unexpected shoe quandry

[Chris Smith]

I am planning to run a marathon two weeks from now in a medium-worn pair of NB763s, a proven
marathon shoe for me. Just recently, I've begun doing some shorter to medium-distance runs in a new
pair of NB831s, which are a few ounces lighter than the 763s. Not surprisingly, I feel a little
faster in the lighter shoes, which appear to have significantly less heel buildup in construction. I
know the dictum--nothing new on marathon day, and I am sort of gritting my teeth about this one and
planning to stick with the 763s despite the temptation to go lighter. My longest possible run in the
new shoes before the marathon would be 12 miles. The fit and running comfort of the new shoes seems
fine. Anyone care to talk me out of my conservative approach and argue for taking a shot on the new
shoes? I am more time-goal oriented this race than in the past, so ounces could matter over the long
haul I guess.

Chris

[Globaldisc]

1). you'll probably make 324,000 strides/steps in the marathon. why do that in a heavier shoe?

2). heck, you've done 12 miles in the shoe and it was fine, it's not a flat, there's no basis to
assume the shoe is not spec'ed for 24 miles.

3). this entire question is silly, and if you honestly ask me both of those shoes are losers,
complete garbage and i would not walk a block in those clunkers! (just having some fun...hee hee).

Andrew..

[Zb]

"Chris Smith" <cswriter@adelphia.net> wrote in message news:3E3FEC01.D50F2FD@adelphia.net...
> I am planning to run a marathon two weeks from now in a medium-worn pair of NB763s, a proven
> marathon shoe for me. Just recently, I've begun doing some shorter to medium-distance runs in a
> new pair of NB831s, which are a few ounces lighter than the 763s. Not surprisingly, I feel a
> little faster in the lighter shoes, which appear to have significantly less heel buildup in
> construction. I know the dictum--nothing new on marathon day, and I am sort of gritting my teeth
> about this one and planning to stick with the 763s despite the temptation to go lighter. My
> longest possible run in the new shoes before the marathon would be 12 miles. The fit and running
> comfort of the new shoes seems fine. Anyone care to talk me out of my conservative approach and
> argue for taking a shot on the new shoes? I am more time-goal oriented this race than in the past,
> so ounces could matter over the long haul I guess.

I don't want to give advice in case it goes wrong for you. What I would say was that if I were in
your position, I would go for it. If I had no probs running a 12 miler, I don't see why I would
suffer over 26 miles. If you are really time oriented then it may well be worth the minor risk.

[Jean S. Barto]

What I'd do is get another new pair of the *old reliables*--the NB 763--and run some short to medium
runs in them, to get 20 to 30 miles in them, before the marathon. A lighter shoe is not always best
in a marathon, especially if you're a middle or back of the pack runner, or someone who is other
than a neutral/efficient runner. Stride and foot plant inefficiencies that are minimal in shorter
races (and even half marathons) can come up and bite you in a marathon, and if this race is
especially important (personal goals or BQ chance), don't mess up your chances with untried shoes!

Just my two cents--

Jean in VA

"Globaldisc" <globaldisc@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030204124555.10778.00000105@mb-bk.aol.com...
> 1). you'll probably make 324,000 strides/steps in the marathon. why do
that in
> a heavier shoe?
>
> 2). heck, you've done 12 miles in the shoe and it was fine, it's not a
flat,
> there's no basis to assume the shoe is not spec'ed for 24 miles.
>
> 3). this entire question is silly, and if you honestly ask me both of
those
> shoes are losers, complete garbage and i would not walk a block in those clunkers! (just having
> some fun...hee hee).
>
> Andrew..

[Chris Smith]

Thanks for that thoughtful reply. In effect, your solution is what I've done. My newest of three
pairs of NB763s currently in my house doesn't have THAT much mileage on it, probably only 125 miles
at most. I'm putting no more miles on them before the race, using the older 763s and a run or two in
the new 831s just for fun. You've helped me focus on the potential problems I could encounter late
in the marathon from the thousands of fractionally different landings I certainly have in the
831s--thanks, Jean. I'll stick with the tried and true and wait to take a chance with the 831s in a
half-marathon later in the year.

