Trends

Barefoot running shoes — the way to go

Ever since the boom in the running industry about 30 years ago, the percentage of runners who get injured each year has remained pretty much the same — despite technological advances and developments in the footwear industry aimed at preventing running injuries.

The latest studies suggest that anything between 40% and 70% of runners are injured every year, despite footwear brands’ claims that anti-pronation devices will limit movement of the foot, reducing the risk of injury in overpronators, or that forefoot and rearfoot cushioning devices reduce impact and the risk of injury. These claims are rarely backed up by published research, though claims of evidence are numerous. Anecdotal evidence also abounds — I have no doubt that many people will be able to share the experience that a persistent, nagging injury suddenly cleared up when they switched shoes. These stories are very common, and lend support to the idea that a certain shoe will help with injury risk.

Personally, I’m of the belief that an injured athlete should rather look at their training as the first port of call after injury, followed by things like muscle strength or flexibility imbalances. An injury can almost always be traced to a change in training intensity or volume, and that’s where I’d begin the detective work, not with shoes.

Anti-pronation not the answer

As recently as perhaps 4 or 5 years ago, pronation was the enemy, and advice was given to limit it at all costs, although pronation is the normal movement of the foot — almost everyone has it.

Basically, the premise for anti-pronation shoes is that upon landing, excessive pronation, which refers to the rolling in motion of the ankle, is partly responsible for injury, since the pressures and loads placed on the shins and knees is excessively high. Therefore, control the pronation and you control the injury risk...

So, shoe companies all developed their own unique devices to do this. Apart from the devices that are proposed to aid with cushioning (Nike Air, Asics Gel, adidas Adiprene, and so on), I would dare say that most of the product (and price) differentiation among shoe brands took place with regards to these motion-control devices.

Running in neutral

That is no longer happening, as far as I can tell.

The major brands still have their heavy, expensive motion-control shoes, but the trend is without a doubt towards the lighter neutral and more cushioned shoe. The default advice that most people are nowadays getting is go neutral.

As mentioned, I don’t believe that the evidence has been gathered to support that heavy anti-pronation shoes are the solution for running injuries. Many other scientists and runners are also suggesting that anti-pronation shoes are being over-emphasized, and that a well-cushioned shoe is the way to go.

Training errors are responsible for injury, the rest is detail! Of course, factors like biomechanics, muscle strength or flexibility imbalances are contributing factors. Therefore, some runners, who are biomechanically correct (incidentally, that term is thrown around liberally without a clear definition of what it actually means!) can get away with training that would cause injury to someone who is not so fortunate, or who has an imbalance in muscle strength or flexibility.

I also don’t believe that simply changing the shoe is the solution — changing the training, and gradually increasing the load, is far more likely to resolve the injury.

With regard to orthotic devices, which function on the same premise as shoes, but may have more effect on biomechanics, I believe that orthotics may be helpful at the two extremes (high arches or very flat feet). But, I really am convinced that given the right training, anyone can wear neutral shoes.

Barefoot running

Nowadays, there is a growing argument that running barefoot is the natural and hence the correct way to run. That’s not to say you should run barefoot (that is highly impractical), but rather that getting as close to barefoot running is becoming a popular notion. In fact, even the shoe industry has cottoned onto this idea. Think of all the many shoes that are now being launched that mimic barefoot running — minimal cushioning, light shoes, designed to bring your running style more in line with its natural origins. Whether it be a flexible shaft in the shoe, or a plate that rotates on the heel, or even the more breathable design, the very obvious trend is towards more movement, more natural, more barefoot.

But, a word of caution here. If a runner who has been pounding the pavement for 20 years in a pair of shoes suddenly switches to these ultra-light shoes, he may be making a risky move, because the change in biomechanics and loading of joints, muscles and tendons will almost certainly cause injury.

The key, as with training, is to gradually change, giving the body time to adapt to the new stresses it faces. The point is, there is a shift in the market, which could be the beginning of the end for the heavy, anti-pronation shoe.

I do believe that within the next five years, the companies that make the best cushioned shoes will grow, while those who hold onto their motion control shoes will suffer.

In marketing, a model called the BCG matrix calls some products Stars, and others Dogs (among other classifications). I suspect that the star of five years ago, the motion control shoe, is gradually becoming a dog, and how the industry reacts will be interesting...