason for bringing this up, is the question I continually raise
about
running form and style being extremely important. For me the problem
remains the same for the majority of the urban dwellers. We have bought
in and believe that we are suppose to land on the heel first in long
distance running. We perceive that heel running means landing on the
back
of the foot first...which is translated as the back of the heel...which
is
further translated as the back of the heel of the shoe. So I continue
to
contend that landing on the back of the heel of the shoe is overstriding
and a deceleration with each and every step...causing untold injuries
over
time.

To address these injuries we invest in shoes which are scientifically
tested to absorb shock, but at what cost to the human foot within the
shoe. For me it's a matter of what cost to the human brain and human
processes of critical thinking.

But as I have said, it is important for us to support all the shoe
companies and their employees the world over. It is important for us to
support the families and loved ones of all the orthopedic surgeons,
chiropractors, physical therapists, athletic trainers and those having
to
do with the commercial ventures associated with running. It is
important
for us to support the employees of all the catalogue shoe and clothing
companies. For they like us need to make a living.

Also it is extremely important not to think about form and style too
much
because I wouldn't have a place to come and talk about the emperor's
clothing. All the other repliers of r.r wouldn't have a community to
openly share their own folklore and wisdom and seek their own answers as
they continue to practice their walking, running, standing and sitting.

Anyway, I repeat the old adage I think it's from Will Rogers, "It ain't
what ya know that gets you in trouble, it's what ya know that just ain't
so." If I ask those in the US what color a Yield sign is, and you give
me
the color I've written at the bottom of this post, then we might want to
continue the dialogue about what barefoot world class runners know that
we
don't. And for me it doesn't mean that we have to run barefoot...only
run with the form that allows us to run as easily and gracefully as
barefoot runners.

Observations and research and comments from:
[email hidden] (Michael Berrow)
Newsgroups: rec.running
Subject: Barefoot Runners and shoe companies
Date: 9 Aug 1996 16:12:32 GMT

A while ago I found an interesting product mentioned at:

http://outside.starwave.com/magazine/1295/12r_boom.html
- - - - - - -
Nike Air Rift
The racy Air Rift, inspired by Kenya's barefoot Rift Valley
runners, has a cushy midsole--and not much else. The four-way
stretch upper covers enough of your foot to keep the shoe on,
and the split-toe design lets your big toe push off
independently--almost as if you weren't shod at all. A pair of
thonglike Rift socks is included in the package. $85.
From Nike, 800-344-6453.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I wondered about these "barefoot Rift Valley runners" and
wondered what had propelled Nike to create such a thing.
It seems the barefoot Kenyans have been winning races all
over the world. They grow up running barefoot long
distances to school, to herd cattle and so on.

I read a report on the 23rd IAAF World Cross Country
Championship held on 25th March 1995 at Durham, England,
which stated:
"The Junior Mens race was next which again was dominated
by Kenya and Ethiopia with many of the leading runners
choosing to run barefoot"

I finally saw them running in a documentary a month or so
before the Olympics. It was the most graceful thing I've
ever seen. They seemed to just *flow* throught the air.

However, part of the documentary showed a white (western)
coach out there training them. He had all the guys in that
clip wearing athletic shoes !!. (Oz: I think he's an Irishman
who's a Catholic brother or priest)

I looked out for barefoot runners in the Olympics but
did not get any trace of one (plus NBC was *very* bad
at covering events at which Americans were not expected
to win).

I've done some further research ... and here is what I've found
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

3000 metre steeplechase
... the "barefoot" Christopher Kosgei of Kenya

In a Reuters news release ...

NAIROBI, June 26 (Reuter) - Some of the world's most talented
track athletes have descended on Nairobi for three days of
Olympic trials widely regarded by the competitors as tougher
than the Atlanta Games next month. .....

"Kiptanui, the greatest 3,000 metres steeplechaser of all time,
should book his place for the only major gold medal he has
yet to win against the challenge of his Armed Forces'
colleague Joseph Keter, barefoot Christopher Kosgei, twice
world silver medallist Patrick Sang, Bernard Barmasai and
Johnstone Kipkoech"

- - - - - - - - - - - -
Other web surfing produces ....

Christopher Kosgei
Stockholm 10 Jul 8:06.86
Yes .. 8 minutes and 6.86 seconds.

not as fast as ...

the World Record holder
Moses Kiptanui KEN 7.59,18 95/08/16 Zurich

but faster than the guy who got the gold in Atlanta.

