In March 2016 I was running on a dry, flat road in a pair of Hokas. For some reason, I landed off kilter, rolled and fractured my ankle. The doctor felt that the height of the shoe contributed to the break. One titanium screw later I’m fine. I did go back to running for a few years but not to Hokas again. I wrote them a letter at the time and they did not respond. While I loved the cushion, I felt like I was always on the verge of an ankle roll. I wish I had paid more attention to that feeling.
1
The “super shoes” with carbon fiber plates were designed to make runners more economical (less oxygen at a given running running speed) and therefore faster. This has been shown in the lab and on the roads and track (in the case of the spikes). The fastest runners produce more force to the running surface and consequently have a more powerful push off, so hitting the ground harder isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Secondly, the myth of pronation as a primary injury cause has been debunked. Pronation or rolling of the foot absorbs shock. Watch the video of Eliud Kipchoge’s 1:59 marathon in a Nike prototype. There are some views of him with the pacers and you can clearly see the runners’ pronation. Some people have difficulty with super shoe stability because of high midsole stack height and too soft material so the
shoes aren’t suitable for them. Everyone has their own preferences, and some people do better with a moderate amount of cushioning that gives a bit but isn’t too soft.
I have been running seriously and regularly for over 40 years (15 marathons). Several years ago, I began to develop some chronic plantar fasciatis and ache-y knees. I switched to HOKA Clifton's and the extra cushioning has been an absolutely wonderful god-send. No more aches or pains at all, with consistent steady mileage (> 1100 miles per year, regularly).
I also wear the HOKA's for lots of hiking miles, with excellent support, and the extra cushioning is wonderful for rocky trails.
Everyone's response may be unique, but the cushioned HOKA's have greatly extended the ache-free running career of many an older runner, such as me.
I hereby certify that I do not now, nor have I ever, had any type of employment or business relationship with HOKA's, nor have any of my family or friends. I am just a Very Big Fan of their highly-cushioned shoes.
5
I agree, I love my Hokas! I also wear the Cliftons and went from struggling with chronic knee and hip pain to no sign of it after switching to Hokas.
1
Although I am no longer running these days, I have gone through my fair share of running shoes. I’ve used all kinds of running shoes as well, ranging from bulky, cushioned shoes to thin, flimsy shoes. The majority of my running career I used heavily cushioned shoes because they helped with support for my knees, despite them being pretty heavy. I always had problems with my knees and ankles which is why I stopped running, but it is also why I went through so many shoes. I started running again after a three year gap my freshmen year and it came as a shock to me when my coach told me to run on the grass of the football field, in only my socks. I wouldn’t say it converted me to thin shoes, but I definitely don’t use the same bulky shoes like I used to. I also realized with this article and the studies it talked about, where they had women try each type of shoe and run on the force plates, that I had the very same problems as they did with the bulky shoes. I, like these women, pronated a lot when I ran, but I never realized it was because of the shoes and not me. Now that I have lighter shoes, I do not pronate as much and I haven’t had any knee or ankle problems since I started running again.
3
Wore cushioned shoes when I started to run in my late 50s, had very possible type of injury, plantar fascitis, knee injury, spinal injury etc. Went to physical therapy and strengthened my glutes, knees, abs and foot. Also switched to Vibram 5 finger shoes with 2mm soles. 600 miles without injury. Now enjoying barefoot on the beach also. In my mid 60s now : -)
5
After developing the early signs of Hammer Toe, I switched to Hoka Bondi 6's at the recommendation of my podiatrist but it felt like I was running through marshmallows. My times suffered significantly as well. I bought a pair of Hoka Carbon X's and I'm a new woman! My time is better and my foot feels great.
I've been using Brooks Gel 16 for about two years. The first summer was great, running 5 and 6K with good times and improving every month. During the winter I stopped and started again in the spring, but had to stop by fall as the left leg started kind of giving out randomly. Now every once in a while I get ankle pains, knee pains, and the left thigh hurts on the outside. The shoes, however are very comfortable. They have become worn due to being a heel strike runner. So is the pain due to the shoes? It's very hard to tell, as I use them all the time, and also do Krav Maga 3 times a week. I'm wondering if I should just get Vibram FiveFingers, but I can't see using them in the winter months in Colorado...
1
Just looking at the pictured shoes and I know I'd be tripping, and scuffing, and throwing my stride off. I need some "touch" with the running surface. Not straight to 100% minimalism, or barefooted running that was the trend du jour, many years ago, but rather to simply feel my feet hitting and grabbing the surface. Same reason I don't wear lifting gloves. I need to grip the bar, and know I have a grip, that I'm not relying on a thin layer of material to make up for a lack of grip strength. (unless its a lifting strap for power lifting, but only on hard lifts. maybe some pull-ups.)
And that back loaded heel? What is that? That has to have an effect on a runners stride. Its shortening the leg extension. Pushing ground strike forces back up the leg, impacting the hip socket.
