Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Vibram Fivefingers (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Maurile Tremblay
- Start date
jason12vb
Footballguy
I'm a 36 year old shaved headed, Harley riding, IT professional, mountain biking FBG with a hot wife 8 years my younger. I own 3 pair of five fingers. I love them...but I'm not a heavy runner by any stretch of the imagination.
tri-man 47
Footballguy
jason12vb
Footballguy
Should have added carnivore to further distance myself from the "The favorite toe-shoe of vegan restaurant servers and 55-year-old men with ponytails" quote.
Ted Mullins
Footballguy
Same here, I don't really run in them at all but love them for squats. Not sure if it's just a mental thing for me but I have not worn anything else that had the same feel.
The people who laugh at me for wearing them are going to be pretty jealous when I get my $40 from this class action lawsuit.
Big Cat
Footballguy
The lawsuit is based upon unfulfilled promises... That the product would help build muscle and so forth. People may have bought the product expecting promoted benefits they never got. And I the WSJ they said damages could be $94 on a $100 pair of shoes. I don't know if that's before the attorneys take their piece, though.
Chaka
Footballguy
Looks like he explained that "problems" weren't the issue. The issue is that benefits were touted that turned out to be untrue. Anyone who bought the shoes did not receive the promised benefits even if they didn't experience "problems." Think snake oil.
MaxThreshold
Footballguy
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
No retraction.
The lawsuit was based on Vibram's claim that their shoes would "reduce foot injuries and strengthen foot muscles." I don't know that there's any real dispute about strengthening foot muscles. I don't know if any studies have been carried out, but there's a lot of anecdotal evidence that switching to barefoot-style shoes puts stress on certain muscles that don't otherwise get much of a workout. Muscular stress commonly produces an increase in strength -- that's the point of resistance training, after all.
The rub comes from the "reduce foot injuries" claim. There is some evidence for this, but also some evidence against it in the form of this recent study that showed an increase in bone marrow edema in runners during the first ten weeks after switching to barefoot-style shoes. That study was apparently the basis for the lawsuit.
I didn't know what bone marrow edema was, so I googled it. It's a buildup of excess fluids in bone marrow, often in response to the bruising or stressing of a bone. It is often asymptomatic -- in which case, it doesn't hurt, and the person with bone marrow edema will not know he has it unless he gets an MRI. (The study asked the runners to record their perceived pain scores in their training logs, but it did not publish those results except to mention that the perceived pain scores substantially departed from the MRI results. I suspect that means the Vibram group didn't experience greater pain.)
The study states: "One of the primary concerns of barefoot/minimalist running is that although foot musculature may be strengthened, injury may result from the added stress placed on the bones in the foot, especially throughout the adaptation period when runners transition from traditional running shoes... It has been suggested that most runners will transition from a rear-foot strike to a mid-foot or fore-foot strike when running barefoot or in minimalist running shoes. The lack of cushioning under the foot during this transition may place the runner at greater risk for stress injury at the mid- or fore-foot."
If "stress injury" doesn't mean "something that hurts," but just means a physiological response to stress, then no duh. Of course pounding your feet on the pavement without cushioning results in greater stress than doing it with cushioning, and of course there will be a physiological response to that during the transition period. That's super obvious, right? So during the transition period, ease into it slowly.
The more important question, IMO, is whether barefoot running leads to more frequent or more serious injuries -- real injuries, the kind that hurt, not just callouses or other responses to stress -- in the long term. The ten-week study did not address that, and its results cannot be extrapolated to conclude that barefoot running is worse than cushioned running in general. After all, the exact same bone marrow edema that occurs when switching from cushioned running to barefoot running also occurs when switching from sitting on the couch to cushioned running. That doesn't mean that sitting on the couch is better for you than cushioned running. It just means that when you stop sitting on the couch and start running, there will be an adjustment period with increased stress on your feet.
From the paper about the ten-week study: "Bone marrow edema changes are indicative of added stress and have been seen in sedentary subjects who ran for only 7 days in a row in traditional running shoes."
I have three pair of Vibram Fivefingers and still like them. I don't do much running; but if I did, that's what I'd wear unless it started to hurt.
Last edited by a moderator:
Britney Spears
guest speaker
Never saw this thread before, but I have 3 pairs of the Vivobarefoot Gobi. They are by far my favorite shoes and my feet feel more comfortable in them than any other shoes. I had slight plantar fascia problems when I played basketball growing up and many shoes make my feet ache, these don't.