Joseph Keter KEN 8.07,12 96/08/01 Atlanta OG

apparently Kiptanui was having an "off" day there
because he got ....
Kiptanui KEN 8.08,33 96/08/01 Atlanta OG

In another place we find confirmation
that Kosgei runs barefoot ...
--------------------------------------------
St. Denis Meet Results by Paul F. Houde

MEETING DE L'HUMANITx IAAF GRAND PRIX II
SAINT-DENIS, FRANCE (suburb of Paris)
MONDAY, June 3 1996

from AFP-Reuter-Minitel France

3000 m steeple:

1. Christopher Kosgei (Ken) 8:12.29 barefoot again !
2. Brahim Boulami (Mar) 8:18.49
3. Patrick Sang (Ken) 8:18.59
4. Matthew Birir (Ken) 8:18.68
5. Richard Kosgei (Ken) 8:21.36
6. Johnstone Kipkoech (Ken) 8:21.83
---------------------------------------------
TRACK & FIELD: Kenyans in top form
(c) 1996 Reuter Information Service

BRATISLAVA (May 29, 1996 - 18:30 EST) - Three men set year's
fastest times at the Slovnaft international athletics meeting
on Wednesday.

Kenya's Christopher Koskei, silver medallist at last year's world
championships, clocked eight minutes 17.70 seconds in the 3,000
metres steeplechase, running barefoot ahead of team mates Wilson
Kipketer and Johnstone Kipkoech.
---------------------------------------------
Christopher Kosgei did *not* run in the 3000 Metre steeplechase
in the Atlanta Olympics (not on the team)
.. Matthew Birir, Joseph Keter and Moses Kiptanui did.
Keter got the Gold and Kiptanui got the Silver.

NOTE that the barefoot Christopher Kosgei ran the
3000 metre steeplechase in Stockholm on 10 July in 8:06.86
.. which is FASTER than the time (8:07.12) for the guy
(Keter) that won the gold medal in Atlanta !.

Keter is the only steeplechaser featured on the Nike @lanta
web page. Was he sponsored by Nike ?. Did Nike "sponsor" to
persuade faster *barefoot* Kenyans to not run that way
at the Olympics (with umpteen million people watching) ?
Who knows ?

Make no mistake, the shoe companies are into using this
vehicle in a big way to promote their products. Just checkout:
http://www.planetreebok.com/olympics.html

So, I can just picture the *science* guys reporting back
to the Nike boardroom ... "er, yeah ... it seems that
these guys do better barefoot because their feet move
naturally and they push off better with the big toe".

The board members turn ashen-faced and one says "Well,
go develop a shoe that still enables you to do that ...
meanwhile we'll have our sponsorship department focus
on making sure that the world doesn't see a barefoot guy
winning an Olympic track event. We can co-ordinate
with Reebok on this".

Maybe I'm being paranoid. Anyway, food for thought.-- Mike Berrow
--------End of Mike's Post-----------

Anyway about the Yield sign. If you said Yellow, you need to look
again.
It was in 1985 or 1987 that a federal law changed them. You begin to
see
what we're up against when dealing with the human mind and what we're
playing with when most people when asked will say, "Yellow."

So when it comes to running, the majority of people will say that in
running other than sprinting you're suppose to land heel first.

Anyway, if you hang around r.r long enough, the drip irrigation of the
mind from Mike, Miles,Charlie, Sam, Doug, Ray, Dave, zamboni, Richard,
Dan, Madeleine, GK, Denny, Rick, Russell, Chris, Oz, Abhay and all the
other generous contributors to the expansion, creation, discovery,
exploration of knowledge/scientia and the human condition creates an
interesting community within which to live and realize our
fragility/strength and the interconnectedness of those of us who run as
part entry fee into human race. Namaste (which means roughly, "I salute
the God in you."😉

--
In health and on the run,
Ozzie Gontang
Maintainer-rec.running FAQ
Director, San Diego Marathon Clinic, est. 1975

David Geesaman said...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Flaherty (1994) found
that oxygen consumption during running at 12 km/h was 4.7% higher in shoes
of mass ~700 g per pair than in bare feet. An increase in oxygen
consumption of ~4% is of little importance to the recreational runner, but
the competitive athlete would notice a major effect on running speed.

700g is almost 25 oz, and also 1% of a 150lb athlete. 25oz is a damn
heavy pair of shoes.

A more carefull reader will notice Flaherty was referring to "~700 g per pair", not a
single shoe.

Quoted message said:

Now I guarantee you nobody in those cross country
races was wearing 25oz racing shoes

But they were quite likely to wear 12.5 oz shoes, or 25 oz per pair. Actually, 12.5 oz
would be typical for a trainer and fairly light for a trail shoe.

Quoted message said:

- more like 6 oz shoes. At least that's
what everyone in my competitions was wearing.

Really? What 6 oz trail shoes were they wearing? I run road races up to 10K in
Brooks T3 Racers. Those weigh 6.5 oz and I am not sure I'd want to run trail run in
those.

P Wilson said:

David Geesaman said...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Flaherty (1994) found
that oxygen consumption during running at 12 km/h was 4.7% higher in shoes
of mass ~700 g per pair than in bare feet. An increase in oxygen
consumption of ~4% is of little importance to the recreational runner, but
the competitive athlete would notice a major effect on running speed.

700g is almost 25 oz, and also 1% of a 150lb athlete. 25oz is a damn
heavy pair of shoes.

