Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)

runrepeat.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 60 posts

Re: Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)

#51

Post by frereubu »

iamacyborg wrote: post #35
frereubu wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sort of in general agreement with you about healthy running practices, but I don't think endurance running - just running for long distances with no eye on time - is a good comparison with performance running - where timing is key, even if you're running log distances. It's to do with the purpose of the running. Eliud Kipchoge only broke 2 hours because of the shoes he was wearing, which are only used for one rac…

> It's to do with the purpose of the running. Eliud Kipchoge only broke 2 hours because of the shoes he was wearing That’s a vast oversimplification.

OK, let me put it another way. Do you think Kipchoge would have broken two hours if he'd been wearing trainers with technology from five years ago?

Re: Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)

#52

Post by angiolillo »

mikestew wrote: post #47
angiolillo wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. :-)

True! Though if I were to pick an aspirational target it would be his sub-four at 85 :)

I should clarify that it's not that I don't pay any attention to race times, just that it's not my primary focus -- I regularly sacrifice PRs to make sure I feel good and avoid injury.

“We want to make good time, but for us now this is measured with emphasis on “good” rather than “time” and when you make that shift in emphasis the whole approach changes.” — Robert M. Pirsig

Re: Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)

#53

Post by mikestew »

angiolillo wrote: post #52
mikestew wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but Winlock was running sub-3:00 in his 70s. :-)

True! Though if I were to pick an aspirational target it would be his sub-four at 85 :) I should clarify that it's not that I don't pay any attention to race times, just that it's not my primary focus -- I regularly sacrifice PRs to make sure I feel good and avoid injury. “We want to make good time, but for us now this is measured with emphasis on “good” rather than “time” and when you make that shift in emphasis the…

Oh, I get you. I’ve raced at a high level for years, but as a senior runner I’m lately starting to think about going from “do well at XC nationals” to “stay in good enough shape to keep up with the ‘kids’ on the Sunday club trail run”. :-)

Re: Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)

#54

Post by thesamethrowawa »

angiolillo wrote: post #46
thesamethrowawa wrote: post #39

It'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…

Oh 100%, and that's the brilliant thing about running, it's a very personal sport and you take what you want from it, which can also change as you get older or life changes. But-

A 2:30 runner giving a more recreational runner advice about improving times is trying to be helpful and supportive sharing their learnings and expertise, even if misguided.

A HN-er that has never ran before throwing out stuff about barefoot running since they read Born to Run a few years ago is just plain ignorance.

Re: Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)

#55

Post by PowerElectronix »

penetrarthur wrote: post #30
PowerElectronix wrote: post #11

Disclaimer: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.

yeah, it is great that you've read a book or two, but why is it that every single elite athlete runs and trains in modern "springloaded" shoes?

Not doing so puts them at a decisive disadvantage. Like not wearing the now banned tech swimsuits was a few years back in competitive swimming.

Re: Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)

#56

Post by PowerElectronix »

mikestew wrote: post #43
PowerElectronix wrote: post #11

Disclaimer: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 ever…

The thick soles and their geometry are designed with heel stricking in mind, as it allows for a longer stride while not injuring your heel and not losing energy (that otherwise would be dissipated in the heel impact).

It is an unnatural, unhealthy way of running and it rewards the runner with the better gear instead of the one with bettertechnique and conditioning.

Re: Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)

#57

Post by iamacyborg »

frereubu wrote: post #51
iamacyborg wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's to do with the purpose of the running. Eliud Kipchoge only broke 2 hours because of the shoes he was wearing That’s a vast oversimplification.

OK, let me put it another way. Do you think Kipchoge would have broken two hours if he'd been wearing trainers with technology from five years ago?

Maybe? Like, the shoes are certainly a contribution factor, but you're basically talking about stacking multiple 0.1 percenters at that point, which one tipped things over the line is hard to say, and you obviously have to account for the fact that Kipchoge is a genetic freak (like all top athletes) with a couple decades of consistent training behind him and a team hell-bent on finding all incremental gains they can. That period also saw significant improvements in fuelling strategy, amongst other things.

Re: Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)

#58

Post by angiolillo »

thesamethrowawa wrote: post #54
angiolillo wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Oh 100%, and that's the brilliant thing about running, it's a very personal sport and you take what you want from it, which can also change as you get older or life changes. But- A 2:30 runner giving a more recreational runner advice about improving times is trying to be helpful and supportive sharing their learnings and expertise, even if misguided. A HN-er that has never ran before throwing out stuff about barefoot…

> A HN-er that has never ran before throwing out stuff about barefoot running since they read Born to Run a few years ago is just plain ignorance.

This seems uncharitable. I see only one comment that favorably mentions Born to Run and a couple that favorably mention minimalist running shoes but none of these give any indication that the poster has never run before.

It seems like a barefoot-style runner giving someone advice about training barefoot to strengthen stabilizing muscles or improve ankle proprioception or something is similarly trying to be helpful and supportive, even if misguided.

I agree with your underlying point though -- it's a very personal sport. That's why it's hard to specific advice about shoes or training unless you know whether someone is running to improve their race times, cardiovascular health, mental health, age gracefully, physical therapy, lose weight, or something else. Because the right approach for one goal might be counterproductive for another.

Re: Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)

#59

Post by dan-robertson »

yread wrote: post #41

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.

Firstly, consider why so many people like running outdoors when they could just run on a treadmill and watch tv indoors? Secondly, note that running injuries don’t tend to suddenly appear and cripple people half-way through a run. They are more likely to appear at the start, sometime afterwards, or to gradually progress in a way that might lead one to reducing volume or resting.

Re: Energy return in running shoes explained (2025)

#60

Post by vee-kay »

iamacyborg wrote: post #17
vee-kay wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's not wrong though. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5G93ta66xSk The tribals from the Sierra Madre Mountains in Northern Mexico - called the Tarahumara or the Rarámuri people - are considered to be among the best endurance runners in the world. Some of the First Nation tribes of the Americas (especially their messengere who ran hundreds of miles to deliver messages) and the traditional African tribals (such as the Ma…

You’re peddling mostly nonsense. Modern shoes don’t force you to heel strike.

[dead]
Post reply on HN