Barefoot/Minimalist Shoe Running Clinic in Grand Rapids, Michigan (Read 1842 times)

 

Hate to say; but this's got to be one of the worst arguments I've ever read.  To sum up, to me, you're saying that: "Some people suck and they are slow and there's nothing you can do about--they'll remain being slow and sucking."  You're not Richard by any chance, are you?

 

There are principles and they can be applied to a 4-minute miler as well as a 4-hour marathon runner.  Some people, most people, don't see that and that's probably why they remain a 4-hour marathon runner--or 5.  There are physiological and mechanical fundamentals.  As long as we all trying to move forward with 2 legs, those fundamentals would apply.

 

Guess you never heard of some elite runners being "hired" as advisory staffs for various shoe companies to provide feedbacks.  Some of the most popular marathon training programs are developed by former elite runner.  Speaking of that, by the way, I had NEVER heard of a decent marathon training programs developed by a podiatrist.  Does that mean anything?

Poor argument?  Not at all.  First, I never said anything close to your paraphrase, although you seem to have taken it that way.  Go back and re-read my post.  Carefully.  Do you really believe everyone can run 4 hr marathons? 

And no, I'm not Richard.

Second, I understand that there are principles.  There are also principles of physics.  Imagine the difference in landing for a 130 lb weight vs a 205 lb weight.  Do you really believe they both land with equal force?

Which "popular" marathon programs do you want to discuss?  Are you referring to the ones that recommend 24 or 26 mile long runs for 4 hr marathoners?   (Or the ones with 8 miles at threshold pace for someone with a threshold at 8:35 per mile?)  I thought you were of the view that 3 hrs  was more than enough.  So which popular program do you recommend?

 

Actually, the 130 lb runner can land with equal or more impact than the 205 lb runner if he (or she) is moving at a higher velocity. The impact force on the foot is linearly related with running velocity.

 

Also, interestingly, the impact force is unrelated to the density of the running sole. The purpose of running shoes is not to reduce impact forces, but to distribute them differently across the foot. The question at stake is not one of reducing impact, but of how best to distribute that impact across the foot, given its structures.

 

Check out this article:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3693376

Newton's second law of motion.  Force equals mass X acceleration.  What happens when you double the mass?

The impact force on one's foot has nothing to do with horizontal velocity.  It has a lot to do with vertical velocity and varies as the square of that velocity.  Truth be told, horizontal velocity of one's foot while in contact with the ground is zero with respect to the ground.

Try a little experiment.  Drop a steel ball and a rubber ball from the same height onto pavement.  Which one reboounds more?  Why?

That was an interesting little study, but I doubt one can extrapolate results from 14 persons to an entire running population.  Also, there are many variables that would influence impact velocity, so I'm not clear how they determined that increasing lateral velocity resulted in increased impact force.  I wonder what the correlation factor was?  Was it strong or weak? 

One thing I know for myself is that after about 2.5 hrs of running my feet really feel every step.  Elite marathoners probably wouldn't know about that because they're usually finished by then, but I've still got another hour and a half to the finish.

 

Try a little experiment.  Drop a steel ball and a rubber ball from the same height onto pavement.  Which one reboounds more?  Why?

Are you trying to argue that the rubber ball lands with less impact force? Well, it depends on what you mean by "impact force." Certainly if their masses are the same, they will each strike the ground with the same momentum. They will each impart the same energy and momentum to the ground.

The difference, of course, is that the rubber ball deforms, and depending on the elasticity of that deformation, it may or may not bounce as high as the steel ball.

 

That was an interesting little study, but I doubt one can extrapolate results from 14 persons to an entire running population.  Also, there are many variables that would influence impact velocity, so I'm not clear how they determined that increasing lateral velocity resulted in increased impact force.  I wonder what the correlation factor was?  Was it strong or weak? 

 

One thing I know for myself is that after about 2.5 hrs of running my feet really feel every step.  Elite marathoners probably wouldn't know about that because they're usually finished by then, but I've still got another hour and a half to the finish.

This is your response? Correlation factor?

Stop digging. That's my suggestion.

I wear gloves when its cold outside, and I am running outside.

I bet you take them off when it gets warm, too.  Like today.  Damn it was nice out.  I took my gloves off.  My hat, too.

 

Are you trying to argue that the rubber ball lands with less impact force? Well, it depends on what you mean by "impact force." Certainly if their masses are the same, they will each strike the ground with the same momentum. They will each impart the same energy and momentum to the ground.

 

The difference, of course, is that the rubber ball deforms, and depending on the elasticity of that deformation, it may or may not bounce as high as the steel ball.

If you know about spring/mass/damper relationships you will understand what's occurring.  The kinetic energy of the rubber ball is stored in the ball and then released to drive the ball back into the air.  However the kinetic energy of the steel ball is not stored in nearly the same amount (It will probably bounce back a bit.) and dissipates as heat.

Muscles also act as springs.  They absorb surprising amounts of energy (muscle & ligament were often used for bowstrings) and can release it, but they fatigue much quicker than rubber. 

 

If you know about spring/mass/damper relationships you will understand what's occurring.  The kinetic energy of the rubber ball is stored in the ball and then released to drive the ball back into the air.  However the kinetic energy of the steel ball is not stored in nearly the same amount (It will probably bounce back a bit.) and dissipates as heat.

 

Muscles also act as springs.  They absorb surprising amounts of energy (muscle & ligament were often used for bowstrings) and can release it, but they fatigue much quicker than rubber. 

Don't patronize me. I used to be a physics teacher. Not that any of this bullshit, my minimal expertise in physics, or your background in statistics has anything to do whatever the hell it is we are pretending to argue about.

 

Don't patronize me. I used to be a physics teacher. Not that any of this bullshit, my minimal expertise in physics, or your background in statistics has anything to do whatever the hell it is we are pretending to argue about.

I wasn't trying to patronize you.  I don't know you or your background.  I'm an engineer, so I know a little bit about mechanics and physics. 

With respect to highly cushioned shoes, I mentioned some time ago, (in a post that was referred to as the worst argument ever heard) that there are complications introduced when trying to deal with shock loading.  There's a lot to be said for lighter footwear in longer races.  Extra weight on the end of your leg is a big negative when trying to swing it for 4 hrs.  The way it's added is also an issue.  Usually one's heel is lifted high, and this forces the body to "lean" forward a bit more than normal.  This can put additional pressure on back neck and shoulders , causing soreness and discomfort in long races.  (By contrast, at work I wear absolutely flat shoes all day without issues.)  It's boils down to a matter of personal preference and comfort.   (I'm sure by now Nobby is doing cartwheels over that comment.)  In my case, several bouts with plantars (and a stress fracture on my little leg bone) were enough signs to move me from lightweight shoes to something a little more substantial.  Since then I've run thousands of miles without issue.