A more carefull reader will notice Flaherty was referring to "~700 g per
pair", not a single shoe.

I suspect Dave noticed that.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Now I guarantee you nobody in those cross country
races was wearing 25oz racing shoes

But they were quite likely to wear 12.5 oz shoes, or 25 oz per pair.
Actually, 12.5 oz would be typical for a trainer and fairly light for a
trail shoe.

Competitive cross country runners do not wear anything close to 12.5oz for
racing. Not trainers, and certainly not so-called "trail shoes".

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

- more like 6 oz shoes. At least that's
what everyone in my competitions was wearing.

Really? What 6 oz trail shoes were they wearing?

Let me guess what were they wearing for racing cross country ... ? cross
country racing shoes, perhaps ? Some people actually wear track spikes for
these as well, though this demands a fairly regular running surface.

I mean, the answer is obvious if you ask the right question, part of your
confusion seems to stem from the fact that you're thinking that they're
"running trails", and you've bought into this whole "trail shoe" marketing
nonsense.

Quoted message said:

I run road races up to 10K in Brooks T3 Racers. Those weigh 6.5 oz and I am
not sure I'd want to run trail run in those.

Cross country shoes have a relatively stiff spike plate, fairly long spikes,
and durable outsole material. Not only do they handle rocks better than the
T3, they do so better than trainers. Also, many cross country courses are
on fairly smooth terrain (e.g. grass plus well maintained dirt or cinder
trail) so you could run them in flats (and I have). But spikes will give you
better traction.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Donovan Rebbechi said:

Competitive cross country runners do not wear anything close to 12.5oz for
racing. Not trainers, and certainly not so-called "trail shoes".

FWIW I just weighed my Adidas Neptunes. they are 255g (8.9 oz I think) each,
including laces, a set of somewhat worn 9mm spikes and ... some dried
mud :-)
http://fitnesssports.com/adidas/neptune_red.jpg

steve common said:

Donovan Rebbechi said:

Competitive cross country runners do not wear anything close to 12.5oz for
racing. Not trainers, and certainly not so-called "trail shoes".

FWIW I just weighed my Adidas Neptunes. they are 255g (8.9 oz I think) each,
including laces, a set of somewhat worn 9mm spikes and ... some dried
mud :-)
http://fitnesssports.com/adidas/neptune_red.jpg

I get just under 9 for mine-- Asics 15-50, which are a in a similar genre-- a
sturdy 9mm XC spike. They don't have a whole lot of cushioning, but the spike
plate, the waffle outsole and the more durable uppers add up to some extra
weight. The pins themselves didn't make much difference when I weighed them (a
few tenths of an ounce). 6oz does seem a bit light for XC spikes actually --
even the relatively light Kennedy XC is advertised as a bit heavier than this
(7oz)

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

You joggers will do anything to make your "sport" appear less candy
assed. You could prance around in suits made of razor wire, and you'd
still be just another cream puff jogger.

"P Wilson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

David Geesaman said...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Flaherty (1994) found
that oxygen consumption during running at 12 km/h was 4.7% higher in
shoes
of mass ~700 g per pair than in bare feet. An increase in oxygen
consumption of ~4% is of little importance to the recreational runner,
but
the competitive athlete would notice a major effect on running speed.

700g is almost 25 oz, and also 1% of a 150lb athlete. 25oz is a damn
heavy pair of shoes.

A more carefull reader will notice Flaherty was referring to "~700 g per
pair", not a
single shoe.

So was I. I thought shoe weights were always for a pair of size 8.5 or
9s, correct me if I'm wrong. 25oz is very heavy - I don't think I've ever
owned a pair of running shoes that were spec'd above 13oz.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Now I guarantee you nobody in those cross country
races was wearing 25oz racing shoes

But they were quite likely to wear 12.5 oz shoes, or 25 oz per pair.
Actually, 12.5 oz
would be typical for a trainer and fairly light for a trail shoe.

Quoted message said:

- more like 6 oz shoes. At least that's
what everyone in my competitions was wearing.

Really? What 6 oz trail shoes were they wearing? I run road races up to
10K in
Brooks T3 Racers. Those weigh 6.5 oz and I am not sure I'd want to run
trail run in
those.

Anyone in that race would have been wearing spikes. I've worn track
spikes on all kinds of cross country race surfaces and wouldn't consider
anything else unless there is more than 200m of pavement on the course.
I've had great luck with a light, stiff spike like the Adidas Equipment LD
and XC - unfortunately these were discontinued long ago.
Road race flats are ok for trail running, but not great. I've worn them
on our cross country course, but then again at race pace I run up on my
toes - and difference is smaller.

Dave

Quoted message said:

I thought shoe weights were always for a pair of size 8.5 or
9s, correct me if I'm wrong.

Nope, per single size 9 shoe. Maybe different back in the day, but
pretty much every weight quote I've seen in the last few years has been
per shoe.