In a way it would make more sense to run in shoes that make you slower for the same effort or make you expend more effort. Ideally, you could just run around the block and it would be as much effort as 10km. Without the risk of something going wrong mid route leading to being stranded/soaked/injured 5km from home. Same with cycling.
Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)
41–50 of 60 posts
Re: Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)
#42Fascinating. My main takeaway is that running technology is primarily driven by World Athletics' 40 mm stack limit and prohibition on physical springs or pistons but not on advanced foams. If they relaxed those constraints then number-chasers would happily show up to races in 150mm foam clouds, jumping stilts, exoskeleton leggings, etc. Alternately, if they started restricting races to 20 mm stack heights that might…
Fastest, most efficient, and, arguably, funnest shoe.
Re: Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)
#43Disclaimer:I run in minimalistic shoes, so of course I'm a hater of this stuff. I find the current trend of springloaded shoes that incentivice people to have a terrible running gait absolutely disgusting. If it weren't for commercial interests I bet these shoes would have been banned long ago. They are bad for the runners and they are bad for the sport.
I find the current trend of springloaded shoes that incentivice people to have a terrible running gait absolutely disgusting.
Yeah, that is truly just, like, your opinion, man. “Terrible running gait”? I’m not even going to ask for any evidence because there isn’t any. What there is evidence for is faster times, faster recovery from races and hard workouts. There is further evidence that the shoes don’t work for everyone, some are “super responders” for whom the shoes work really well, others find benefit, and for others the shoes are a waste of money.
What’s disgusting is r/barefootrunning turning shoes (or lack thereof) into a religion when, like many religions, the evidence is minimal.
Signed, a guy with a lot of thin-soled shoes on the shelf, and two pair of Vaporflys.
Re: Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
> He writes, some claim hyperbolically, that "[i]n Tarahumara land, there was no crime, war, or theft. There was no corruption, obesity, drug addiction, greed, wife-beating, child abuse, heart disease, high blood pressure or carbon emissions. They didn’t get diabetes, or depressed, or even old." This and other statements in the book have been criticized by some authors. "Some claim hyperbolically" - masterfully under…
I visited the Tarahumara and ran the race in his book 4 times. I know Chris personally and he's certainly a storyteller and not a scientist to put it simply. I was similarly bothered by these kind of claims and he wasn't the first to make them. I did some research papers in college on this years ago. Surprisingly, these claims are more true than false, though in no way completely true. There are some fascinating cult…
That's fascinating regardless of the topic! How exciting.
> Surprisingly, these claims are more true than false, though in no way completely true. There are some fascinating cultural mechanisms that enable each one. But they were also largely dependent on their society being extremely small and living in remote hillsides and only coming together for certain social events. Not very applicable to modern society.
Indeed - the Mayans might be worse at culturally-mandated obsidian daggering of people, but at least they don't have microplastics!
Re: Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)
#45this site never fails to impress me with how in-depth it is. I (re) started running several years ago and the world of shoes is dizzying. I still don't have a great grasp on it but I'm glad I've found some shoes that are reliable for me. Fairly certain that I experienced this phenomenon that the author pointed out: "...if a shoe is too soft and bouncy, it can make your stabilizer muscles work harder just to keep things steady." Hard to say for certain but I've found those really soft/bouncy/lightweight shoes are fine for me over short runs (such as a 5k race) but are terrible on longer runs due to this phenomenon.
Re: Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)
#46It's eye-opening when a subject you have first hand deep personal knowledge of is posted on Hacker News. You realise how confidently people post about topics they know absolutely nothing about. Yes, you've read born to run, well done. It it's a good story, not a handbook of practical advice. Telling 2:30 marathon runners doing hundreds of miles a week that running shoes are bad and they should be going bare foot. OK.
Some of the disagreement I've seen seems to boil down to the fact that different runners have different goals. Advice for a number-chaser trying to crack 2:30 isn't helpful for minimalists who want better foot stability and ground feel and vice versa.
In my case I get a lot of well-meaning but misguided advice from fellow runners who can't understand why I don't focus on optimizing my race times. But my goal is to continue running marathons in my 80s and beyond like Fauja Singh or Ed Whitlock, so I make different tradeoffs.
Re: Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)
#47It's eye-opening when a subject you have first hand deep personal knowledge of is posted on Hacker News. You realise how confidently people post about topics they know absolutely nothing about. Yes, you've read born to run, well done. It it's a good story, not a handbook of practical advice. Telling 2:30 marathon runners doing hundreds of miles a week that running shoes are bad and they should be going bare foot. OK.
Some of the disagreement I've seen seems to boil down to the fact that different runners have different goals. Advice for a number-chaser trying to crack 2:30 isn't helpful for minimalists who want better foot stability and ground feel and vice versa. In my case I get a lot of well-meaning but misguided advice from fellow runners who can't understand why I don't focus on optimizing my race times. But my goal is to co…
Yeah, but Winlock was running sub-3:00 in his 70s. :-)
Re: Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)
#48In a way it would make more sense to run in shoes that make you slower for the same effort or make you expend more effort. Ideally, you could just run around the block and it would be as much effort as 10km. Without the risk of something going wrong mid route leading to being stranded/soaked/injured 5km from home. Same with cycling.
> it would make more sense to run in shoes that make you slower for the same effort or make you expend more effort
Some runners train with parachutes, sleds, weight vests, or rucksacks which all make even short runs feel much harder. Ultimately it depends on your goals. Is it cardiovascular fitness? Build muscle? Live longer? Feel better? See a lower number in a chart?
Re: Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)
#49In a way it would make more sense to run in shoes that make you slower for the same effort or make you expend more effort. Ideally, you could just run around the block and it would be as much effort as 10km. Without the risk of something going wrong mid route leading to being stranded/soaked/injured 5km from home. Same with cycling.
Probably not for running because it would affect how you run in a way that wouldn’t give you the benefits you’d want above just running the full distance. Probably the only thing I’d recommend for “running slow but getting good benefits” would be off-road running. The softer impact and uneven ground reduce stress while giving you a joint workout that supports road running, in my opinion.
For cycling, just ride up a hill if you’re that desperate for punishment :p
Re: Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)
#50as long term runner, this was fascinating. however I'd have appreciated a bit more of a discussion of forefront first running.