I picked up some racing flats yesterday (Saucony Kilkenny XC2, which were the flattest of the flats) which I'm going to try out today. Any thoughts about going with flats as a transition? I was a little nervous about going straight to FF or BF.

My general plan for 2009: 1. Continue wearing my 5.0's at work where I do a lot of walking and standing - over 40 hours a week for the last 2 months seems to have helped strengthen my feet. In Jan., I'll change them to 3.0's (by removing the insoles?) 2. Take out the insoles and finish wearing out the cushioned shoes I have left 3. Transition to running flats for around 2/3 my running (or less later in the year) 4. Work up to about 1/3 my mileage barefoot (or more later in the year) and consider FF 5. Run a 20K barefoot (all on doubletrack) next fall

First off - OUCH! That track surface is not smooth! The skin on my feet is tender! This bothered me more than anything. Second - nothing else hurt at all. I felt like doing a second lap, but decided against it. Third - no soreness today.

That's a good sign. The skin toughens up very fast. It's the muscles and tendons and bones that take a long time.

I've been trolling the forums for a few weeks. I like the economic and minimalist aspects of bf but have the flattest of all feet. A few PT friends who knew I run seemed genuinely disturbed by said flatness when they first witnessed. It wasn't even a conversation topic, I was just walking on a terrace and they had a difficult time making sense of it. I have two races coming up but then would like to explore bf, maybe during recovery. Given the environment in which I started running I'm obviously using a stability shoe when running which did not prevent a femoral stress fracture this summer. MTA: I've moved my questions to a question thread

I've tried running in Vibrams a bit on the treadmill and want to do more, but changing to mid/forefoot striking is tough, I've been fighting Achilles tendinitis for a few months so it will have to wait. Keep up with the good info, though.

It's much easier to switch if you do some barefoot running. The Vibrams are not a great way to learn.

It's much easier to switch if you do some barefoot running. The Vibrams are not a great way to learn.

Why?

Why?

Because they limit feedback. Feedback is the whole point. It is the feedback that allows you to run more smoothly, efficiently, and safely. Granted, they give lots more feeling than normal shoes. But when you're trying to learn a whole new form, you need all the feeling you can get.

Because they limit feedback. Feedback is the whole point. It is the feedback that allows you to run more smoothly, efficiently, and safely. Granted, they give lots more feeling than normal shoes. But when you're trying to learn a whole new form, you need all the feeling you can get.

Thanks Ed. Understand the point. Perhaps I will "feel" more once I get outside and off the treadmill. I ran my first mile barefoot on my treadmill last night. It felt good but I could tell a blister was developing on my left foot. It seems I force this foot more instead of relaxing as I do on with the right.

I like the economic and minimalist aspects of bf but have the flattest of all feet.

i read a book recently that outlined a lot of aspects of barefooting and went into why some people have flat feet. i thought it was interesting the example they used.

one of the most supportive structures on earth is the arch (i.e. the coliseum, weather carved stone bridges). the arch of our feet has over 100 moving parts including tendons, muscles, ligaments and bones. given this information it is also beneficial to know the easiest way to weaken or destroy an arch structure is at the center, from the bottom up. for years shoe companies have been telling people that their arches need this support when in reality it is probably the strongest part of your foot. as your arches (or lack thereof) get stronger they will naturally form a better shape to support your weight. this can also result in a smaller shoe size.