Marathoning in Brand New Shoes
View Full Version : Marathoning in Brand New Shoes
Anyone ever done it? I am considering it. I had a great 10 miler last night in a brand new pair of
Mizuno Wave Mavericks & a new pair Gel Heel inserts..despite being tired from a long day of work.
And this is also the first time I've worn that specific model. I was pleased..surprised...I just
retired a pair of Wave Creations, great great shoe...a first timer for me..that model though took me
about 75 miles to break that shoe in...however it did give me a sweet spot for about 300 miles to
it's credit.
I always have a great great run in that "first run" in a pair of shoes "I know". Maybe it's
psychological....but who in the heck came up with this "wisdom" of breaking in shoes as a "must"
anyway? I question if that Runner's Rule of Thumb still applies in 2003 w/todays
shoes/technologies...
Today's shoes are often seemingly perfectly flexible (at least for my/my style) on day one. Not just
the flats but the stability shoes too. I love NB 1210 and now the 1220...and that shoe's always
proved to need no break-in period
imo. I'm starting to think this "you must break a shoe in" is wisdom of a day/period when
shoes were made of different materials. If you know a shoes properties and it's
sufficiently flexible on day "one"...where's the downside in racing in a brand new, never
worn, pair of shoes?
I absolutely love that first run in a pair of new shoes...and so I'm thinking about wearing a shoe I
know, but a brand new never worn pair for an upcoming Marathon. Anyone ever done this? Can we now
retire this "break-in" period is a "must" rule?
Andrew....
In article <20030917100557.23341.00000839@mb-m19.aol.com>, Globaldisc wrote:
> I absolutely love that first run in a pair of new shoes...and so I'm thinking about wearing a shoe
> I know, but a brand new never worn pair for an upcoming Marathon. Anyone ever done this? Can we
> now retire this "break-in" period is a "must" rule?
I simply don't believe this "rule". However, I wouldn't want to use a marathon to experiment with a
new pair of shoes either. I'd want at least one long run in them first. I'd consider racing in never
worn shoes, but not the marathon.
Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
My experience has been that my NB 877, 878, etc. have needed no breaking in. Last week I put on a
new pair and ran 3 miles, then 8, then 24. They felt great from the start.
The concern I would have in a marathon is that, on occasion, I have had some weird stitching or glue
or something that needs a little attention on a new pair, and if you haven't worn them around at
least a little bit, you might not realize the problem until you have a blister at mile 11 or
something.
Brian Jones "Globaldisc" <globaldisc@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030917100557.23341.00000839@mb-m19.aol.com...
> Anyone ever done it? I am considering it. I had a great 10 miler last
night
> in a brand new pair of Mizuno Wave Mavericks & a new pair Gel Heel inserts..despite being tired
> from a long day of work. And this is also
the
> first time I've worn that specific model. I was pleased..surprised...I
just
> retired a pair of Wave Creations, great great shoe...a first timer for
me..that
> model though took me about 75 miles to break that shoe in...however it did
give
> me a sweet spot for about 300 miles to it's credit.
>
> I always have a great great run in that "first run" in a pair of shoes "I know". Maybe it's
> psychological....but who in the heck came up with this "wisdom" of breaking in shoes as a "must"
> anyway? I question if that
Runner's
> Rule of Thumb still applies in 2003 w/todays shoes/technologies...
>
> Today's shoes are often seemingly perfectly flexible (at least for my/my
style)
> on day one. Not just the flats but the stability shoes too. I love NB
1210
> and now the 1220...and that shoe's always proved to need no break-in
period
> imo. I'm starting to think this "you must break a shoe in" is wisdom of
a
> day/period when shoes were made of different materials. If you know a
shoes
> properties and it's sufficiently flexible on day "one"...where's the
downside
> in racing in a brand new, never worn, pair of shoes?
>
> I absolutely love that first run in a pair of new shoes...and so I'm
thinking
> about wearing a shoe I know, but a brand new never worn pair for an
upcoming
> Marathon. Anyone ever done this? Can we now retire this "break-in"
period is
> a "must" rule?
>
> Andrew....
After 12-15 miles, the running system (feet, socks, shoes, biomechanics etc.)that left the front
door has probably changed. You need to see how your shoe accomodates these changes. Some shoes, like
my 2080's, are pretty much as they are going to be out of the box. My NB764's, however, are a bit
wobbly for the first 25 or so miles until they "bed in". Your marathon shoes really need at least
one longish run so that there will be no surprises come race day.
Globaldisc wrote:
> Anyone ever done it? I am considering it. I had a great 10 miler last night in a brand new pair of
> Mizuno Wave Mavericks & a new pair Gel Heel inserts..despite being tired from a long day of work.
