Good video. I have seen this one and I just feel the need to say that it does not address physiological differences and doesn't actually look at the forces that a shod runner experiences because the padding of the shoe adds a distribution of the forces that are not taken into account when you have someone heel strike barefoot on a treadmill. It does look at the the rate of loading at the contact surface (shoe or foot) with different gait patterns.

As for the evolutionary argument, I get it but think it gets a little tricky once we no longer needed to run to catch our food and shoes, of any type, allowed us to work around structural faults that allowed people to survive where they previously would have not.

That being said I advocate and train towards neutral foot strike as well but am still not sold on the VFF. I just use a pair of racing flats for speed work and run properly in a pair of good trainers that fit my foot well. I haven't had a running injury in years despite drastically increasing my mileage. Good running technique is good running technique no matter what you are wearing.

The guy's story seemed awfully familiar. Then I realized he is the same Dr. Lieberman from the book "Born to Run" which I happen to be reading as we speak... Good timing.

So, I get it... I bought a pair of Merrill Trail Gloves and took them for a spin (on trails) the other day. A great experience through and through....but, my concern with road running is that humans [b][i]have not[/i][/b], for millions and millions of years, been running on [i][b]hard concrete[/b][/i]. I'm curious as to whether that's a game changer in reality.

Hard concrete is no more hard than hard packed moistureless soil

Glad to hear that we agree that heel striking is a silly practice that should not be encourage for any runner, however that study doesn't actually look at the forces of shod heel strive vs. bare foot forefoot strike. Aslo, you can run with a neutral foot strike in a standard running shoe. What it involves is slightly more plantar flexion than you would in a neutral shoe like a racing flat (nearly every flat has zero ramp). Given the passive tension of the gastrocnemius m. most people have to actively pull against the muscle increasing the amount of effort for foot placement. We probably agree on most of this, I just don't think that the shoe issue is as open and shut as this video implies. Neutral foot strike is a great improvement in understanding running technique.

[quote=paganopj]So, I get it... I bought a pair of Merrill Trail Gloves and took them for a spin (on trails) the other day. A great experience through and through....but, my concern with road running is that humans [b][i]have not[/i][/b], for millions and millions of years, been running on [i][b]hard concrete[/b][/i]. I'm curious as to whether that's a game changer in reality. [/quote]

I don't think it's a game changer at all. The more I study bio mechanics and sports the more I feel that good technique is good technique in just about all conditions. To me the game changer is that we no longer starve to death if we carry a gene that makes our feet not conducive to running like we would have if we were hunter gatherers.

I disagree that there is a problem with heel striking. You can have good heel striking form and good neutral form, but neither is necessarily better.

Here is an article from USA Triathlon that addresses the issue. As you can see in the article, the majority of elite triathletes are heel strikers. It even discusses how Haile Gebrselassie purposefully transitioned from midstrike to heel strike when transitioning from 10k to marathon. He then became the first to break 2hr 4 minutes and has the official marathon record.

The article also talks about how changing your strike from heel to mid can cause injuries rather than decrease them.

If you run properly (i.e. roll your foot from heel to toe after striking) you can run barefoot and heel strike just fine. I disagree completely with the evolution argument. He even discusses converting the forefoot strike to "rotational energy." Well, a good heel striker will do the same with a heel strike and convert the heel strike to rotational energy. If you took in a group of world class heel strikers I bet you wouldn't see the spikes they saw in the graphs with average runners.

As a disclaimer, I have some five fingers and I've transitioned from heel striking to midfoot striking and back. I'm faster with heel striking and more prone to injuries with midfoot striking.

Obviously, everyone is different and that is another reason why I had to speak up against the heel-strike hate :)

(It looks like you have to log in to read the article, it's in the summer 2011 USA triathlon magazine with the Bennetts on the cover.)

[quote=TaoSurfing][quote=jnrice][quote=paganopj] To me the game changer..... [/quote]

Ha ha, the great irony .... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jREaZYB8ozY[/quote][/quote]

Yes, this and the New Balance commercials are tied for the best commercials EVER! It's almost enough to make me buy a pair of Brooks, but I just don't like the way that they feel on my foot.

One final thought on barefoot running. I like the idea of looking at evolution and how our foot developed to think about the best way to run, but I get frustrated when companies try to claim that their gimmick is the answer (VFF) or a trend that ignores a lot of realities (barefoot running I just saw two people bare foot heel striking down a sidewalk in Portland and I died a little inside). Not all running shoes are designed well enough to be considered improvement on a bare foot in all situations, but their are shoes that fit every foot that help protect the foot, account for the specific needs of your particular bio mechanics etc.