I don't wear them for exercise though (I don't exercise). bag
The finger toes thing always looked too strange to me. I would try them for free I guess.
I also tried the Merrill barefoot shoes ($22 at TJ Max) and they really bother my feet.
I don't wear them for exercise though (I don't exercise). bag
The finger toes thing always looked too strange to me. I would try them for free I guess.
I also tried the Merrill barefoot shoes ($22 at TJ Max) and they really bother my feet.
Mister CIA
Footballguy
Don't own the toe shoes but I've owned a few pair (Merrell and New Balance) with the Vibram soles. Big, big fan.
Apes with Guns
Footballguy
i think you should get $10 just for having to be seen in the stupid things.
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
Checking back in here after awhile. I've begun running outside about 1-2 times per week, running either 4 miles 2x a week or 6 miles 1x a week. All running is done outside, which involves mostly pavement, concrete, wood (running on docks). I've started to feel some pain in my knee, which is not terrible (I think because I'm only running 1-2x per week) but based on some articles I've read, I think it could be because of a rear foot strike.
I figure it can't hurt to try these suckers, so .... which would one you recommend? I don't plan on using these for anything other than running as described above (i.e., not going to wear these in the gym other than on a treadmill, won't be wearing them for casual use, etc. Just for running).
I figure it can't hurt to try these suckers, so .... which would one you recommend? I don't plan on using these for anything other than running as described above (i.e., not going to wear these in the gym other than on a treadmill, won't be wearing them for casual use, etc. Just for running).
dickey moe
Fingerpicker
I understand the functionality, but is it possible to wear these without looking like a total db?
glvsav37
Footballguy
I'm no running pro, but if you are indeed a heel striker, I would NOT get these until you have worked on your from and run more forward. These have very little to no heel cushion and you will only end up hurting more. If you can modify your form so that every stride is forward, then I would give these a go.Chase Stuart said:
I tried running in mine and did not enjoy it. I'm still working on my stride, so for now I'll keep these for their original intent, wearing around the backyard and playing with the kids.
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
I don't know if heel-striking is causing your problems or not but you can still avoid heel striking in normal running shoes. Many runners (including me) don't heel-strike.Chase Stuart said:
jason12vb
Footballguy
I've got 3 different models and my favorite has been the TreckSport...very versatile and easy to get on. There is a bilka model that has more support in them than other models and is billed as mostly a running shoe...that might be a good place to start. Whatever you do though...you've gotta get used to it slowly. Try to run 2 miles and your calves will hurt for a week.Chase Stuart said:
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
Interesting, thanks. I guess I don't know that I'm a heel striker, but I assume I am. I am sure my running technique is not very good, and since I hear a lot of beginner runners heel strike, and a lot of people with knee pain heel strike, and I fit into both of those categories, I assume I do, too.
I currently run in Asics. Is there another shoe that you'd recommend?
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
Interesting article on heel striking:
http://runneracademy.com/prevent-heel-striking-when-running/
I'm confident that I do this, because I think 1) if I take longer strides, that will be easier than a bunch of short strides, and I hate running as it is so easier = better, and 2) when I get in a "groove" I think of myself running long strides that feel pretty good.
I'm willing to try doing shorter strides, but I kind of think it will be a lot harder. I'm gonna run in the morning, so we'll see.
http://runneracademy.com/prevent-heel-striking-when-running/
I'm confident that I do this, because I think 1) if I take longer strides, that will be easier than a bunch of short strides, and I hate running as it is so easier = better, and 2) when I get in a "groove" I think of myself running long strides that feel pretty good.
I'm willing to try doing shorter strides, but I kind of think it will be a lot harder. I'm gonna run in the morning, so we'll see.
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
I have worn Asics and I midstrike. Google a video on this. There are plenty of examples if you are interested in making changes. By the way, you can get injured no matter what you do. There are many factors beside foot strike.
MAC_32
Footballguy
To increase your chances of staying healthy running always keep your eyes up, shoulders down, stay light on your feet, and on the scale, do strength training to compliment, engage your lower body muscles while you run, and seek expert consultation when buying shoes. I am a frugal sob but I open my wallet when it comes to three things - a good steak, good drinks, and my running shoes.
Nothing is full proof, but from my experience this works. I tried the vff and it was way too awkward. I know other great runners that have had success and swear by them. Good for them. I'll never do them again. Just find what works best for you.
Nothing is full proof, but from my experience this works. I tried the vff and it was way too awkward. I know other great runners that have had success and swear by them. Good for them. I'll never do them again. Just find what works best for you.
