Gear Review: Newton Distance

Newton's third law states that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. That's a law of physics and occurs no matter what shoe you're using. But what if there was a way to maximize that equal and opposite reaction, such that less of the ground reaction force is wasted, and is instead maximized to propel you into your next stride? The first time I heard of this concept was in 2001, when one of my high school XC teammates announced that she had heard of Nike producing a shoe that was supposed to bounce you into your next stride (for perspective, this girl grew up to be a cyclist and and engineer, so she probably loves gear and technology, but in high school, none of us knew anything about shoes). Unfortunately, the Nike Shox turned out to just have some stupid spring shaped heel made out of EVA and not even be a real running shoe (nothing wrong with EVA, as most shoes use it, but this shoe didn't do what my friend had hoped it would). The next time I heard about it was the infamous Spira shoes, which put actual springs in the forefoot and ignited way more controversy on LetsRun than...well, actually everything ignites controversy on LetsRun, so nevermind. Then a few of my friends started wearing Newton. These were real runners who needed real running shoes; runners who weren't about to settle for gimmicky nonsense. Runners who wanted to do everything to maximize their performance, but weren't about to resort to banned technology (I still have no idea whether those Spiras were actually banned or not). Well, after hearing enough of them rave about these shoes and getting several emails from readers asking if I had tried Newtons, I figured it was time to try out the Newton Distance.

More on Footstrike and Some Other Random Stuff

Actually I lied with that title. I don't really have any comments on footstrike. Just some fun with the video camera after the jump. Video was taken after a run, so I was tired enough that this is my natural stride, not some stupid thing I decided to make up for first five minutes of running. All of this was done at my relaxed easy day pace. There were also a lot more run-throughs than the eight here, but I just grabbed one from each direction/view/shoe when I was editing. Camera is a Canon something or other (that really narrows it down...I feel like the people who go into a running store and say "My current shoes are Brooks."). Shoes are the Brooks Launch and Brooks Pure Connect.

No One Perfect Way to Run

The latest article to sweep the running world is Christopher McDougall's New York Times article and video on how to run. The article is harmless enough...obviously it's skewed towards McDougall's way of thinking, and like any opinion piece, it only shows one side of the argument, but it doesn't present anything that actually stuck out to me as factually wrong (unlike his book, which has some incorrect details like the assertion that Nike invented the raised heel, when there were actually running shoes with raised heels on the market before Nike was even founded). The video is...odd. McDougall comes off a bit like a car salesman, telling people that there is only one way to run and 85% of people are running "wrong," and then showing people how to do the same barefoot sprint drills that the rest of us have been doing for years, calling it a foolproof method to running the "correct" way. Only lots of people who are running "wrong" are pretty fast...and if someone has gotten themselves to the elite level running "wrong," are they really wrong?

Cadence and the Magic Number of 180

It seems that everyone has been told that the ideal cadence is 180 steps per minute. The great Jack Daniels himself has stated that a slow cadence is associated with overstriding and increased injury rates. For a long time, this has been undisputed. A cadence of 180 was king. However, lately this magic number seems to be something people are questioning. Is a cadence of 180 really ideal for every person at every pace?

Pronation and Midfoot Striking, Forefoot Striking, and Heelstriking

Every so often I hear someone say that they know they have a neutral gait because they are a midfoot or forefoot striker, and overpronation is the domain of heelstrikers. They claim that because they don't heelstrike, it's impossible for them to overpronate and they don't need a shoe with any stability (though the idea that neutral shoes have no stability is also a myth). Similarly, I sometimes hear of someone well-meaning but ill-informed trying to push a minimal shoe on someone just because they midfoot or forefoot strike, without actually doing a gait analysis. While a midfoot or forefoot striker may or may not actually have a neutral gait, the idea that every midfoot and forefoot striker is a neutral pronator is absolutely false.

Are we messing with form and shoes as a substitute for hard training?

Everywhere I look today, I see information on "the perfect running form." Articles on how to move from an ungainly heelstrike to a beautiful stride where your midfoot gently kisses the ground. How you should ditch your heavy foamboat foot coffin trainers with their high wedge heels and go to a minimalist zero-drop shoe that promotes good form. How this will all help you run faster, more efficiently, and injury-free. I can hardly go to a running website or forum anymore without being bombarded with information overload on form and shoes! And people are eating this information up too, to the point that I see more questions about running form and shoes than about training!

I know a lot of runners. There's a lot of variation as far as form goes, and as far as what shoes they wear. There are a lot of heel strikers, some midfoot strikers, and even a few forefoot strikers. And their shoe choices run the gamut from traditional trainers with a high level of cushioning and stability to completely barefoot. And it's not like the slow ones are the heel strikers who wear heavy trainers...my fastest friend is a heel striker who primarily wears the Brooks Defyance, a neutral trainer with a 12mm heel-toe differential and a high level of inherent stability for a shoe of its class (yes, neutral shoes have support built in). However, there is one thing that all of the fast ones have in common...they all work their effin' asses off.