The general advice runners give is to run on the balls of your feet...

Poor bastard. Is he ok?

can I run barefoot on a treadmill?

You have my permission.

to die?

All im going to say is the beginner running shoes from brooks, new balance, and asics are really good for ~30 min jogs. They are durable and comfortable and can be used for walking.
Look at how many of the new nike models are in the trash or on ebay.
You cant run a sub 2 hour marathon at wnat...13 mph? U dont need nike hyperfly meme shoes.
Just get cheap shoes from a flea market or ask around town

This is a decent post and a nice distillation of the whole thing with barefoot running. Here is a great video that goes into further detail: youtube.com/watch?v=zSIDRHUWlVo

But too extreme.

HOWEVER once you are achieving a certain level of performance you will find that you need shoes with a heel, shoes with some tension, etc again. Running shoes ARE NOT straightjackets, calling them that is demeaning and counterproductive to understanding the whole picture of running. Certainly it is important to develop the muscles, stabilizers, and neuromuscular control throughout your feet, lower legs, and entire body.

If you are particularly motivated you can watch videos of barefoot runners with good form and elite runners (who generally have good form, but not always). You will find that for a great majority of runners, their motion is THE SAME with shoes or without. Observe Moses Mosop, like a stick of butter sliding down the road: youtube.com/watch?v=mTMgIViinuQ

The whole point of wearing shoes is with a heel is to aid the natural biomechanics of the "spring" like system in your feet and legs. Without a raised heel/tensioned sole, the force absorption and production comes entirely from you musculature. You will find note that relying solely on this system to run either very fast speeds or very long distances is rather inefficient. Yes, people run great distances barefoot/in minimal shoes. Yes people run pretty fast in barefoot/minimal shoes.

>b-but the human body is designed to run
>the Tarahumara run thousands of miles barefoot
>some soiboi in my office runs ultras barefoot
Yada yada. The human body is not built to roll out of bed and run a 15 minute 5k, or 12:37 for that matter. We subject our bodies to an unnatural level of stress in pursuit of greater accomplishment, there is no need to create add all this stress without adding some support. And that is the real nonsense coming from these barefoot people.

Attached: PA-17602027-2-e1396588679929.jpg (900x600, 134.88K)

But if you goal is performance, get some shoes. If your goal is performance, you should also be REGULARLY incorporating barefoot work, either as drills or in short recovery runs.

Generally, anyone who is moving some serious weight in a clean and jerk or snatch is wearing lifitng shoes. Generally, anyone who is running competitive times is wearing running shoes.

You don't have to be running 150 miles a week, and 2:02 marathons to benefit from running shoes. And you don't have to always run barefoot to avoid "atrophy" and "bad habits."

Shoes are TOOLS not STRAIGHTJACKETS. Anyone who says otherwise should almost certainly be ignored outside of very focused contexts.

Attached: moses-mosop-bounces-on-his-forefeet-and-floats-through-the-air-to-win-the-chicago-marathon.jpg (1024x683, 249.34K)

I always forget how good Mosop looked...

Attached: Taoufik+Makhloufi+Olympics+Day+11+Athletics+9HIJsxfYiX0l.jpg (594x422, 69.35K)

Granted, the straitjacket comment was an exaggeration.

Within the context of sport and competition, I agree completely that one should use every allowed advantage to perform their best, apparel included. Shoes, singlets, belts, wraps, drugs, whatever.

My post was written from the perspective of day-to-day general physical preparedness. I don't believe that the non-competitive runner should use heeled shoes if they can help it. I don't believe that the non-competitive lifter should wear a singlet or use a lifting belt if they can help it. From this perspective, I'm asking this question:

Is the equipment in question being used a compensation for
>weakness,
>limited range of motion, or
>poor motor control
?

If it is, and my goal is general physical preparedness, then the equipment is working against me. I would do better instead to train myself to improve in those areas. That's why I advocate for "as barefoot as possible" running, which, it should be noted, is not the same as advocating for 100% barefoot running. I run in shoes -- because my world is asphalt and concrete -- but they're shoes that let my feet do the work.

Serious question, why do running shoes all look so fucking gay? I was on Nike last night wanting to buy actual shoes for running, but they all look like wearing bananas on the feet.

I just have a hard time with the general physical preparedness argument for any sport, running or otherwise. This type of fitness takes preciously little work to develop, and even less to maintain. In the case of the foot, the calves and leg muscles are all well-activated with or without shoes, they just get fatigued slower with shoes. These muscles are not the training target of running, that is first the cardiovascular system and second the ENTIRE body running motion (not just the extremities). Once some level of strength is developed in the foot and leg muscle, it remains stimulated with sufficient running volume even with shoes. Anyone greatly worried or predisposed to injury would do fine with a few laps on grass and a little more stretching and mobility work - though there are many substitutes and we should all be doing something other than running anyways. Proprioceptive ability is nebuluous and ill-defined, and I imagine even more well preserved than muscular ability with or without shoes. And I really doubt that there is sufficient feedback from a smooth surface like asphalt or rubber to provide any benefit once calluses develop. You will gain greater benefit from some more complex athletic activity (soccer, cone drills, trail running even with shoes). Again, the body is a system and we don't always need to isolate and overstate the importance of one component.

Any argument to form is mostly irrelevant, as there is much said about how running form is only trainable to a certain extent. Some people have a stride that is either a bit long, or too slow, or too powerfully driven at speed to make barefoot running worthwhile. Why should they limit themselves to shuffling around?

Attached: Rudisha_David1-OlyGame12-thumb-500x750-4204.jpg (400x600, 77.04K)

Look up Brooks or mizuno, they typically are less trendy and more functional. Nike has a few core workhorse models like Pegasus and skylon too though. I agree the fashion aspect is distracting and cringe from a serious runner's view, but meh, you find a model you like and just keep buying it.

i workout barefoot while shadowboxing and doing footwork drills in my garage, but i bought a pair of adidas running shoes that help with foot pronation because my right foot tends to bow inward. i like to think my feet are not atrophied due to my workouts, does this even matter when im trying to pick up running as supplementary cardio in my training?

No, he died

As long as you don't have some condition causing pronation, just buy whatever shoes feel comfortable. If that is a support shoe or a neutral shoe, most important is that it works for you. The evidence for pronation control either working at all or being beneficial is nonexistent.

>What do you make of this?
Jump and land on your heels, barefoot or otherwise

Those are runner's shoes. Rule of thumb with Nike is that the expensive ones are dedicated running shoes. But you should just go to their website and go to the running section if you're not sure.

vivobearfootchadhere

Cringe

This post is all kinds of stupid.
Don't follow this shit people.

But they are. They’re excellent as they have a wide profile, lots of toebox room and a neutral drop. I mainly use them for my longer runs with balega socks

are these actually good?

also are hokas a meme?