The shoes I run in, ran in and revere

All hail the OG Kinvara!

Unless you are a runner who follows in the barefoot steps of Abebe Bikila, chances are that you've put some time into selecting, using and eventually discarding your running shoes. In the ten years since running became an important part of my lifestyle, I've probably owned over 30 pairs of trainers. I still have a lot of them, but quite a few have been donated or trashed due to their condition. I have one pair that I no longer use, but will never give up. Yes, I'm talking to you, original Kinvara.

Now that I no longer spend 2-3 hours a day commuting, I have more time to focus on the details of life. Upping my running from three to six days a week has caused me to pay more attention to my gear. More running means more running clothes and I'm planning to go through my sizable collection of running shirts to see what to keep or donate. Today I took on the easier task of addressing the assemblage of running shoes in my gear cabinet and you can see the results further below.

Over the years I've owned just about every major brand of running shoe: ASICS, Nike, Adidas, New Balance, Saucony, Brooks, along with some less well known brands such as Karhu, Helly Hansen, Spira and Sketchers. Many of these shoes were sent to me by manufacturers when I was maintaining Emerging Runner's sister site, Runner's Tech Review. Some shoes were worn over 1,000 miles, but a couple of pairs were donated after only a few runs.

Right now, I have three categories of running shoes in my house: 1) regular rotation, 2) special conditions and 3) decommissioned. Category three is where I'll be getting rid of some pairs. Going through my shoe collection has caused me to reflect on all my shoes and I thought I'd share those thoughts here.

REGULAR ROTATION

I try to run in a different pair every day because I read that shoes need recovery time too. Happily, I have a lot to choose from.

New Balance Zante 2

Responsive and comfortable

If I ever race again, I'll wear this pair. Low and energetic. They remind me of the Kinvara 5, but feel a little faster.

Brooks Launch 

Smooth and stable

This shoe was a surprise gift from my daughter. They would be a great everyday trainer, similar to the Adrenaline, but lighter.

Saucony Triumph ISO

If the Toyota Avalon was a shoe

When my feet are sore and I have to run, this is my go-to pair.

Saucony Kinvara 5

Light and energetic

I stopped running in these for a couple of years because of heel wear, but now they're back in the rotation. Not quite as peppy as the Zantes, but they are running royalty nonetheless.

SPECIAL CONDITIONS

These are the shoes I wear for trails, bad weather or indoor running. I keep two of these pairs in a separate storage area and was too lazy to go get them when I was photographing my upstairs collection.

Spira Stinger XLT

Subtle as a chainsaw

This was a Runner's Tech Review special. Turns out they are pretty decent shoes, but the gimmick (springs in the mid sole) is ineffective. I use them when I run on pavement in the rain. Good traction.

Helly Hansen Trail Lizard

Not a good choice for technical running

Super lightweight and great for racing on hard packed dirt trails. No rock plate so they can be punishing on sharp stones and roots.

Brooks Cascadia 8

Unstoppable

Handles mud, rocks, scree and steep inclines like a Range Rover. Surprisingly runnable on pavement.

Saucony Kinvara 3

700+ miles on the treadmill

This was originally my primary 10K and half marathon shoe. I switched them to treadmill duty when I got the 5s. They still look brand new.

Karhu Fast 2

Alternative treadmill runners

These shoes were incredibly awkward on the road and only slightly better for track intervals. Stiffness lessened with use and they are now a decent treadmill and elliptical shoe.

DECOMMISSIONED

An interesting assortment of the good, the weird and the ugly. Sadly, the shoes with this little guy at the end of the description (🏃) will be recycled because they are no longer runnable.

Saucony Virrata

Minimal and cushy

I really liked these shoes because they were super light and near zero drop from heel to toe. I wore them out quickly because the out sole is primarily blown EVA. Tried them on to see if they were still runnable, but alas, they are done. 🏃

Brooks Pure Drift

Commonly asked at races: WTF are those?

Brooks sent me these as part of a wear testing program. Liked them a lot but wished I'd asked for a half size larger shoe. I thought they were as minimal as a shoe could get and then Saucony sent me the Hattoris. 🏃

Saucony Hattori

Weird but awesome

This is basically a pool shoe with better materials. No cushioning at all, no laces either. Ran a few PRs with them and used them as my daily trainers until I completely wore them out. 🏃

Saucony Kinvara

Perfect

I have never loved a running shoe as much as these original Kinvaras. I wore them out to the point where I risked knee issues running in them for more than four miles. Tried them on yesterday for the first time in seven years and they still feel perfect on my foot. No more running in them but they're staying in my collection.

Retroactive run

Old faithful - Brooks Adrenalin 10's

Today's run (street): 4.5 miles

This morning I was looking at the the spring shoe guide in the March issue of Runners World. I've always liked running shoes because they are technically designed and they look cool. Most runners view a new pair of trainers as a reason to get excited about a run, which is why so many new pairs are sold every year.