> And this is also the first time I've worn that specific model. I was pleased..surprised...I just
> retired a pair of Wave Creations, great great shoe...a first timer for me..that model though took
> me about 75 miles to break that shoe in...however it did give me a sweet spot for about 300 miles
> to it's credit.
>
> I always have a great great run in that "first run" in a pair of shoes "I know". Maybe it's
> psychological....but who in the heck came up with this "wisdom" of breaking in shoes as a "must"
> anyway? I question if that Runner's Rule of Thumb still applies in 2003 w/todays
> shoes/technologies...
>
> Today's shoes are often seemingly perfectly flexible (at least for my/my style) on day one. Not
> just the flats but the stability shoes too. I love NB 1210 and now the 1220...and that shoe's
> always proved to need no break-in period
> imo. I'm starting to think this "you must break a shoe in" is wisdom of a day/period when shoes
> were made of different materials. If you know a shoes properties and it's sufficiently
> flexible on day "one"...where's the downside in racing in a brand new, never worn, pair of
> shoes?
>
> I absolutely love that first run in a pair of new shoes...and so I'm thinking about wearing a shoe
> I know, but a brand new never worn pair for an upcoming Marathon. Anyone ever done this? Can we
> now retire this "break-in" period is a "must" rule?
>
> Andrew....
>
>
--
Random number generation is too vital a task to be left to chance.
In article <20030917100557.23341.00000839@mb-m19.aol.com>, Globaldisc <globaldisc@aol.com> wrote:
>Anyone ever done it? I am considering it.
I've done it, but not by choice. A few excerpts from my report:
... On Thursday, took my shoes out to go for a 4 - mile run. Some sort of rot had occurred and
*both* uppers had splits in them about 2 inches long.
... At the race packet pickup on Fri, they had a flea market and I bought a pair of Saucony
flats. Much better but *no* chance to give them a significant test. Ran 10 min or so on Saturday
- so far so good.
[the race]
... Blood has soaked through my left shoe. My toes have no skin in a couple of places, but I
couldn't have hoped for less trouble with a brand-new pair of shoes.
Full report:
http://groups.google.ca/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=9tb139%24siq%241%40watserv3.uw-
aterloo.ca
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 16:40:58 GMT, "Brian Jones" <firstpres@turtlecreek.net> wrote:
>My experience has been that my NB 877, 878, etc. have needed no breaking in. Last week I put on a
>new pair and ran 3 miles, then 8, then 24. They felt great from the start.
>
>The concern I would have in a marathon is that, on occasion, I have had some weird stitching or
>glue or something that needs a little attention on a new pair, and if you haven't worn them around
>at least a little bit, you might not realize the problem until you have a blister at mile 11 or
>something.
>
>
This is one reason all shoes should get a slight breakin period, another is that stitching isn't
always tight in all the right places, but as you run in them it and the leather and nylon also
stretch. Your points about a loose thread or dab of glue are right on too.
Your marathon shoes really need at least one longish run so that there will be no surprises
come race day.
____
That's my point...I don't discover surprises in shoes "I Know".... the same exact model I've been
training in...just a brand new fresh pair, that's all. And as for "bedding"?...I'll take the new
fresh springy bouncy sensation any day over a bedded fit. The sensory sensation for myt
feet/legs/knees of new shoes is so envirgorating....that I'm considering wearing a fresh pair of
what I will exclusively train in 30 days prior to the race....we'll see....but since I always have a
great great run w/a brand new pair of shoes....I figure it would only make sense to have some on
race day.....
Here's a laugh for you. I was making some browser changes while I was composing the reply to your
original post. Was surprised not to see my reply to you. Was even more surprised to read your reply
to what I thought was my "non post". Turns out I managed to killfile myself. Too funny not to admit
the faux pas. Good luck with the new shoes.
Globaldisc wrote:
> Your marathon shoes really need at least one longish run so that there will be no surprises come
> race day.
> ____
>
> That's my point...I don't discover surprises in shoes "I Know".... the same exact model I've been
> training in...just a brand new fresh pair, that's all. And as for "bedding"?...I'll take the new
> fresh springy bouncy sensation any day over a bedded fit. The sensory sensation for myt
> feet/legs/knees of new shoes is so envirgorating....that I'm considering wearing a fresh pair of
> what I will exclusively train in 30 days prior to the race....we'll see....but since I always have
> a great great run w/a brand new pair of shoes....I figure it would only make sense to have some on
> race day.....
--
Random number generation is too vital a task to be left to chance.
Globaldisc wrote:
> Anyone ever done it? I am considering it. I had a great 10 miler last night in a brand new pair of
> Mizuno Wave Mavericks & a new pair Gel Heel inserts..despite being tired from a long day of work.
I can't speak for the Wave Mavericks but I did a 100 miles race on a new pair of 2080's with 10
miles. I had no shoe problems albeit some tired legs but I attribute that to staying up past my
bedtime in the race.
