? for those who have adjusted their form (or know something about form and stability issues) (Read 701 times)

In the past couple of weeks I have really worked on my form--concentrating on better posture and midfoot strike, rather than an almost backwards lean and hard heel striking. It's made an amazing impact on my "speed" (such as it is). To assist with this I purchased a pair of less controlling, lighter weight trainers with a less built-up heel (NB 902). I've so far only used them on a couple of shorter runs, but really like them. For the last couple of months most of my mileage has been in my NB 767s, which is a mild-moderate stability shoe. It's been working very well for me. In the past the shoe that has worked best for me is the NB 1222, which is a moderate-high stability shoe. I've run all of my longer races (10 mile - 25k) in this model (I'm on my second pair in a year), but these races were all before I paid any attention to my form. Tonite I went back to my 1222s to try to squeeze a few miles out of them and it was a miserable experience. While these shoes used to feel right, now they felt like trying to run with cinder blocks attached to my feet through a swamp. Hard to believe this is the same shoe I rated as my fave for so long. I was just talking to Eryn and recalling that I had some similar issues with the 1222 in the early Spring, just after the snow had melted. All Winter I had run in the all-weather version of the 767 and really liked that, mostly because they kept my feet warm and dry. When I went back to my 1222s they initially didn't work for me at all, but after a month or so they were fine again.... I think maybe I know why. I am now wondering if I subconsciously was striking more midfoot and with more upright posture/balance on the slippery snow and ice without really noticing it, which is why switching back to the 1222s was very painful in the early Spring. Then as I reaccustomed myself to dry pavement I went back to heel striking, which made the 1222 a more appropriate shoe for my needs. Does this seem likely? Now I'm wondering if I should consider the 1223 at all. I'm almost wondering if my change in footstrike could be requiring less stability from my shoes...? It would be nice if I could switch to a less stable shoe for the bulk of my miles--those damned high stability shoes are high-priced, too! Any thoughts from those with more expertise? k

I'm not foot/shoe expert but it definitely seems possible. I know lots of people who over time and training have gone from being wicked overpronators to neutral or at least only slightly overpronating.

Keep it up and I'd say get rid of those 1222's and choose less intrusive, minimalist shoes from now on.

I think I will! Man, and the 767 is SO much cheaper than the 1222/1223--like to the tune of $60 right now! And I hear the 768 is going to have even more forefoot cushioning (NB seems to be in some sort of partnership with Chi Running, so many of their advancements in upcoming shoe models appears to be in the form of better forefoot cushioning--good news for anyone implementing a more midfoot/forefoot landing technique). Just when I think I have this whole running thing figured out something new presents itself. k

Ha, that's hilarious, Mikey. And I'll bet there's something to that. Though I will say that a couple of weeks ago I wore my 1222s for a few runs and they were fine (I was definitely planning to order a pair of 1223s as soon as they are available, even)--but I also wasn't really working on my form too much at that point. Now I've gotten to the point where the midfoot landing and better posture is happening without my having to consciously think about it very much (and trying to heel strike is actually feeling more awkward/uncomfortable), so I'm not sure how much of it is my different stride/foot plant and how much is muscular--probably some combo of both. k

Sweet. It's awesome to be able to buy <$100 shoes,="" instead="" of="" $135!=""></$100>