As I looked at the 2014 models, two trends occurred to me. One was that most manufacturers have moved away from minimal models but are still maintaining the concept of "low drop." This means that the height difference between the heel and forefoot is typically less than 10." The other trend is toward super-cushioned running shoes. Models like the Hoka One One have huge out-soles that resemble the old running shoes from the '80's and '90's.

 

I was an early adopter of minimal running shoes, beginning with the first Kinvaras, followed by the Grid Tangents, Hattoris,  and the Brooks Pure Drifts. Before that, I used to run in conventional shoes, my favorite being the Brooks Adrenalins. The Adrenalins are built to last. I got over 700 running miles out of my GTS-9's before I switched them to being weekend casual shoes. I had a similar experience with the 10's. In fact I still wear those every weekend.

After looking at the shoe guide, I wondered what it would be like to take the 10's out for a run after treating them as sneakers for the last three years. I love my Saucony Virratas, but I felt like a change today and figured the nicely cushioned Brooks would provide a good break. I laced up the 10's and they felt as good as ever. From the first steps off the driveway, I knew that they'd be fine, despite having over 1,000 miles on them.

I haven't run outdoors too often this year, so I'm re-acclimating to pavement. The purpose of today's run was to nudge my comfort beyond the 3 mile base that I'd defaulted to over the past two months. The shoes felt fine, but there is a difference between the 11.1 ounce Adrenalins and the 6.5 ounce Virratas. I don't know if that extra weight slowed me down compared to yesterday, but something did.

Forgetting that for the moment, I did appreciate the well cushioned feel of the classic Adrenalins. I wondered if there is a happy medium between the two types of shoes. Apparently some of the 2014 models are leaning in that direction. New materials that perform better than EVA are being used, resulting in softer cushioning and lighter weight.

I'm not sure if I'll include the Adrenalins in my primary shoe rotation, although I see no harm in using them for long easy runs. I'm remembering the foot issues I had when training for the half marathon in 2012, when I'd do 9-12 mile runs on the Bethpage bike trail every weekend. That might be a good way to build up my long base without going through that painful stage again. I also wonder if training in those heavy shoes would give me a performance boost when I return to the lighter Virratas.

A return to my happy place (City Sports)

It looks better in the picture

Today's run (treadmill): 3.1 miles

Much of today was spent in the city and I began the day with a high energy treadmill run. I'd considered running outdoors, but outside conditions looked a little soggy. I'm trying to focus on performance running as I prepare for my next race, and set the speed faster than normal. Soon after that, I was wishing the workout would end. I figured that the faster the pace, the faster the run would get done, so I steadily increased my speed.

I was pleased with my workout performance, although I regretted pushing so hard. With a full day's work ahead of me, I should have thought through the amount of effort I'd expend. I ended up doing fine and didn't fall asleep once in my meetings.

I was on my way to see friends for lunch in midtown, so I stopped into nearby City Sport to see if they had anything new. The store is only a couple of blocks from my old office and I'd go there often at lunchtime for stress relief. I'm in the market for a lightweight running raincoat and found a Brooks LSD jacket on clearance for $59. It seemed like a good deal, but unfortunately they didn't have it in my size. I consoled myself with the thought that the black and red color scheme was fairly unattractive.

Altra Instinct

Topo RR

I checked out City Sports' running shoes and saw that they'd added some interesting brands, including Altra (a zero drop brand with a wide toe bed) and Topo (a low shoe with a split toe design) that reminded me of my Brooks Pure Drifts. I decided I'd come back when I had more time to try them on.

Between all the walking in NYC and my treadmill run this morning, I'm up to 16K steps for the day. After the heavy downpours this afternoon I became concerned that I could be be rained out again tomorrow. The skies have since cleared and I'm hoping that lasts through morning.

Time for new shoes or just wishful thinking?

Ready and willing to test again!

Mondays are rest days and that's what I did today - sort of. I didn't run (or cross train) but I did get all around the city on foot. I'm happy to report that, even with all that walking, my hip is feeling much better. I'm hoping the pain won't come back tomorrow when I go out for a run. Of course, running outside may not even be an option in the morning. According to weather.com, we'll be seeing showers throughout the day.

I've been thinking about my hip pain and wondering if this a warning that my Kinvaras are beginning to break down. I haven't been wearing these shoes much lately, so it's not clear to me if there's really a correlation. I've been fortunate to get close to 500 miles on the Kinvaras and they still look good, but I've noticed some pronounced wear on parts of the outsole. I just got an email from Brooks asking that I update my testing profile. Perhaps I'll be getting another pair to evaluate, just in time.