Britney Spears
guest speaker
I got a pair of New Balance Minimus MR1. They are like a sock with some grip. Can spread toes, etc.
Really like them. Extremely comfortable and I feel very light on my feet in them.
Really like them. Extremely comfortable and I feel very light on my feet in them.
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
Went on a run today with the goal of really focusing on being a "foot striker." I watched a couple of videos beforehand, and focused on making sure I landed on the middle of my feet on my steps. I was able to do this for the whole run, which surprised me because I figured I'd slip back into old habits. Now, the bad and the good:
The bad:
Wow that was hard. I've been running 6 miles at a 9:20 pace, which includes some walking. On the first three miles, I generally run at a sub-9:00 pace, which includes two one minute or so walk breaks. Today, I did 2.4 miles at a 9:15 pace, so I was considerably slower. I also took just one short walk break, so I was even slower than the time indicates.
I was also exhausted at the end. I wanted to do 2.5 miles, and at the 2.4 mile mark I said #### that, I'm dead. About an hour later, I'm still pretty tired. My biggest fear was that by taking shorter strides, it would both tire me out and slow me down. Both of those seem to be true. I took very short strides, which I think is how you're supposed to be a mid-foot striker, and that just seemed to take a lot out of me (possible upside -- this burns more calories?). Also, my calves are killing me. They are going to be burning tomorrow, I can already tell. I'm generally okay with that, because working out a part of my body that I don't normally work out is a good thing. But man, this was a really, really hard 2.4 mile run. The short strides were murder.
The good:
My knee didn't hurt at all, and I imagine this will always be the case. This is probably enough to make dealing with all the bad worth it.
The bad:
Wow that was hard. I've been running 6 miles at a 9:20 pace, which includes some walking. On the first three miles, I generally run at a sub-9:00 pace, which includes two one minute or so walk breaks. Today, I did 2.4 miles at a 9:15 pace, so I was considerably slower. I also took just one short walk break, so I was even slower than the time indicates.
I was also exhausted at the end. I wanted to do 2.5 miles, and at the 2.4 mile mark I said #### that, I'm dead. About an hour later, I'm still pretty tired. My biggest fear was that by taking shorter strides, it would both tire me out and slow me down. Both of those seem to be true. I took very short strides, which I think is how you're supposed to be a mid-foot striker, and that just seemed to take a lot out of me (possible upside -- this burns more calories?). Also, my calves are killing me. They are going to be burning tomorrow, I can already tell. I'm generally okay with that, because working out a part of my body that I don't normally work out is a good thing. But man, this was a really, really hard 2.4 mile run. The short strides were murder.
The good:
My knee didn't hurt at all, and I imagine this will always be the case. This is probably enough to make dealing with all the bad worth it.
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
[icon]
Insoxicated
It's "nothing is FOOL Proof" FYI
I'm the farthest thing from a running expert, but from what I've been told by serious runners (ultra guys who do 50 and 100 mile trail runs).. you want to worry less about your min/mile early on and just focus on finding a pace you can maintain for the distance of the run. From what I've heard, unless you're doing interval training (sprint/walk/etc) ... it's generally better to try to carry a consistent pace through your run. As you get stronger and your aerobic capacity, that pace will naturally pick up.
Last edited by a moderator:
MAC_32
Footballguy
You expended more energy focusing on your technique. As it becomes more natural you won't be wasting as much energy focusing on doing it right. You'll just do it, function of muscle memory. It also explains why you're more sore than usual, you tried a new technique, something your body isn't used to. You'll adapt.
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
Thanks. Make sense. What do you think of this short striding thing? It seems really popular when I read about it, but it does seem to be a bit counter-intuitive to me that taking a lot of short steps will be easier than not as many long ones. But hey, I know nothing about running, and all the research seems to negate my point.
Chaka
Footballguy
Short striding is Jeff Galloway's go to answer for pretty much all pain while running. If something hurts while you are running then shorten your stride.
From my experience he is right.
MAC_32
Footballguy
I really try to be open to new ideas about things, but I am instinctively skeptical of anything 'new' when it comes to exercise.
I heard about this short step thing a few years ago and it hasn't been broken as myth yet so maybe there is something to it, but i said the same thing a year ago about vff after being skeptical forever and now here we are.
