Hi everybody, long time no talk.
I've been planning on writing this piece for a while, but I absolutely hate writing, so it's tough for me to dedicate the amount of time that it takes to organize my thoughts properly and write out everything I want to say.
There are a lot of things that I want to touch on, so hopefully I remember them all as I am writing this out, but I apologize in advance if this becomes a bit long winded.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll just jump right in. Ever since running without shoes gained more attention, a big topic of discussion has been "what kind of surface should we run on"?...There are those who say that we should run on "natural" surfaces like grass (usually people who don't run barefoot), and those on the other end of the spectrum who run on asphalt/concrete daily and say that it gives them no problems. They even say things like "rock is just as natural as grass". I'm sure you have all heard the claim many times, "the harder the surface the softer you land", justifying our capability to run on concrete sidewalks and asphalt roads.
I'm gonna go ahead and put my thoughts on this topic out there. I have come to the conclusion that our bodies' ability to run smoothly/softly/gracefully (without shoes) depends on if the ground that we are running on is what I like to call a clearly defined surface. When our brains can see exactly what we are running on and where exactly our feet are going to land step after step, it allows us to run much more smoothly and with more grace.
This is a primary problem when it comes to running on "grass". In fact, we are never actually running on the grass, our feet make contact and our weight is supported by the ground that is underneath the grass. I don't know about you all, but when I am running in a field that hasn't been mowed in a while with longer grass, my running feels very awkward, not smooth at all, and I definitely don't feel like I am landing "softly". We have to pick our feet up higher and our bodies aren't exactly sure where our next step is going to land because the exact landing surface underneath the grass is hidden.
When we run on asphalt or concrete sidewalks, the surface is very clearly defined and there is no guesswork. We don't have to pick our feet up as high and our bodies know exactly where our next step is going to land. I myself have run for quite a while with great success on asphalt and concrete. I was running 15-25 miles a week, by far much more than I had ever run with shoes on, and I was doing it all pain free.
I know that there are many people out there who have done a very substantial amount of running without shoes primarily on sidewalks and roads. However, I also know that there are a considerable amount of people who have developed stress fractures in their feet from doing too much mileage right from the beginning on these hard surfaces, and I am one of them. I think that people who suggest running on "natural" surfaces are on to something. Just as our bodies developed in a perfect way for running (without shoes), with appropriate tendons, muscles, bones, and ligaments, I also think that our bodies developed (evolved?) in a way to accommodate repeated running on the natural ground that is underneath us.
I'm sure you all have also heard the argument that "rock is just as natural as grass". Where on Earth is there a place that is inhabited by a significant number of people that has miles upon miles of "natural" rock path. Also, thorn bushes are natural and we clearly aren't meant to run on those...I will agree that the "natural" argument is a pretty stupid one, but like I said, there is something to it.
Now, I'm hoping that everyone agrees with me that having a clearly defined surface to run on is important for smooth, graceful running. But now, this leads me to another consideration that should be made when it comes to running without shoes, and that is the density of the surface. In reality, the density of a surface directly affects to what degree that surface is clearly defined, but I just wanted to be clear that a surface that we believe to be clearly defined (wet sand for example) is not as defined as we think...(our weight is not being supported until the sand is compressed enough to allow us to push off for our next step, we're not running on the surface that we see before our foot lands, but actually on the level at which the sand is compressed and we can push back off).
Ok, I want to make it clear that I am not saying "sidewalks and roads are bad to run on barefoot because you will get stress fractures!" I understand that I most definitely did too much running (without shoes) volume for my current body to handle.
-Would I still have gotten those stress fractures, had I done that same amount of running on dirt instead (which is less dense)? Maybe, nobody knows for sure.
-If humans grow up running and walking on these extremely dense surfaces, would there bones adapt to be able to handle the load? Would there be virtually no stress fractures if people grew up that way their entire lives? Maybe, nobody really knows.
The point I'm trying to make is that, the more I think about it, people justifying running on concrete and asphalt sounds more and more like people justifying running with shoes...sure there are plenty of people who do it and don't get hurt, but there are also a lot of people who repeatedly get hurt doing it.
Maybe if we all grew up walking and running barefoot on sidewalks and parking lots we would be fine and nobody would get hurt, but I don't know if that's true and I don't think anybody else really knows either. But EVEN IF that was the case, why not just run on less dense surfaces (hard packed dirt) to avoid any potential problems altogether?