Running shoes retire too

End of the line

Today's run (street): 3.75 miles

In today's NY Times Well section, there is an article entitled, "When to Retire a Running Shoe." It's a subject of great debate, because the answer can be different with every runner. The article doesn't provide an actual answer, but it does support my view that a shoe's cushioning level makes little difference in terms of protection. Golden Harper, the man who created Altra running shoes, suggested that a runner knows when it's time to replace, “You get a sense for it,” he said. “Nothing hurts, but it is going to soon.”

I think about that as I consider which shoes to wear during my upcoming race. My Kinvara 3's are nearing 500 miles. Though they have held up exceptionally well, I know that this was when my original Kinvaras came to their useful end. The other concern I have about the Kinvaras is that, despite their light weight, they're a little soft as a racer. I'm trying to decide whether to run in the Spira XLT's that are a little more responsive (but have their quirks), or the Brooks Pure Drift prototypes that I use primarily on the treadmill.

Today I ran in the Kinvaras around the neighborhood and I felt like I was running close to top form. The numbers didn't back that up, but I still did better than average. It may have been the stiff winds coming from the west that slowed me down, or the fact that I left a little in reserve through most of the run. I plan a more aggressive approach on Saturday. I'll run tomorrow then rest. I hope this rain moves out by morning so I can finish my taper with a street run.

Shorts success at the SOHO REI

Shorts but sweet

Today's run (street): 3.6 miles

My office is usually a ghost town on the day before a holiday weekend. Acknowledging that, my company officially closes our office at 1:00 PM. I chose to work from home this morning instead of coming in for half a day. We begin "Summer Friday's" next week, but this was the next best thing.

With no commute to worry about, I had more time to sleep in this morning. I've been feeling sleep debt lately so this additional rest was welcomed. After morning coffee and the news, I changed into my running gear and headed outside. The skies were cloudy, but free of rain. Humidity was high, but I figured that an outdoor run would be far preferable to the treadmill.

My route took me through the top of my neighborhood and then down to the bottom, and back. I ran well and ended up pacing a little better than my average. Since today was a week day, I encountered more cars than on a typical weekend morning. I spent more time than normal running on the sidewalk and was especially careful not to trip on misaligned concrete.

Although I didn't wear them today, I finally found a pair of good running shorts with pockets. Yesterday, me and KWL went downtown to check out REI's new location in SOHO that is having a big sale this week. It's an impressively large store and a good place to waste a few hours if you have them. We didn't, so we split up and headed for our respected areas of interest - cycling for him and running for me.

After considering options from Salomon, Patagonia, Mountain Hardware and REI brand, I bought a pair of Brooks Rogue Runner III's. The shorts have a 7" inseam, two side pockets, a small zipper pocket and an inside pouch. They'll be great for either the street or the trails.

Brooks's PureDrift is good news for minimalist runners

A most minimal shoe - coming Jan 2013

Today's run (street): 2.5 miles

Last night I predicted that it wouldn't rain this morning, so I set up my gear for an outdoor run. When I stepped outside, I realized that wishful thinking wasn't enough to ensure good weather conditions. I decided on the spot to run, despite the light rain that was falling. I figured, if conditions worsened, that I'd just turn around and head for home.

I didn't know it at the time, but my Garmin showed that I'd covered the first mile extremely slowly. I thought I was moving well, but it's hard to gauge your pace when you're still half asleep. The rain had let up after ten minutes so I guess I'd picked up the pace from there. I ended up averaging 9:50 for the run, which isn't all that bad.

I wore my test shoes again this morning and appreciated their minimal construction, low platform and comfort. However, I wished they were a little roomier on the lateral side, at the top. My toes do get a little squished, but so far, I've had no issues with blisters or chafing. The shoe is pre-market, so the fit will probably change many times before they launch.

Brooks announced a new model this week, with an expected launch date of January, 2013. I'm guessing I'm going to like them ; )

Two projects: Pure and Sole

Mis-Connecting with the PureConnect

Today's run (street): 4.75 miles

Yesterday I had lunch with a colleague and then headed over to City Sports to look at some new items.  I'd received an email this week from City Sports saying they had Brooks's new line of Pure Project shoes. These shoes, inspired by the minimalist running movement, have been greatly anticipated. If you follow Brooks on Twitter you might think that running in them approaches a religious experience.

My lunch mate is an avid cyclist so, while he went off to look at bike gear, I made my way to the running shoe section. I was helped by a salesperson who actually knew something about running shoes. This was a pleasant surprise because I usually get people who know very little about the differences between brands and models.

My salesman asked if I'd like to try a pair of the PureConnects, Brook's most minimal model in the Pure Project line. I tried them on and my excitement was immediately deflated when I felt how snugly the shoe wrapped my mid-foot and arch. The back and front of the shoe felt awkwardly separated. The salesperson claimed that this snugness facilitated a mid-foot landing and I told him I didn't think it was necessary to clamp my arch to do that. I did some strides in the limited space and did not think the shoes felt especially responsive.

