 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Had a little hr pootle on the ss earlier and whilst riding back up out of belper a man came bounding down the market place in full running gear but minus shoes. Now barefoot around belper near the pubs seems stupid! Saw him again about an hour later washing his feet in a big puddle whilst waiting to cross the road....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-34125830
How do you think man ran for the first 200,000 years?
When my parents took my running shoes away - cos I was overtraining to deal with their marriage breaking up - I ran in bare feet.
It's about the only excuse.
There are lots of other things we did 200,000 years ago (apparently), including expecting to live barely past your 20s.
Dodging the broken glass and tarmac/concrete in a man made world presumably... ...oh wait a minute.How do you think man ran for the first 200,000 years?
Google will show it is not that unusual - Zola Budd being the most famous protagonist. I've heard various suggestions why including something analagous to rotational weight of tyres being so important in cycling!
one of these attention seekers run past my office every lunchtime
If i have woken up to see a serial killer in my room
Yes, its lovely.
Is it better or worse, that depends on the individual. For me overall its worse, footwear is there primarily to protect my feet from cuts and subsequent infections and we'll as warmth. Your feet do toughen up, but not as tough as when shod.
How do you think man ran for the first 200,000 years?
Tenuous at best. There's little or no evidence either way. Our ancient ancestors may well have have made sandals, they may have not. If you want to run barefoot, there's nothing to stop you, but trying to 'justify' it by evoking ancient history is probably spurious.
How do you think man ran for the first 200,000 years?
Did you post that on a cave painting?
There's certainly some evidence for that suggestion, such as ancient footprints in dried mud, though from an evolutionary sense there must have been a time when man was walking upright before he'd developed to making stuff with his hands. Also you'll find current indigenous populations running barefoot.
I note that I've got nothing invested in that idea - I don't run barefoot. I've often considered the idea, or at least with truly minimalist footwear, but have never been injury free enough recently to risk it - my injuries being things which barefoot wouldn't help and might make worse.
[i]I[/i] think anytime someome says "barefoot shoes" you should be allowed to stab them in the feet. I mean really.
Running does seem to attract the snake oil merchants though.
My understanding is that the padding (especially in the heel) can encourage inefficient running technique, eg landing on your heel as opposed to your misfit or forefoot.
This is the theorising behind the benefits of barefoot running as it was told to me by a keen runner, I haven't looked into the evidence for or against
aracer, indeed, there are ancient footprints in mud, but those of "lucy" are Australopithecines; really really ancient and a different species, once you get to Homo Habilis they're making fire, using stones tools, once you get all the way to that start of early Sapiens species (Sapiens Idaltu for instance) they're pretty sophisticated people (they are 'us' after all) The point at which all sorts of technologies were discovered is having to be pushed back all the time. And TBH children running about barefoot in modern Africa has more to do with poverty than gait.
I'm just really suspicious of these sorts of claims, "paleo" is fast becoming a marketing tool...
There are habitually barefoot populations where the tendency is actually to heal strike rather than forefoot strike.
There's seems to be very few studies done into it. Certainly not enough to draw a consensus. Although instinctually I'm voting fore/mid foot FTW.
Edit, I've not paid attention for a while. If there's anything new that hasn't come from a Harvard professor I'd be keen to have a peruse.
Obligatory....
Running does seem to attract the snake oil merchants though.
Barstads bringing out a plethora of different running shoe standards soleley for commercial gain.
[quote=nickc ]And TBH children running about barefoot in modern Africa has more to do with poverty than gait.
So they're "poorer" than the ancient people you suppose made sandals? There certainly are current populations who run barefoot - for example aboriginals mainly do. What's more in the context of current running fads are you suggesting that those ancient peoples made sandals with heel cushioning?
The Roman Empire is well known for its development of air cushioned sandals.
I think you'll find it was the ancient Greeks who first commercialised cushioned footwear.
Apologies, I'd forgotten she was a Greek Goddess not Roman.
Should have known really, bunch of copy cat brutes those Romans.
I have tried it up and down the road, having been wearing minimally cushioned shoes. It feels fantastic. So nice to feel the ground through your feet and have your toes and foot bones freedom to move around. However my soles are obviously not tough enough. It's also silent and vibration-free too.
No, I'm saying you can't generalise. They may well have been groups of ancient people that habitually went barefoot, and there may well have been groups of ancient peoples who did not. Using modern Aborigines as a proxy for what humans did or didn't do hundreds of thousands of years ago isn't sound.
So they're "poorer" than the ancient people you suppose made sandals
In that they may have lost that particular skill, then yeah, they probably are "poorer". I imagine they also can't tan a hide either, which ancient people certainly could do, just because they do or don't do something now has no bearing at all on what ancient humans did or didn't do.
What's more in the context of current running fads are you suggesting that those ancient peoples made sandals with heel cushioning?
Show me the evidence that ancient peoples were doing sufficient amounts of running to make shoes an issue for them.