I think people forget that sidewalks were created IN RESPONSE to shoes!! People weren't walking around barefoot and then decided "I want to walk on an extremely hard surface everyday"...we started putting pillows on our feet, then decided that we needed a very hard surface to walk those pillows on...which MESSED EVERYTHING UP. Whereas if you remove both the foot pillows and the artificial rock hard ground you're back to square one and the way that it should be.
If you have never ran on a smooth dirt path then I can understand why you are not convinced yet. There is absolutely no comparison between the feeling of running on nicely packed dirt and rock hard uncomfortable asphalt. When I start running on a nice dirt path it truly takes my breath away and it is one of the best feelings in the world.
The earth underneath the grass truly feels like the ideal density to run on, and when you remove the grass from on top, it is a very clearly defined surface as well and what seems to be the perfect compromise between a clearly defined surface for smooth running and also having a little bit of "give" to it (lack of rock hard density).
I truly think that our bodies were built for our planet's ground, and it is a beautiful thing to think about.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alright, this has gone on for a while now, so I'm going to wrap it up. I hope that everyone gives me feedback with their thoughts on all of this, because I honestly think recognition of everything that I have wrote here is the next important step for creating a mindset in people that will allow themselves and others to develop healthy running habits.
The last thing that I want to say is that it is a life goal of mine to open up a dirt track (like 400 meter running track) where I can start a barefoot track club for younger people (kids mostly). Not only do I want as many people to develop there bodies properly and in a healthy way, but I think that PERFORMANCE is the key to convincing others in the world that running without shoes is the best way to do that. I want to start a competitive track club with young kids who are athletic and enthusiastic about running so that they can compete and show others how much healthier and effective running without shoes can be (they will be able to train longer and harder than shod athletes because of lack of injuries, leading to better performance).
No offense to most of the community on this website, but nobody is going to be convinced that barefoot is better by seeing a bunch of 30-50 year olds running around the neighborhood barefoot haha. I mean I'm only 23 and people just look at me like I'm a weirdo and don't take me seriously when they see me running barefoot...because I'm an adult. What people WILL be convinced by is a 15 year old running a sub 50 second 400 barefoot and crushing shod runners...that's what it's going to take to get people to understand.
Looking forward to hearing people's opinions.
George
I've been planning on writing this piece for a while, but I absolutely hate writing, so it's tough for me to dedicate the amount of time that it takes to organize my thoughts properly and write out everything I want to say.
There are a lot of things that I want to touch on, so hopefully I remember them all as I am writing this out, but I apologize in advance if this becomes a bit long winded.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll just jump right in. Ever since running without shoes gained more attention, a big topic of discussion has been "what kind of surface should we run on"?...There are those who say that we should run on "natural" surfaces like grass (usually people who don't run barefoot), and those on the other end of the spectrum who run on asphalt/concrete daily and say that it gives them no problems. They even say things like "rock is just as natural as grass". I'm sure you have all heard the claim many times, "the harder the surface the softer you land", justifying our capability to run on concrete sidewalks and asphalt roads.
I'm gonna go ahead and put my thoughts on this topic out there. I have come to the conclusion that our bodies' ability to run smoothly/softly/gracefully (without shoes) depends on if the ground that we are running on is what I like to call a clearly defined surface. When our brains can see exactly what we are running on and where exactly our feet are going to land step after step, it allows us to run much more smoothly and with more grace.
This is a primary problem when it comes to running on "grass". In fact, we are never actually running on the grass, our feet make contact and our weight is supported by the ground that is underneath the grass. I don't know about you all, but when I am running in a field that hasn't been mowed in a while with longer grass, my running feels very awkward, not smooth at all, and I definitely don't feel like I am landing "softly". We have to pick our feet up higher and our bodies aren't exactly sure where our next step is going to land because the exact landing surface underneath the grass is hidden.
When we run on asphalt or concrete sidewalks, the surface is very clearly defined and there is no guesswork. We don't have to pick our feet up as high and our bodies know exactly where our next step is going to land. I myself have run for quite a while with great success on asphalt and concrete. I was running 15-25 miles a week, by far much more than I had ever run with shoes on, and I was doing it all pain free.
I know that there are many people out there who have done a very substantial amount of running without shoes primarily on sidewalks and roads. However, I also know that there are a considerable amount of people who have developed stress fractures in their feet from doing too much mileage right from the beginning on these hard surfaces, and I am one of them. I think that people who suggest running on "natural" surfaces are on to something. Just as our bodies developed in a perfect way for running (without shoes), with appropriate tendons, muscles, bones, and ligaments, I also think that our bodies developed (evolved?) in a way to accommodate repeated running on the natural ground that is underneath us.