Undeterred, the salesperson had me try on the PureFlow model which is a little more cushioned and has a stabilizing component that, interestingly, sits opposite from the medial side of the shoe. The Flow felt better on my foot than the Connect but I still didn't like it. I tried a quick "run" and felt no chemistry. My primary rule about a running shoe is never believe sales people when they say "They will feel better when you run in them." Sorry, but no. If it doesn't feel right in the store, I'm done.

The obelisk in "2001: A Space Odyssey" looked harmless too

Speaking of "projects", this weekend I will attempt to do a console-ectomy on the Sole to replace the system board that is preventing us from adjusting the speed of the treadmill. Right now, the parts are sitting in a huge box in the living room and I'm scared to look inside. I have a bad track record with "repairs" and I'm a little intimidated by the task.

Finally, I hit the local business park this morning to practice running roads with elevation. I needed to be back early, otherwise I would have headed to Bethpage. I ran to the park and circled the loop three times before heading back home. The route is not especially steep but there is a steady incline over half the distance.

Tomorrow I'm hoping to get in some speed work as I look toward next week's 5K. I may also try running some inclines on the treadmill. That is, if I don't permanently destroy the new control board today.  

First run with the Karhu Fast 2's plus a Stillwell holiday run

Yesterday's run (street): 3.5 miles
Today's run (Stillwell Woods): 6.1 miles

Apparently today is some sort of holiday because Stillwell Woods was pretty empty this morning when I arrived for my run. Just a little seasonal humor folks. Merry Christmas to those of you who celebrate and for those of us who don't, enjoy this relaxing day because tomorrow we'll all be shoveling snow.

I've been off work since Thursday afternoon and have been enjoying the time off with my family. Yesterday morning I went out for my first run with the Karhu Fast 2's. Based upon wearing them around the house, I had certain expectations for these shoes. The "Fulcrum" technology is supposed to guide a runner's landing to a spot behind the arch to facilitate forward propulsion. After lacing up the Fast 2's for my run I noticed a big difference in the feel between the front and back. I assumed that was an effect of the fulcrum and I held judgment until I took off.

My immediate reaction was to compare the shoes to the Kinvaras. While the Kinvaras are light and very flexible on toe-off, the Fast 2's are very stiff at the front. Far stiffer than any other shoe I own and I own a lot of running shoes. I tried to stay open minded about this difference and moved along fairly well until I reached a slight downhill section and noticed that the lack of flexibility was causing some misalignment in my stride. As I ran further I felt an unusual amount of strain on the ankle area at the top of my right foot. It was making my leg tired and I had barely covered a mile.

I reached a point in my route where I would run straight for a while so I picked up the pace to see how they felt in a full on run. Despite the Fast 2's promise as a speed and racing shoe I found myself missing the Kinvaras and the Adrenalins, both of which provide a more muscular response to quick turnovers. I plan to take the Fast 2's out a few more times and try them under different conditions before I judge them too harshly. They are high quality shoes and are probably ideal for runners that prefer a stiffer ride.

It seemed like a good idea to run the trails at Stillwell this morning and it turned out great. Despite 25 degree weather it all felt good. I wore my Brooks GTS 10's that I've neglected lately in favor of the Kinvaras. Even though the Adrenalins aren't trail shoes they work well on hard packed, non-technical trails like the ones I ran today. Compared to the Karhu's, the Brooks felt far more natural. I followed a course I knew well, a loop that weaves through numerous sections of the western end of the Woods. Each loop measures about two miles so I ran it three times. I only encountered a couple of mountain bikers today but I did see a surprising number of hikers and a few other runners. I felt great throughout the run and appreciated the short but steamy shower that followed. I hope that everyone is enjoying this holiday as much as I am today.

Tubes, zig-zags, bounces, shocks and resistors

K-Swiss goes tubular

A couple of weeks ago my daughter and I were on the train heading back from the city when we stopped at a station. Directly outside our window was a billboard ad for the K-Swiss Tubes running shoe. Knowing nothing of this shoe, I judged it on design alone. Built within the outsole were a series of open "tubes" that run perpendicular to the length of the shoe. The tubes were clearly designed to disperse shock and (I'm guessing) return some energy from the impact. I just remember thinking that I would never wear that shoe in public.

Adidas Mega Bouncer

Nike's Shox absorber

Reebok gets Ziggy

The Reebok ZigTech shoe provides a similar visual reaction. In the case of this shoe it's a rippled outsole (e.g., "zig-zag") that supposedly provides a flexible high energy experience. I've been amused by the marketing of the shoes and the fact that not one athlete who endorses them is known for their running. I don't know if the technology works but they sure look funny.

One model of a weird shoe that I have tried is the Adidas Mega Bounce. I like Adidas as a brand so I put on a pair out of curiosity. I expected springiness but all I felt was awkwardness. So much for that. I'd put the Mega Bounce into the same category as the Nike Shox. This shoe is built with shock absorbers in the back that remind me of the air shocks I installed on my Mustang when I was in high school. This shoe seem to be popular and they are fairly pricey but I rarely see them on the feet of real runners.