This is the problem here, claims have been made regarding persistence hunting, or chasing down large animals when the available evidence suggests that they did lots of snaring of small animals (rabbits hares, birds and so on). There's little or no evidence of persistence hinting, as it's not going to leave any (obviously) So to claim "Ancient people didn't run in shoes" is false. It's a modern marketing approach aimed (mostly) at men.
As I said run in barefoot shoes if it works for you, but linking that to ancient civilisations is pointless.
They may well have been groups of ancient people that habitually went barefoot, and there may well have been groups of ancient peoples who did not. Using modern Aborigines as a proxy for what humans did or didn't do hundreds of thousands of years ago isn't sound.
It would seem more sensible to me to look at populations living in similar terrain and climate rather than somewhere stupidly hot or cold. Of which I'm struggling to think of any modern examples.
It would seem more sensible to me to look at populations living in similar terrain and climate rather than somewhere stupidly hot or cold.
Similar terrain?
by 125,000 - 50,000 years ago, people* were already moving out across the bearing sea, were moving into Northern Europe, and southern Africa and Asia, probably over many thousands of years and on many separate occasions. Humans lived then where humans live now.
* As did our ancestor species before us, Homo Erectus were moving out of Africa millions of years ago, into the same areas we live in now There's little or no evidence either way of them wearing shoes (or not) either!
It's just marketing.
[quote=nickc ]I imagine they also can't tan a hide either, which ancient people certainly could do
What, all of them?
Using modern Aborigines as a proxy for what humans did or didn't do hundreds of thousands of years ago isn't sound
...
just because they do or don't do something now has no bearing at all on what ancient humans did or didn't do.
It doesn't prove anything, but what do you think the chances that such tribes have regressed from what their ancestors did?
Show me the evidence that ancient peoples were doing sufficient amounts of running to make shoes an issue for them.
[img] 
[/img]
It's all kind of silly though isn't it - you're asking people to prove something which you can't disprove, when available evidence of current populations suggests there's a good likelihood of it happening. What's more, if we come back to the modern footwear fad, we might have no evidence of ancient populations, but there is plenty of evidence of significant amounts of running being done in times when Nike was just a Greek goddess.
It didn't start off as marketing. It's a reasonable proposition, in my opinion. Marketers gonna market, of course, but there's no need to rubbish the entire concept simply because marketers have overhyped it. That's their job.
Thinking rationally, it's perfectly reasonable to offer shoes with little support. It's been shown that it is quite possible to enjoy running that way, and also possible to enjoy running the other way. In cycling terms, it's why people still choose ride fully rigid singlespeeds.
Other significant disadvantage to running barefoot offroad is that when it's muddy it's really quite tricky 🙂
Anyway I think there is some evidence to suggest that persistence hunting was quite popular. Endurance in the heat is one of Homo Sapiens' strengths after all, possibly its biggest, so why not use that fact?
We're used to thinking of humans as weak and feeble compared to the animal kingdom but we are pretty good at keeping going in the heat of the day. It's been proposed that this was our original evolutionary advantage rather than larger brains, because you have to have a means of getting lots of protein and omega fatty acids before you can evolve a huge brain.
There's little or no evidence either way of them wearing shoes (or not) either!
There wouldn't be, the sort of things they might or might not be wearing would struggle to survive to provide an example.
I was actually thinking of (relatively) modern populations. For which we'd probably have to look at the pre (or at) contact populations of North America?
Of course there's masses of marketing BS. Goes without saying tbh, pretty much everything and everything is marketed. Including breathing!
Edit: this sort of thing https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Rock_Cave
www.barefootrunnersworld.com/forum/why-would-you-ride-a-bike-with-one-gear
I was actually thinking of (relatively) modern populations. For which we'd probably have to look at the pre (or at) contact populations of North America?
They all came via a relatively cold route though, and once moccasins had been invented they wouldn't have been un-invented. A population that'd always been somewhere warm would not have been driven to invent warm shoes.
I think they're just a little bit bonkers. Running in bare foot must be one of those "rights of passage" that all Uber hard core ex SAS types think they have to keep doing, just so everyone around them can see instinctively that they are "different" and should be revered.
But I see a few running around Spitalfields in Town heading up towards Old St on occasion, two of them normally together. Proper lean, rugged and you can still see the tag attached to the back of the neck where they came out of the mould.
Clearly mentally above the rest of us, I mean we'd all be thinking about glass/drug/dog shite/snot/spit/oil/refuse/chewing gum and 3/4 drunk coffee spills... but not these types, oh no. For them its a challenge of both mind and spirit, their minds clearly left them....so the spirit carries them on.
🙄
Yeh I get that Molly
But I'm living (staying)in Scotland, I couldn't give two hoots about what's best in my feet on the Australian outback!
I think they're just a little bit bonkers. Running in bare foot must be one of those "rights of passage" that all Uber hard core ex SAS types / STW posters think they have to keep doing, just so everyone around them can see instinctively that they are "different" and should be revered.
FIFY...
Personally I think they should be given a poke in the eye with a sharp stick..