One thing everyday runners never consider is their injuries, etc, are not due to their shoes, which is a device, or lack of a trendy one, but because they are bad runners! They are sloppy in form and function. While walking, striding and running are of course natural to the human design, most people have developed bad habits as they mature. Add weight gains, injuries, etc, and what seems natural can be hurtful.
Watch how many people walk, their weight shifts side to side, no leg extension, but a waddle. Sure bet their running stride is gonna be wrong. Many take short steps. Some have a list, favor one leg.
In my experience as a trainer, most people have poor body mechanics. So injuries result.
7
As an ex-runner in my 70s who still jogs, the Hoka are a godsend, but studies cited are inhernetly flawed be inability to isolate factors, especially training, foot type (pronated/supinated, needin more support or more mobility), bow legs or knock kneed, hip rotation, etc. For shoes it is always one person's medicine is another person's poison. The only way to know if to try the shoe and see if it works for you.
Additionally, as a health professional, I and many others have fond the Hokas are especially helpful for most all elder folks suffering from knee or hip pain exacerbated by impact, as well as many people with plantar fasciitis.
One think on deciding upon which of their models is to check forefoot flexibility to see what feels best. Some folks do better with a stiff forefoot and others with more flexibility.
2
Is there conflation of soft, thick soled shoes with firm, thick soled shoes?
I have not tried out any of the Nike Vaporfly shoes. However It is my understanding that the combination of PEBAX foam, air unit and carbon plate (only one carbon plate now allowed per new World Athletics rules) in that shoe is stable and firm. Ordinarily that shouldn’t cause most runners to over pronate. It does make sense that a thick soled, very soft shoe would exacerbate overpronation. BTW, pronation is desirable because it helps to disperse shock. Watch the video of Eliud Kipchoge running his 1:59! marathon at the INEOS challenge last fall in Vienna and you will clearly see his feet and those of the pacers pronate.
1
Hoka shoes will give the wearer diabeetus. Be careful!
2
As someone with chronic plantar facitis I can say for sure that overly squishy shoes actually force your feet into unnatural positions. I noticed this when all cushioned shoes started using cheap, inferior cushioning that feels squishy like house slippers but when you actually walk they cause the bottom of your foot to stretch way out -- especially the arch, pulling the fascia and tearing it more. Also shoes have no shape anymore to accommodate all the shoebox shaped feet. Natural rubber gives support and spring but, too expensive these days for cheap products. Also athletic shoes which have stiffer sides and an actual heel cup support the feet. All this cheap mesh top stuff is horrible and just lets the foot spread like a cooking pancake when force is applied.
Man, there is a sucker born every day. The shoes in the photo actually made me laugh.
3
I went to a minimalist shoe about eight years ago. I got used to them gradually (which was a pain, because it meant stopping and changing my shoes in the middle of the run for a couple of months, but was worth doing) so I didn't have the injury problems some people have had. When I was wearing the regular running shoes, I had to strap my knees or else they would hurt. When I switched to the minimalist shoes, the knee pain went away. They've become hard to find except through mail order, but they work for me. There are padded zero-drop shoes and I've worn them, but the point about road feel in the article is right on. Not only that, but because of the thicker sole, they were trippier.
5
@Bloomington Cook As an experiment I switched between an 'ordinary' running shoe (Asics Kayano/Brooks Adrenaline), Hoka's and some light Nike racing shoes on alternating days for a few weeks -- and my knees NEVER hurt in the light/minimalist Nike's -- I will never go back no matter what they come up with.
1
I run in Hoka shoes for about 5 years, I developed knee pain, hammertoes and deformed toe nails. Sadly, I never made that connection.
I am running again with a minimalist shoe for about a year without any discomfort.
9
@@tulip st I ran in Hokas for a few years and then ended up with a chronic case of achilles tendonitis in my left ankle. Maybe it was from the Hokas
4
@@tulip st I have been running for a few months now with the Hokas Gaviota 2, I do not have any more knee pain or any other ache or discomfort, the best buy in a long time. The last ones before were Adidas Boost, and had regular knee pain with those. For trail running still use Saucony´s TR8 for a few years, without any problem.
2
The well- padded New Balance shoe, with a Superfeet insole, has been very helpful to me in treating chronic plantar fasciitis-- it allows me to walk in comfort, and stand all day without pain. I do not run in these shoes.
What the author says about less ability to feel the ground, is true, at least in my case. I have more difficulty keeping balance on slick surfaces, or uneven surfaces, and in one case did a face plant when I stepped on a rain slicked railroad tie.
The shoes have their advantages, but also some disadvantages.
Now that the plantar fasciitis is under control,I do alternate the shoes with less padded running shoes for walking.
6
I volunteer at the end of a big city marathon, and I remember with the first version of these that came out at least, some runners were barely able to walk after finishing as the soles were squashed and uneven. I think if you tend to pronate anyway, you're going to land heavier on that side of the shoe and these things aren't build to last so if you're racing in them they need to be very nearly fresh out of the box.