I am a long strider and I strike my feet too hard when I'm tired, but I think I make up for it by using my lower body muscles more. It helps offset the extra pressure I am putting on my feet. I'm by no means tall, but I'm definitely not short. 6'1. My theory is this short step thing works for shorter runners. It is awkward to try to long stride if your body isn't made up to do it, I can see where shortening it up can be a means for getting healthier and faster. It's just that though, a theory.
I heard about this short step thing a few years ago and it hasn't been broken as myth yet so maybe there is something to it, but i said the same thing a year ago about vff after being skeptical forever and now here we are.
I am a long strider and I strike my feet too hard when I'm tired, but I think I make up for it by using my lower body muscles more. It helps offset the extra pressure I am putting on my feet. I'm by no means tall, but I'm definitely not short. 6'1. My theory is this short step thing works for shorter runners. It is awkward to try to long stride if your body isn't made up to do it, I can see where shortening it up can be a means for getting healthier and faster. It's just that though, a theory.
glvsav37
Footballguy
Think off it as gears on a bike...the bigger gears turn less and go furthest, while the little gears have to do 2x the amount of work to go as far. It's natural to 'want' to take bigger strides to cover more ground (big strides=more distance per step=shorter time). But in taking longer strides, you are decreasing the angle your leg is to the ground. The more acute the angle, the more likely you are landing on your heel (you toes and foot pad are pointed too vertical to be effective). When I was researching the V5 Fingers, the big point was landing on your foot pad, it and your toe spread act as natural shock absorbers.
As for my shoe....I am still very much a novice, 2--2.5 miles every other (with some wicked ### hills in there) day. I just got the On-Running Cloud Surfers
https://www.on-running.com/en-us/products/cloudsurfer
They are a tad heavy, but after a week, so far I dig them.
FUBAR
Footballguy
If you don't want to think about short strides, think about quick turnover. 180 steps per minute is ideal, most people fall quite short of that.
You may not get faster, but it should reduce injuries.
FUBAR
Footballguy
Chaka
Footballguy
Take it slow and do not run too far, maybe half of your normal distance. You are going to need time to adjust and you will definitely be sore tomorrow.
FUBAR
Footballguy
Yeah, I was feeling it around mile 4.
Other than the fingers, these aren't that different than the Saucony Shay XC2 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004O93OZ6/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o05_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 which I've ran with throughout the past 2 years including a half ironman. Less support, but similar padding (lack of).
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
As expected, my calves/thighs were killing me for the better part of a week. Really, really sore. I was feeling good enough today (six days later) to try another run doing this "short stride/mid-strike landing" style. I think it went a little better.
I still find it exhausting, but I was able to go slightly faster and perhaps wasn't quite as exhausted at the end. I had been running 6 miles, but again topped out at 2.4 miles. Then I rested for 10 minutes and did another 1.6 miles at a slightly slower pace just to get more cardio in. I am sure my calves will be again hurting tomorrow, but my goal is that in maybe 3 weeks, any soreness related to this new style will be gone. The bigger question is whether my endurance will improve, as taking these short strides does seem to take a lot more out of me.
I still find it exhausting, but I was able to go slightly faster and perhaps wasn't quite as exhausted at the end. I had been running 6 miles, but again topped out at 2.4 miles. Then I rested for 10 minutes and did another 1.6 miles at a slightly slower pace just to get more cardio in. I am sure my calves will be again hurting tomorrow, but my goal is that in maybe 3 weeks, any soreness related to this new style will be gone. The bigger question is whether my endurance will improve, as taking these short strides does seem to take a lot more out of me.
FUBAR
Footballguy
Although I'm also sore, it's not that bad. Probably because I used other minimalist shoes first. I do find these force short strides which is pretty much the point. Heart rate stays low, in MAF range which is also good. I won't race with these (yet) but they're great for a change up 4-6 miles
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
Again, I'm a pretty new runner, and I'm completely new to mid-foot running. So I'm fine with all the soreness: I know that when you work out a muscle you generally don't, you're sore for awhile. I actually am curious about switching to a minimalist shoe, but first I want to get more used to this style of running.FUBAR said:
What I'm not noticing is the it being easy. My heart rate -- I think, I'm not measuring it or anything -- is higher now. I'm really, really tired after the run, probably not too much different than where I was after 6 miles using my old way. Anyway, I'm perfectly willing to try this out for awhile: my hope is that (1) my knees don't hurt, (2) within a month, I'm back up to being able to run at least 5 miles, and (3) my speed is close to where it used to be (not that my speed was ever "good" but I feel pretty slow now).
It seems to me that I'm using more energy to go the same distance now by taking so many steps, but I understand that most people seem to say the opposite is true. So basically I need to check back in a month or so.