Skechers resists running

This weekend I saw an ad for Skechers SRR (Skechers Resistance Runners) that looks like a cross between those ubiquitous "Shape Ups" and a running shoe. Their website claims that dramatic gains in postural, gluteus medius and calf muscle activation (???) will come with the use of these shoes. Okay, good to know. I realize that all of the serious running shoe companies have their own unique science. Brooks has DNA and BiOMoGo, ASICS has their GEL and Trussic technologies, Saucony has "Pro Grid" and Mizuno has the Wave. At least these features are integrated into the shoe in such a way that they look like serious footwear. I could say I'm not one to judge but clearly I am. The question is, if K-Swiss or Skecher were to send me a pair of their latest models, would I give them a fair shake on Runner's Tech Review? The answer is yes. However, I guarantee most of my testing would be done in the early morning, in the dark, so I'd have the lowest chance of being seen with them in public.

Gear matters

5.1 miles at Eisenhower Park

Today's run (Eisenhower Park): 5.1 miles @ 9:23 per mile

I've said it before but I'll say it again: gear matters. I'm beginning to understand that a person's running pace is related to both their physical abilities as well as the unique conditions and variables that make up a run. Hills and heat can slow down a runner while the right weather can make a run feel effortless. A shirt that fails to wick moisture can contribute to overheating and ill fitting socks or uncomfortable running shorts can distract from a runner's focus. Every variable can yield a positive or negative influence on performance. What is a quick drying shirt worth to you on a hot, humid day? I'd say plenty. What about running shoes?

If you asked me a month ago what I averaged for pace I would have said that I run between 9:05-9:25 per mile. In a race I'd usually beat the low end of that by 20-30 seconds. Again, it's the conditions that make the difference with all those other runners helping to sweep you along. Recently I've been alternating between my mainstay Brooks Adrenalin GTS 10's and two pairs of lightweight Saucony running shoes. When I run in the Brooks I'm a solid low-9:00 miler. If I'd needed heavy motion control shoes I might be working hard to regularly break 10 minute miles. When I run in the Saucony Kinvaras I often attain paces below 9:00 per mile. If I'd always run in the Kinvaras I'd have considered myself a sub-9 minute mile runner all along.

The Saucony Grid Tangent 4's provide an even greater boost. I regularly run 8:40 minute miles with the Tangents which I consider to be a decent 5K race pace. I haven't yet raced in these shoes but I'm hoping the combination of speed boost from the shoes plus a faster pace through competition will help me beat my racing PR of 8:19 per mile. My next race is an 8K that pushed my limits last year so it will be interesting to see how the variables work on that day.

This morning I returned to Eisenhower Park to run the paths, some of which I'd traveled on a Red Cross walkathon with my family earlier in the month. I locked onto a course defined by arrows painted on the ground and followed that all around until I found myself back near where I'd started. I took a more free range route from there, circumnavigating the big pond where people sail three foot remote controlled sailboats and then passed through the Veteran's Memorial gardens. At that point I began to hear the sound of a marching band blasting out patriotic music as was fitting on this Memorial Day weekend. I finished after completing five miles and while my speed wasn't impressive it was definitely a good workout. So perhaps I may have covered more distance at a faster speed were I wearing my Sauconys. Gear definitely matters but between the GTS 10's and the Tangent 4's, it's all good.

Test new running shoes? Yes, please

The new Saucony Kinvara

Today's run: Central Park (planned)

I was recently contacted by a PR person from Saucony about an opportunity to try their new Kinvara lightweight trainer. This shoe is more neutral than what I'd normally wear but I'm interested in its low profile with a heel-to-forefoot ratio of 18/14 mm. I haven't forgotten about mid foot running but my Brooks GTS-10's are so great I would be reluctant to give them up. Given their unique nature, and their low profile the Kinvaras may make a great addition to the Emerging Runner's collection of running shoes. Besides the Brooks GTS-10's I also have pairs of GTS-9's and ASICS GEL-1130's. On the trail side I have Helly Hansen Trail Lizards for the toughest technical terrain, Adidas Response 15's for multi-surfaced trail and street running and some NB 460's that fit and perform really well despite being a "value priced" shoe.

Left out of this collection are any lightweight trainers or racing shoes. I was very interested in the Brooks Green Silence when it was announced but when the time came I opted for the 10's to replace my 600+ mile 9's. I signed up for (and was accepted to) Brook's test program but I have not been contacted to try anything. Even if I do I won't be able to talk about the shoes or mention them on this blog, per the terms of the program. No problem there, the chance to try Brooks experimental shoes is worth the silence, green or otherwise. I'm happy to try any running shoes or gear that companies want to send to me to review. I'd even try Nikes but not those silly ones with the shock absorbers on the heel.