--
Doug Freese dfreeseNOBS@hvc.rr.com
globaldisc@aol.com (Globaldisc) wrote in message
news:<20030917100557.23341.00000839@mb-m19.aol.com>...
> I absolutely love that first run in a pair of new shoes...and so I'm thinking about wearing a shoe
> I know, but a brand new never worn pair for an upcoming Marathon. Anyone ever done this? Can we
> now retire this "break-in" period is a "must" rule?
My own experience with new shoes is similar to yours. While I've never run a long run in a brand new
pair of shoes I find that they feel the same on the first day as they will in a month or so. Maybe
we're just lucky that way.
I think it it tempting fate to run a marathon in brand new shoes. There might be a bad spot of
stitching that will rub you the wrong way and the only way you'll find out about it is 16 miles. It
is a roll of the dice and I'd say you've got a 50 - 50 chance of it working out.
my $0.02 Andy
>
> Andrew....
On 17 Sep 2003 14:05:57 GMT, globaldisc@aol.com (Globaldisc) wrote:
>Anyone ever done it? I am considering it. I had a great 10 miler last night in a brand new pair of
>Mizuno Wave Mavericks & a new pair Gel Heel inserts..despite being tired from a long day of work.
>And this is also the first time I've worn that specific model. I was pleased..surprised...I just
>retired a pair of Wave Creations, great great shoe...a first timer for me..that model though took
>me about 75 miles to break that shoe in...however it did give me a sweet spot for about 300 miles
>to it's credit.
>
>I always have a great great run in that "first run" in a pair of shoes "I know". Maybe it's
>psychological....but who in the heck came up with this "wisdom" of breaking in shoes as a "must"
>anyway? I question if that Runner's Rule of Thumb still applies in 2003 w/todays
>shoes/technologies...
>
Have you done a "first run" of 20+ miles ? The feet swell alot more on a 20+ miler as opposed to a
4-8 mile run. Is there a difference in available room in a broken-in pair versus a virgin pair that
a short "first run" might not reveal ?
If you successfully did a 20+ mile "first run", then go for
it. The only downside is a defective pair of shoes possibly flushing down the toilet months of
preparation.
JR
On 18 Sep 2003 11:22:21 -0700, ishky@earthlink.net (amh) wrote:
>My own experience with new shoes is similar to yours. While I've never run a long run in a brand
>new pair of shoes I find that they feel the same on the first day as they will in a month or so.
>Maybe we're just lucky that way.
It's not luck, you're just good at selecting your shoes. I can't tell you how many people have told
me they bought shoes even though they didn't feel right, just because it was a major brand.
>
>I think it it tempting fate to run a marathon in brand new shoes. There might be a bad spot of
>stitching that will rub you the wrong way and the only way you'll find out about it is 16 miles. It
>is a roll of the dice and I'd say you've got a 50 - 50 chance of it working out.
>
Personally I'd hate to not finish a marathon (it's never happened yet) cause I took the chance
with new shoes. Think of all those hours of wasted training all because of an errant glue blob.
Why risk it?
Da man wrote:
>
> This is one reason all shoes should get a slight breakin period, another is that stitching isn't
> always tight in all the right places, but as you run in them it and the leather and nylon also
> stretch. Your points about a loose thread or dab of glue are right on too.
So to play devil's advocate, is that one mile or 100 miles? :)
--
Doug Freese dfreeseNOBS@hvc.rr.com
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 12:42:42 GMT, Doug Freese <dfreese@hvc.rr.com> wrote:
>> This is one reason all shoes should get a slight breakin period, another is that stitching isn't
>> always tight in all the right places, but as you run in them it and the leather and nylon also
>> stretch. Your points about a loose thread or dab of glue are right on too.
>
>So to play devil's advocate, is that one mile or 100 miles? :)
Is what 1 mile or 100?
Da man wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 12:42:42 GMT, Doug Freese <dfreese@hvc.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>This is one reason all shoes should get a slight breakin period, another is that stitching isn't
>>>always tight in all the right places, but as you run in them it and the leather and nylon also
>>>stretch. Your points about a loose thread or dab of glue are right on too.
>>
>>So to play devil's advocate, is that one mile or 100 miles? :)
>
>
> Is what 1 mile or 100?
The time you call "a slight breakin period?'
--
Doug Freese dfreeseNOBS@hvc.rr.com
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 21:21:16 GMT, Doug Freese <dfreese@hvc.rr.com> wrote:
>The time you call "a slight breakin period?'
There's no set time, it's just a good idea to wear them to work, or **** kickin' for a day or two,
or until they feel less stiff than most new shoes do.
Automatic Translations (Powered by
):
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by
vBSEO 3.3.0