FUBAR
Footballguy
You're right that it takes time.
New runners could benefit from a heart rate monitor. You should take it slow at first, the hrm will help you keep within an appropriate effort. As you gain experience going purely by perceived effort can be good, but you should develop your feel for it first. I'd say it's just my opinion, but many sports doctors and trainers will say the same.
Emerson Biggens
Footballguy
Friday morning I was in line at a convenience store to get ice. I was 3rd in line. 1st in line was a doughy, lily white dude with these vibram shoes on. Looked totally ridiculous. The second guy in line was a black guy that looked like LL Cool J. He must have stared at those shoes for 3 minutes straight like the guy had ladies high heels on or something!
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
Well tonight was pretty incredible.
Worked all day, and decided to go home for a run when I got home at 9:30. Figured I'd try to get to 4 miles, but if not, oh well.
Focused very seriously on short striding. My first mile was at 9:50, which is really slow for me (I had been doing my first mile at about 8:40 before switching to this style). I usually take about 75 second walk breaks at the 1.2 mile, 2.5 mile, and 3.7m places when I do my 5-mile run. When I do a 6 mile run, I take 60 second walk breaks right after miles 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.
So I was annoyed at my slow pace, but I noticed I wasn't tired, so I decided not to take a walk break. Got to 2.5 miles and while I was a little winded, it wasn't that bad so I said f it, let's just keep going. At the 3.7 mile mark, I was feeling pretty good and said if I've made it this far, I might as well go 5 miles without running. I then upped my pace and ran the 5th mile at like 9:20, which was the fastest mile I did tonight. But I still wasn't that tired, so I just kept going another mile, and did the 6th mile in under 9 minutes.
So I ran 6 miles without taking a single walk break. I don't know if I've ever in my life done more than 3 miles without a walk break. Pretty freakin' weird to me, but I guess this going slow thing really helps. I did the full 6 miles in around 57:30. Now in my old long-stridin', heel-strikin' days, I think I did 6 miles in around 56 minutes, and that's with 5 walk breaks. So I'm going quite a bit slower, but presumably this is much healthier on my body. I bet my time will go up soon, too, seeing as how I suddenly went from 2.4 miles to 6 miles in about a week.
All of this is a long way of saying I think I'm a convert to this short striding, mid-foot striking, thing. It was really weird being able to run for an hour without stopping. I'm still kind of shuked by it, because I'm pretty sure I've never run more than about 25 minutes without stopping for a walk break before.
Worked all day, and decided to go home for a run when I got home at 9:30. Figured I'd try to get to 4 miles, but if not, oh well.
Focused very seriously on short striding. My first mile was at 9:50, which is really slow for me (I had been doing my first mile at about 8:40 before switching to this style). I usually take about 75 second walk breaks at the 1.2 mile, 2.5 mile, and 3.7m places when I do my 5-mile run. When I do a 6 mile run, I take 60 second walk breaks right after miles 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.
So I was annoyed at my slow pace, but I noticed I wasn't tired, so I decided not to take a walk break. Got to 2.5 miles and while I was a little winded, it wasn't that bad so I said f it, let's just keep going. At the 3.7 mile mark, I was feeling pretty good and said if I've made it this far, I might as well go 5 miles without running. I then upped my pace and ran the 5th mile at like 9:20, which was the fastest mile I did tonight. But I still wasn't that tired, so I just kept going another mile, and did the 6th mile in under 9 minutes.
So I ran 6 miles without taking a single walk break. I don't know if I've ever in my life done more than 3 miles without a walk break. Pretty freakin' weird to me, but I guess this going slow thing really helps. I did the full 6 miles in around 57:30. Now in my old long-stridin', heel-strikin' days, I think I did 6 miles in around 56 minutes, and that's with 5 walk breaks. So I'm going quite a bit slower, but presumably this is much healthier on my body. I bet my time will go up soon, too, seeing as how I suddenly went from 2.4 miles to 6 miles in about a week.
All of this is a long way of saying I think I'm a convert to this short striding, mid-foot striking, thing. It was really weird being able to run for an hour without stopping. I'm still kind of shuked by it, because I'm pretty sure I've never run more than about 25 minutes without stopping for a walk break before.
brun
Footballguy
If you purchased these and want some cash back. There's a class action lawsuit covering most of the models sold in the last few years that can get you $20-$30.
https://www.fivefingerssettlement.com/
https://www.fivefingerssettlement.com/
Similar threads