I'm planning another Central Park run today and I'm hoping to cover some new ground north of the reservoir. I keep hearing about the hills up there and I'll see how well my training has paid off.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's probably a duck

Despite a relatively busy schedule on Friday I was bound and determined to make the trek to JackRabbit in Union Square at lunchtime. A friend of mine, who is looking for a new pair of shoes for an upcoming marathon, was planning to join me. He was working on a close deadline so he couldn't go. I decided to go anyway and hopped on the F train for the quick trip downtown. I was greeted by the sales staff and mentioned that the Brook's customer service people told me Brooks had sent a shipment of Green Silence shoes to the store. They said that was true but unfortunately the shipment had not yet arrived. They were as curious about the shoe as I was but they set my expectation that it wasn't likely to be a shoe that I would use as a daily trainer.

The Jackrabbit people are the real deal. They understand running and running shoes and we quickly moved to the subject of mid-foot striking. Mark, one of the managers, told me that he was working to transition to that style and he suggested that I try the Brooks Ravenna. This shoe replaces the Axiom and is lighter than the Adrenalin GTS 10. The Ravenna also lacks some of the stability controls of the GTS 10 so it's more of a light trainer. I tried on a pair and they felt good but, understandably, they were not as plush as the new Adrenalins. After that Mark had me try on a pair of neutral cushioned shoes (ASICS Cumulus) and put me on the treadmill to see if I pronated. The reason for using a neutral shoe is to negate any gait correction. Mark captured me on video and much to my surprise I saw that I'm still heel striking (though Mark said I move very quickly off to the toe) and that I pronate to the point where my gait is indistinguishable from that of the AFLAC duck. I clearly need stability shoes so I'm debating whether to just get the GTS 10s or buy the Ravennas which will be a better choice for mid-foot running. I'm coming back next Friday and Mark said he'd put me in some Mizunos and Saucony shoes to compare with the Brooks.

This morning my friend KWL stopped by to pick up some computer gear. We'd planned a run but were concerned about the foot-plus of snow that was predicted by morning. When he arrived there was no snow  whatsoever so we headed out and covered three miles in around 27 minutes. It was a faster pace than I've been running, helped along by KWL's energy. He reminded me a little of how it was to run with AG who was always a slight step ahead  - like a greyhound on a tether. It was a great run and great fun to have a buddy to talk to along the way. It certainly made the time go by fast. We're getting snow now so I'll see what conditions are like by tomorrow morning. I'm prepared to use my snow treads if I have to. That could be kinda fun.

What Christmas means to me

Today is Christmas day and for me that meant something very special: I could run in my neighborhood on a Friday morning without a single car on the road. While I love the energy of the holiday season where everywhere you go there are fun decorations, happy shoppers, and holiday music I also love the fact that for one day of the year (Christmas) most businesses shut down and the world becomes a very quiet place. I'm enjoying this quiet for the most part today, although I did have to sit through a two hour Alvin and the Chipmunks movie this morning.

I decided to continue my experimentation with a more upright form, shorter strides and striking with the front of my feet. I ended up running 5.6 miles at 8:59 per mile overall on this morning's run. Like yesterday, I was taking more steps per minute (averaged 85 today) but it seemed an easier effort than when I was running at 80 SPM. Although I was pleased to have broken 9:00 per mile on a 5+ mile run without working up much of a sweat I saw in my Garmin reports that I'd slowed down at around the 20 minute mark. It may be that I just need to build up my calf muscles to make it easier to increase my stride frequency. I finished my run with a final push, covering the last third of a mile at around 8:00 per mile. It felt good and again I was surprised to achieve a decent pace while feeling so relaxed.

Yesterday I spent an hour trying some shoes and I had a chance to try out the ASICS 2150s. I thought they felt much better than the 2140s that I'd considered prior to choosing the Brooks GTS 9s. I also tried both the ASICS Kayano 16s (new) and the 15s. They felt the same to me - fantastic. I'm going to give the new Brooks GTS 10s a try but unless they feel significantly better than the GTS 9s I might just pick up a pair of the Kayanos. The 15s were selling for $99, the same price as the new 2150s and GTS 10s. Of course, now that I'm running differently I may want to consider a different type of shoe. Perhaps it's time to give the Newtons a try!

Trail running as painkiller

As I prepared for this morning's elliptical workout I thought about all the mileage I'd put in over my vacation. I also thought about how it may have contributed to my nagging leg pain that started earlier this year. I'm still unsure of the cause of this pain, it may be a hamstring pull or something else entirely. I've thought numerous times about making an appointment with an orthopedist to figure it out. In the mean time it's probably a good idea to do more cross training to rest whatever gets aggravated when I run.