Oh, if only a BQ time were within my goal-set! No, merely trying to get to 4 hours for the first
time, at least as a stretch goal for this race. I think my training is sufficient, now I just need
to get my mind right, as the warden said in Cool Hand Luke.

Chris

"Jean S. Barto" wrote:

> What I'd do is get another new pair of the *old reliables*--the NB 763--and run some short to
> medium runs in them, to get 20 to 30 miles in them, before the marathon. A lighter shoe is not
> always best in a marathon, especially if you're a middle or back of the pack runner, or someone
> who is other than a neutral/efficient runner. Stride and foot plant inefficiencies that are
> minimal in shorter races (and even half marathons) can come up and bite you in a marathon, and if
> this race is especially important (personal goals or BQ chance), don't mess up your chances with
> untried shoes!
>
> Just my two cents--
>
> Jean in VA
>
> "Globaldisc" <globaldisc@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20030204124555.10778.00000105@mb-bk.aol.com...
> > 1). you'll probably make 324,000 strides/steps in the marathon. why do
> that in
> > a heavier shoe?
> >
> > 2). heck, you've done 12 miles in the shoe and it was fine, it's not a
> flat,
> > there's no basis to assume the shoe is not spec'ed for 24 miles.
> >
> > 3). this entire question is silly, and if you honestly ask me both of
> those
> > shoes are losers, complete garbage and i would not walk a block in those clunkers! (just having
> > some fun...hee hee).
> >
> > Andrew..

[Jean S. Barto]

Glad I could help, Chtis--let us know how your marathon goes, and especially how your feet/legs held
up the last 8 miles or so!

Jean in VA (hoping that the warm weather today stays around!)

"Chris Smith" <cswriter@adelphia.net> wrote in message news:3E400F1F.C49A501D@adelphia.net...
> Thanks for that thoughtful reply. In effect, your solution is what I've
done. My
> newest of three pairs of NB763s currently in my house doesn't have THAT
much
> mileage on it, probably only 125 miles at most. I'm putting no more miles
on
> them before the race, using the older 763s and a run or two in the new
831s just
> for fun. You've helped me focus on the potential problems I could
encounter late
> in the marathon from the thousands of fractionally different landings I certainly have in the
> 831s--thanks, Jean. I'll stick with the tried and
true and
> wait to take a chance with the 831s in a half-marathon later in the year.
>
> Oh, if only a BQ time were within my goal-set! No, merely trying to get to
4
> hours for the first time, at least as a stretch goal for this race. I
think my
> training is sufficient, now I just need to get my mind right, as the
warden said
> in Cool Hand Luke.
>
> Chris
>
> "Jean S. Barto" wrote:
>
> > What I'd do is get another new pair of the *old reliables*--the NB
763--and
> > run some short to medium runs in them, to get 20 to 30 miles in them,
before
> > the marathon. A lighter shoe is not always best in a marathon,
especially
> > if you're a middle or back of the pack runner, or someone who is other
than
> > a neutral/efficient runner. Stride and foot plant inefficiencies that
are
> > minimal in shorter races (and even half marathons) can come up and bite
you
> > in a marathon, and if this race is especially important (personal goals
or
> > BQ chance), don't mess up your chances with untried shoes!
> >
> > Just my two cents--
> >
> > Jean in VA
> >
> > "Globaldisc" <globaldisc@aol.com> wrote in message
> > news:20030204124555.10778.00000105@mb-bk.aol.com...
> > > 1). you'll probably make 324,000 strides/steps in the marathon. why do
> > that in
> > > a heavier shoe?
> > >
> > > 2). heck, you've done 12 miles in the shoe and it was fine, it's not a
> > flat,
> > > there's no basis to assume the shoe is not spec'ed for 24 miles.
> > >
> > > 3). this entire question is silly, and if you honestly ask me both of
> > those
> > > shoes are losers, complete garbage and i would not walk a block in
those
> > > clunkers! (just having some fun...hee hee).
> > >
> > > Andrew..

[Bill Rodgers]

>why do that in a heavier shoe?

Why not? Your legs will never know the difference.

Bill R.