I'm sure you all have also heard the argument that "rock is just as natural as grass". Where on Earth is there a place that is inhabited by a significant number of people that has miles upon miles of "natural" rock path. Also, thorn bushes are natural and we clearly aren't meant to run on those...I will agree that the "natural" argument is a pretty stupid one, but like I said, there is something to it.
Now, I'm hoping that everyone agrees with me that having a clearly defined surface to run on is important for smooth, graceful running. But now, this leads me to another consideration that should be made when it comes to running without shoes, and that is the density of the surface. In reality, the density of a surface directly affects to what degree that surface is clearly defined, but I just wanted to be clear that a surface that we believe to be clearly defined (wet sand for example) is not as defined as we think...(our weight is not being supported until the sand is compressed enough to allow us to push off for our next step, we're not running on the surface that we see before our foot lands, but actually on the level at which the sand is compressed and we can push back off).
Ok, I want to make it clear that I am not saying "sidewalks and roads are bad to run on barefoot because you will get stress fractures!" I understand that I most definitely did too much running (without shoes) volume for my current body to handle.
-Would I still have gotten those stress fractures, had I done that same amount of running on dirt instead (which is less dense)? Maybe, nobody knows for sure.
-If humans grow up running and walking on these extremely dense surfaces, would there bones adapt to be able to handle the load? Would there be virtually no stress fractures if people grew up that way their entire lives? Maybe, nobody really knows.
The point I'm trying to make is that, the more I think about it, people justifying running on concrete and asphalt sounds more and more like people justifying running with shoes...sure there are plenty of people who do it and don't get hurt, but there are also a lot of people who repeatedly get hurt doing it.
Maybe if we all grew up walking and running barefoot on sidewalks and parking lots we would be fine and nobody would get hurt, but I don't know if that's true and I don't think anybody else really knows either. But EVEN IF that was the case, why not just run on less dense surfaces (hard packed dirt) to avoid any potential problems altogether?
I think people forget that sidewalks were created IN RESPONSE to shoes!! People weren't walking around barefoot and then decided "I want to walk on an extremely hard surface everyday"...we started putting pillows on our feet, then decided that we needed a very hard surface to walk those pillows on...which MESSED EVERYTHING UP. Whereas if you remove both the foot pillows and the artificial rock hard ground you're back to square one and the way that it should be.
If you have never ran on a smooth dirt path then I can understand why you are not convinced yet. There is absolutely no comparison between the feeling of running on nicely packed dirt and rock hard uncomfortable asphalt. When I start running on a nice dirt path it truly takes my breath away and it is one of the best feelings in the world.
The earth underneath the grass truly feels like the ideal density to run on, and when you remove the grass from on top, it is a very clearly defined surface as well and what seems to be the perfect compromise between a clearly defined surface for smooth running and also having a little bit of "give" to it (lack of rock hard density).
I truly think that our bodies were built for our planet's ground, and it is a beautiful thing to think about.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alright, this has gone on for a while now, so I'm going to wrap it up. I hope that everyone gives me feedback with their thoughts on all of this, because I honestly think recognition of everything that I have wrote here is the next important step for creating a mindset in people that will allow themselves and others to develop healthy running habits.
The last thing that I want to say is that it is a life goal of mine to open up a dirt track (like 400 meter running track) where I can start a barefoot track club for younger people (kids mostly). Not only do I want as many people to develop there bodies properly and in a healthy way, but I think that PERFORMANCE is the key to convincing others in the world that running without shoes is the best way to do that. I want to start a competitive track club with young kids who are athletic and enthusiastic about running so that they can compete and show others how much healthier and effective running without shoes can be (they will be able to train longer and harder than shod athletes because of lack of injuries, leading to better performance).
No offense to most of the community on this website, but nobody is going to be convinced that barefoot is better by seeing a bunch of 30-50 year olds running around the neighborhood barefoot haha. I mean I'm only 23 and people just look at me like I'm a weirdo and don't take me seriously when they see me running barefoot...because I'm an adult. What people WILL be convinced by is a 15 year old running a sub 50 second 400 barefoot and crushing shod runners...that's what it's going to take to get people to understand.
Looking forward to hearing people's opinions.
George