another reason not to buy overpriced running shoes

[The Buddy Guy]

and this is from the conservative running shoe sponsored
Runners World...

http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,5033,s6-187-0-0-
6728,00.html

[Miss Anne Throp]

My main reason..........is that I don't run.

[Lyndon]

jasonnovack@realcountryfan.com wrote:

>and this is from the conservative running shoe sponsored
>Runners World...
>
>http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,5033,s6-187-0-0-
>6728,00.html
>

What you have here is an example of how far out of it RW
(and Amby) is. I broke this story here on r.r on January
4, 2002. Maybe Amby had to get permission from Nike to
reveal the astonishing fact that you can actually run
without shoes.

Here's a link to my post about Warburton article from 2 1/2
years ago:

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-
8&frame=right&th=1266203c 54f3aa44&seekm=20020104135110.13539.00004220%40mb-
fq.aol.com#link1

SOMEDAY they'll (RW) actually figure out that it's ok to run
fast--right after they figure out that the earth isn't flat.
I'm not holding my breath.

Lyndon "Speed Kills...It kills those that don't have it!"
--US Olympic Track Coach Brooks Johnson

[Luc Wastiaux]

The Buddy Guy wrote:
> and this is from the conservative running shoe sponsored
> Runners World...
>
> http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,5033,s6-187-0-0-
> 6728,00.html

Not everyone is lucky enough to have beach close by to run
on barefoot.

--
luc wastiaux

[Philip Uglow]

On 8 Jul 2004 18:36:25 -0700, jasonnovack@realcountryfan.com (The
Buddy Guy) wrote:

>and this is from the conservative running shoe sponsored
>Runners World...
>
>http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,5033,s6-187-0-0-
>6728,00.html

A bio-mechanic specialist gave me an article earlier this
year that basically said the less between you and the ground
the better. Adding cushioning causes wasted energy, like
running in the sand. If I find the article I'll post it.

[Donovan Rebbech]

On 2004-07-09, Lyndon <airlyndon@aol.comnospam> wrote:
> jasonnovack@realcountryfan.com wrote:
>
>>and this is from the conservative running shoe sponsored
>>Runners World...
>>
>>http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,5033,s6-187-0-0-
>>6728,00.html
>>
>
> What you have here is an example of how far out of it RW
> (and Amby) is. I broke this story here on r.r on January
> 4, 2002. Maybe Amby had to get

2 years or so out is actually remarkably good by their
standards.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

[Bill]

Philip Uglow wrote:
> On 8 Jul 2004 18:36:25 -0700,
> jasonnovack@realcountryfan.com (The Buddy Guy) wrote:
>
>> and this is from the conservative running shoe sponsored
>> Runners World...
>>
>> http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,5033,s6-187-0-0-
>> 6728,00.html
>
> A bio-mechanic specialist gave me an article earlier this
> year that basically said the less between you and the
> ground the better. Adding cushioning causes wasted
> energy, like running in the sand. If I find the article
> I'll post it.

If you see the feet of someone who does not wear shoes at
all and compare them, they have a leathery layer and are not
compressed by shoes. It takes a lot of dedication to
replicate this.

Cushioning simulates somewhat the absorption of unpaved
surfaces, sand, dirt, grass, leaves and mulch for which our
feet evolved.

The added cushioning that simulates natural surfaces places
fewer demands on the legs to absorb shock. This can be a
huge efficiency savings.