I checked my workout list before I stepped up on the elliptical machine and saw that I hadn't logged a session on it since June 11. I've taken every opportunity to run outdoors over the last few weeks and my early morning headlamp runs have contributed to that. I thought that an elliptical session this morning would be a nice way to use different muscles that could help strengthen my leg and lessen the pain. I then realized, for the first time in memory, that I had no pain. I was understandably happy but that made no sense to me. I ran a tough 4+ miles yesterday on the trails to top off a record mileage week. I should be hurting more, not less.

Perhaps it was the trails that made a difference. The softer surface absorbs the impact differently than running on pavement. If that's the case I wonder if I should be considering an even more cushioned shoe than the Brooks. The Asics are comfortable and it's my understanding that they represent the high end of the cushioning scale. Hard to know if it's a coincidence but I will plan more weekend runs at Bethpage and Stillwell if that's the case. Reminder to self: buy a compass.

A weekend of joyful running

I've really enjoyed running this weekend and I'll give much of the credit to my new shoes. The pleasure of running pain-free combined with the feeling of moving efficiently has often eluded me over the last couple of months. I am appreciating the Brooks although I do wish that the tongue extended higher past the throat to provide more padding when the laces are tightened. Other than that they are really great and they have quickly dispatched my leg soreness issues. I thought I might redeploy my Nikes as my office running shoes so I tried them again with the after market insoles I had recently purchased. Wearing the Brooks over the last seven days gave me an opportunity to compare the two pairs and the new insoles in the Nikes exaggerated the pronation and made me realize why I needed a stability shoe. I went back to the original insoles and that stabilized the Nikes enough to use them for another activity: a Mothers Day soccer game with my wife and kids.

As for running, I did more miles over a (two day) weekend than ever before. On top of yesterday's near six I ran 4.6 miles this morning. Like yesterday, I did this distance feeling very strong and I wasn't especially tired by the end. As I ran I worked on my form and stride and played with my pace a bit. I did the first quarter mile along a measured distance and noticed that the Garmin was tracking about 6% short. I knew I would need to Gmap my route against my total time to get my true pace but at least I knew that whatever the Garmin was reporting I had run faster and farther. I mixed up my route and covered some streets I haven't taken in a while. The whole run felt great and, for the second time this weekend, I reached the "zone" that I had heard of and read about but had never personally experienced. Where was the noble suffering that I had come to expect? Was this some great breakthrough that has propelled me from the status of beginner to something more? Had the Emerging Runner finally emerged?

Well, not exactly.

I do think that I've made progress and I'm a far better runner than I was nine months ago but much of this weekend's experience had to do with using the right gear and focusing more on duration and less on speed. My pace for today's run was 9:17 which surprised me because I thought I was moving along at a better clip. But I now know through experience that I can integrate speed into my distance runs every few minutes and gain 20 or more seconds per mile. In the meantime I'll be happy to have run 10.5 miles over two days and loved every minute of it.

Members Only

I originally assumed I would sign up for my 8K race online since the application says that you can. When I went to the New Hyde Park Runner's Club website I saw that the registration links were still set up for last year's race. I'm sure they'll sort that out somehow and, worse case, I can mail in the application. What struck me about the website were the photos of the happy club members posed in groups or running in events. I've seen similar collections on local club websites like GLIRC and LIRRC. I've seen many club members at both my recent races and was impressed by their community and by the way they clearly supported each other. I then started thinking about whether I should join a running club.

Years ago I used to run with one or two people and I didn't love the experience. Part of that was due to a mismatch in conditioning between me and them (I was constantly challenged to keep up) and part of it was environmental as I found running the streets of NYC to be stressful and dangerous. More recently I've run with AG and it's better because I'm in much better shape than I was those years ago and she is willing to stay at my pace. It's also time well spent since we are able to cover the same business discussions while running that would normally occur in my office. Some weeks back I ran with a group in Central Park and that was fun. I didn't do much talking because that's still a challenge for me when running. That's still true when I run with AG but it works fine because the focus of our weekly meeting is an update and I listen more than I talk. During the week I run alone on the treadmill and on the weekends I usually do a solitary run around my neighborhood. I find these runs to be very fulfilling and they serve as an opportunity to focus on things without distraction. When I encounter others on the road, more often than not, my counterparts are also running alone.

On the weekends I sometimes drive to the track to do my runs and I usually see groups of runners heading along the road. I've thought about being one of them rather than being just one of the people sharing the track at the High School. I ask myself which scenario fits me better and every time I conclude that I'm better off by myself. I'll admit that running with others can help you keep a faster pace. In both my races I found that having faster runners in proximity helped me run faster. With that exception I think I'm better off being a lonely runner. Much as I enjoy a community I'm not very good at groups. I enjoyed the Lululemon run and I like the runs I've done in Central Park (and elsewhere - see below) but mostly because they are discreet events: assemble, run, depart. No barbeques, fund raisers, meetings, bylaws or committees. I'm not saying these things aren't great, they're just not for me.