For them its a challenge of both mind and spirit, their minds clearly left them....so the spirit carries them on.
Like those grinding 32:16 up some steep hill or other.. 😉
Zola Budd being the most famous protagonist.
She raced on the track barefoot but didnt train barefoot. Lots of runners raced barefoot on the track (Bruce Tulloh to name one)
Anyway I think there is some evidence to suggest that persistence hunting was quite popular. Endurance in the heat is one of Homo Sapiens' strengths after all, possibly its biggest, so why not use that fact?
Again, because some people in the Kalahari do this now, doesn't mean it was practised thousands of years ago, there simply isn't the evidence. Where there is evidence of bones it's "overwhelmingly" small animals, there are bones of large herbivores, but it could be that they stumbled across a kill site, there's no evidence either way of routine hunting of large animals it is, after all massively more dangerous than trapping a rabbit! That we can sweat and can run, ergo must have hunted in a particular way is a "Just so story"
The only point I'm trying to make is linking modern running practices to ancient humans isn't sound.
it's not sound from a science point of view no. Highly circumstantial.
However, you can try it, and you might like it, and you [i]might[/i] like it because of the evolution of your foot 🙂
Running through a town centre is utter stupidity
Glass, nails, needles, puke, Tarmac, concrete etc etc.
I don't recall our ancient ancestors having any of these to deal with?
However, you can try it, and you might like it
TBH the idea of running palaeolithic mega fauna to the point of exhaustion...vs trapping a beaver for your tea doesn't massively appeal, but then I am a big scardy cat! 😆
I don't recall our ancient ancestors having any of these to deal with?
They probably had other horrible things to step on, what impact this had on their life expectancy probably wasn't great.
Makes the paths come alive!
I don't run but do own a pair of vivobarefoot shoes. Comfy for just wandering around in. Light too if you are travelling.
I had some VivoBarefoot shoes too, and running in them and not heel striking felt really good, nice and springy. Couldn't ever be arsed to analyse it further - 'feels good' was good enough for me.
First world problems 🙄
Cos your shoes fill up with sand when you're on the beach.
Various African tribes are cited as examples and exemplars of the barefoot running movement. Get the gifted runners into a professional program, though, and they're shod in plush cushioned shoes. If barefoot was so efficient, wouldn't they continue running barefoot?
I can see the reason for running barefoot on dry grass or sand, but in the urban environment it's probably not optimal.
Personally, I've gone the other way, away from minimalism towards something in between. Cushioning is my friend.
Abebe Bikila
Bare foot marathon wins. Bikila was possible the best known for winning barefoot. From personal experience trying some barefoot or at least minimal cushioned shoes with sole protection has helped my running. Heel striking is just not good for the knees. I'd call it forefoot though, also it does wonders for your calf strength once you get used to it. Its like getting back to how I ran as a youngster on the track.
I was under the impression that humans developed running skills not for hunting but for getting away when your prospective lunch objected to you sneaking up on it.
How do you think man ran for the first 200,000 years?
Why do you think people first started covering their feet? Was it because Big Shoe was blinding them with marketing?
People probably did lots of things differently millennia ago, but that doesn't mean those things can't be improved on.
That doesn't mean the way Nike want you to do it is the right way necessarily, but the default 'modern == rubbish, thousands of years old == ancient wisdom' stuff is just lazy, wishful thinking IMO.
I cut up my dinner with a sharp piece of flint. Knives are just a marketing gimmick.
My understanding is that the padding (especially in the heel) can encourage inefficient running technique, eg landing on your heel as opposed to your misfit or forefoot.
Which is a good reason to learn to run properly and wear appropriate footwear (racing flats or fell shoes as appropriate), not necessarily a good reason to run barefoot. But of course if you want to...
Bikila didn't always run barefoot. Also, at 57kg on his 5' 10" frame, it doesn't seem such a terrible idea.
DrJ- were do you get your flints from? Do you buy whole rocks or get an artisan flint knife trimmer to shape them to your own personal requirements. Also what about forks?
OKay gonna admit it, I sometimes do short bits of barefoot running. It kinda reminds me to run properly with decent technique otherwise I regress to lumbering along. Maybe 1km at a time tops.
I only ever really do it in parks on grass. Usually well away from other humans (yep I think its a bit weird too but it does help me).
Got abused loads for it as well when spotted, with such witty comments such as 'you have forgotten your shoes' 🙄
Running does seem to attract the snake oil merchants though.
None of that in mountain biking... nope not at all! 😀 😀 😀
This Snake Oil stuff, can you get it certified organic?
I cut up my dinner with a sharp piece of flint. Knives are just a marketing gimmick.
Oh the ironing; sarcasm from the man who fell for the whole flint marketing scam!
The Roman Empire is well known for its development of air cushioned sandals.
yeah, but apart from air cushioned sandals, what have the Romans ever done for us?
Have a read of Born to Run by Christopher McDougall if no one said it already. I walk about in bare feet a lot admittedly not in town. It's lovely. The only people who query as to why probably spend too much time analysing others instead of themselves.