Are five finger shoes really good for running? (Read 174 times)

 

I dunno man, over the past few years, you've morphed your online persona to be more of a threatening name caller.

But you aren't good at it.

You don't have to know. I'll gladly accept any challenge to prove I know what I'm talking about. Its simple, if you can't tell me how the women of Kenya carry 20% of their bodyweight with no increase in energy expenditure, and I can, then I know more about running than you could ever dream of.

The only word that matters to me is to be told I'm wrong.

I've been tested by Nike's Lab

I've been tested by the Office of Naval Research. I have all the lab data I need to back up any claim I make.

I'm just waiting to meet the first athlete legitimately interested in learning a more efficient way to run than the training garbage that gets barfed by the sports industry. Running 20% faster is easy.

I'm not the one backing away from proving it.

If you don't like being called names as you so state, then have anyone test me publicly.  Shut me up legitimately. That the NSCA, ACE, ACSM, and NASM can't do it gives me the right to call you any name I want if you don't think I can back up any word or claim I make.

 

You don't have to know. I'll gladly accept any challenge to prove I know what I'm talking about. Its simple, if you can't tell me how the women of Kenya carry 20% of their bodyweight with no increase in energy expenditure, and I can, then I know more about running than you could ever dream of.

 

The only word that matters to me is to be told I'm wrong.

 

I've been tested by Nike's Lab

 

I've been tested by the Office of Naval Research. I have all the lab data I need to back up any claim I make.

 

I'm just waiting to meet the first athlete legitimately interested in learning a more efficient way to run than the training garbage that gets barfed by the sports industry. Running 20% faster is easy.

 

I'm not the one backing away from proving it.

 

If you don't like being called names as you so state, then have anyone test me publicly.  Shut me up legitimately. That the NSCA, ACE, ACSM, and NASM can't do it gives me the right to call you any name I want if you don't think I can back up any word or claim I make.

You're the one making the claims. Supply us with the tangible evidence verifiable that your methods result in faster times.  Please supply a list of all the world, Olympic, and national champions, and national and world record holders you have coached.

 

 

 

If you don't like being called names as you so state, then have anyone test me publicly.  

So we're clear, you are going to call us "princess" etc etc until we have someone "test you publicly."

This makes no damn sense.

I'm always left wondering why you folks do this and engage. Why not just walk away, Renee....You're not to blame.

I engage because this is what I do. But I long since stopped trying to engage him on a logical let's-talk-running level. Because there certainly is no point to that.

Besides, he calls me/us princess, and I want to be all royal and shit.

Since this thread was started about running barefoot, I find it's no longer about barefoot running, but challenging me. I don't hijack anything. Unlike any princess here, I've been training athletes barefoot since I rehabbed myself after being hit by the truck in 1997. The footprints of Mungo Park and published in 2005 validate what I teach being a more efficient way to run.

Even Nike agrees with me. That nobody seems to understand why the most efficient runners are heel strikers and not mid or forefoot as the training world barfs, is what sets me apart. My relationship with Nike started because in their own research with subjects from the Amazon never having worn shoes, were heel strike runners as well. It’s the same technique I demonstrated for Salazar in 2002. this  2007 article documents his quote

http://www.marathonandbeyond.com/choices/clift.htm

Openly, I would have loved to have been sponsored by Vibrams. Given what I claim, you’d think they’d be the perfect fit in company to support what I teach. Instead, they preferred to sponsor the research of Daniel Lieberman from Harvard. That he’s a pathetic fool didn’t mean anything to them. I warned them if they followed his fraud, given I called him on his BS in a 2008 e-mail, they’d face legal scrutiny.

The law firm representing the plaintiff contacted me because I was the only running coach they could find who teaches what they were arguing in court.

Vibrams found my e-mail. Its why they chose to settle out of court. Their stupidity was basing their marketing on Lieberman’s garbage, “research.” I’m merely the one who knew how to explain why they lied. That they were warned by me is why they refused a trial. That they couldn’t counter my evidence to support the plaintiff’s claim, is why they backed down.

If I can’t be disproven in a court of law, what makes any of you think you can do any better?

I claim to teach anyone interested how to run 20% faster with only an hour of instruction. That nobody has the guts to take me up on my offer given I have a full money back guarantee isn't my problem. It merely proves what cowards so many people truly are.

i wear my vibrams for canoeing and kayaking. they're dead fucking brill.

my butler does the paddling.