Last night I did my first street run with my new Brooks Adrenaline 9's. AG and I did our weekly meeting while running both directions on the George Washington Bridge which was an intimidating concept to me (fear of heights, bridges, speeding cars) but it was very different than I'd expected. The bridge itself is fairly flat with a gradual rise to the center and than a decline to the endpoints. On each end are areas where you encounter stairs and a couple of places had jogs in the path where you had to be careful not to run into a cyclist coming from the other direction. The cars were far enough away that they didn't factor in the experience and the view of the Hudson on either side was more serene than scary. We only covered about 2.3 miles but I was happy with the run and very happy that the Brooks performed well and felt good. This morning it was back to the treadmill where I ran about two miles at 8:45/mile. I'm looking forward to my Saturday run where I'm hoping to cover at least 5 miles. The Brooks are already helping my leg problem and that soreness was a wake up call for replacement that I didn't answer. Next time I'll be ready.

The shoe debate has ended

Yesterday afternoon I stopped by the Super Runner's Shop in midtown which is located a block from my office. I mentioned that I bought the Brooks Adrenaline 9's the previous day and was unhappy to later discover that they were a stability model. The man at SRS asked to look at my foot, said I had a low arch and told me that I needed a shoe that managed pronation like the GTS-9 or the Asics 2140. All the same he said he'd be happy to take back the Brooks if I was unhappy with them. I discussed all this later with AG and she said I shouldn't get hung up on whether a shoe is neutral or made for stability. The important thing was fit. I decided that I'd go back today and try on more shoes.

A funny thing happened when I got home and started packing up the Brooks for return. I'd thought about what the salesperson said about pronation and I looked at my Nikes to see if I could find evidence of that. I was very surprised to see that the outside edges of both soles (at the back) were worn quite a bit. I compared the back view of the Nikes with the back of the Brooks and saw how the Brooks were built to counteract that wear. Instead of boxing up the Brooks I tried them on again and then tried the Nikes. The fit of the Brooks was actually much better and my only issue was the tightness at the tongue. AG had told me that sometimes changing the lacing helps the fit of a shoe and I noticed that, unlike the Brooks, the Nikes did not have laces in the top holes. I took the laces out of the top holes of the Brooks, re-tied them and decided that they felt good enough for me to give them another chance.

This morning I gave the Brooks a true test on the treadmill. I changed the battery on the Garmin foot pod last night and was happy to see the 50 was once again recording distance so that wasn't going to distract me like it did on Sunday. I started at a comfortable pace and increased speed as I went. The Brooks felt very good, no complaints. I ended up running a couple of miles at an 8:39 pace. I didn't really push my speed during the run, if I had I'm sure I could have taken down the pace by ten seconds/mile.

So after all that I've decided to keep the Brooks. I told my wife this morning and she smiled and shook her head but supported me completely. I think I drove her a little crazy over the last couple of days obsessing about this purchase. I want to take the GTS 9's on a long run outdoors to really understand how they fully perform. Right now my feet and my leg feel pretty good. Brooks Adrenaline GTS 9's, I'm sorry what I said about you before. You're more than okay.

Give me the old soft shoe

#

#

My Nikes served me well for Saturday's race and it was almost with regret that I set out on Sunday to find their replacements. On the advice of experienced runners I decided to visit a local running store in Huntington where I could get some informed opinions on the right shoes to buy. The woman who helped me certainly had the right attitude and she looked at the way I walked and confirmed that I have a neutral stride. I told her I wanted a neutral cushioned shoe with a good response for a front foot runner.

I was given a number of shoes to try from Saucony, Asics, Brooks and New Balance. They all felt okay although I found one pair a bit unbalanced. After some trying and re-trying it came down to the Asics 2140's versus the Brooks Adrenaline GTS 9's. After some debate I chose the Brooks and took them home.

When I got home I looked up the shoes online and confirmed that the Brooks are more of a stability shoe for pronators (AG had warned of this) and the Asics 2140 had similar characteristics. I was deeply disappointed that I was steered toward this type of shoe despite my request for neutral cushioning. I spent the rest of the day deciding whether the Brooks, which felt okay, would be worth keeping. I ran with them on the treadmill and they felt fine but their responsiveness was not what I was hoping for. A big issue is the way they fit at the tongue, too tight against the front of my ankles. I felt like I couldn't have the laces any looser without feeling some slippage. I also think I've diagnosed the problem with my Garmin, a low battery in the foot pod. I'm hoping to find a replacement for that today.

I tried the Adrenaline GTS 9's again this morning and decided that I should be 100% happy with a pair of running shoes that cost twice what I paid for my trail shoes. Super Runners has a number of stores in NYC and their policy is to take back or exchange shoes if you're not happy. I'm going to take back the Brooks and try on true neutral shoes until I find a pair that feels as good as the Nikes did when I first brought them home.