2
I liked the squishy cushioning of hokas. After awhile my knees and ankles started hurting. I switched back and forth with my other shoes, until I was pretty sure the problem, for me, was the shoes. I stopped using them- problem solved. Getting a good fit and some kind of supportive insole and wearing shoes around is the only way to know if a certain brand and model works for you.
2
Fitted with the proper insoles, there should be no problem. I customize insoles to avoid pronation.
1
Sorry @JT but as one who's been in this business for 40 years I can tell you with certainty that insoles make no difference if the foam below the midsole is soft and unstable, which has been the trend the last few years.
As the science shows, in order to gain balance our body needs to 'find' the ground in order to stabilize thru the gait cycle -- it's a subconscious affect of which you may not even be aware. All that cushion might feel better, and when you stand those insoles might make you feel more secure, but excessive foam below the insole makes that process of stabilizing more difficult. Insoles do not address what's going on below the top line of the midsole once running is initiated.
9
A scientific study that included women? What a refreshing change of pace.
37
Thanks Connie. My thought exactly. I’ve always joked that they would have used men in the first birth control pill studies if they could have.
2
I own a pair of Nike Vaporfly 4% and Zoom Fly 3 as a daily running shoe. I’ve been running the same 5 mile route for years in many different shoes. I beat my best time on that route by 5% the first day I put on the Vaporflys. The shoes are incredibly springy and they propel you forward. They are absolutely a game changer.
3
After developing osteoarthritis in my knees (probably from distance running) I’ve found cushioned shoes make my knee pain much worse. I’ve worn Brooks Ghost shoes for 10 years and replacing them every 300-400 miles. This unintended experiment has shown me that they’ve added more cushioning in the last two models and they are now unwearable.
In running stores it’s hard to find shoes without cushioning. I want the interior comfortable but the sole needs to be firm. For now I wear my old Brooks which are sturdy.
5
Try trail runners. I have a pair of NB something or others that are nice and firm. Love them. Never could tolerate running in marshmallow- like shoes.
3
@JAS you might try a pair of Topo Athletic running shoes, several of their models have modest cushioning, a low heel to toe drop (you don't have to go to 0 drop), and the best part is they are roomy in the toe box so your toes can spread and splay naturally -- important for balance and agility thru the running gait cycle.
I heard that the benefit of cushy shoes was to reduce impact on knee and perhaps hip. Do these studies tell us anything about that?
For people with knee pain, the cushion may reduce knee pain in walking. For knee pain, "motion is lotion"; walking can produce synovial fluid that lubricates the joint.
6
@Charlotte They do not. They make your knees really unstable. Get a shoe with a stable bottom and if you need cushioning for the bottoms of your feet, insert what you need -- arch support, ball of foot padding, etc. Squishy shoes are horribly destabilizing for hips, knees, ankles and arches. They are like foam house slippers -- for walking to the kitchen and back:)
4
@Charlotte They do not. They make your knees really unstable. Get a shoe with a stable bottom and if you need cushioning for the bottoms of your feet, insert what you need -- arch support, ball of foot padding, etc. Squishy shoes are horribly destabilizing for hips, knees, ankles and arches. They are like foam house slippers -- for walking to the kitchen and back:)
Hoka marketing team has descended on this comment thread. Be aware.
31
@BBB Hoka is the sole reason I can still run.
I tried the almost barefoot shoes, and messed up my hip, back one tour of duty for physical therapy.
Bodies come in all shapes and sizes. There is something aesthetically pleasing in my mind to minimalist shoes. I learned the very hard way, after trying hard to get used to them, my body can't do it.
The best shoe is one that prevents injury and let's you keep exercising. So, I don't mind Hoka getting a shout out.
11
@Ford313 I am a huge Hoka fan. Without them I would not be able to run. I'm 60 yrs old and love them. I backpack 220 miles in them too...no more ankle pain. It has been life changing. Hoka Bondi is the one I swear by.
2
I have peripheral neuropathy in my feet and lower legs. I get around using forearm crutches and maximally padded sneakers. These sneakers have enabled me to get out and walk, without them it’s too painful. I also need to wear the cushiest, lightest pairs. It is clear that I don’t run, but these shoes have added so much to my quality of life.
8
@Deb Schuback
I agree. I have neuropathy, too.
The shoes are good for walking.
Running? No way.
4
@DD Neuropathy? Big time. (Plus several neuro conditions requiring continual meds; just balance is challenging. I've tried simple walking with NB's tennis shoes, NB's walkers, Mephisto's Tennis (my favorites - AFTER my US Army boots). Yet, I keep dreaming of my Keds. Now, i have a cane, a walker, & Rollator. I dream of my Keds - totally flat. Oh, my God! Where are my Keds??? (-0- padding, -0- sponge; thin sole. Heaven! Where are my Keds???
1
I'm a 70 year old former runner with a degenerated disc in my back and now recovering from hip replacement. I need the cushiest shoes available just to WALK! I presently use Gravity Defyer shoes with steel springs inside the heels that provide 11mm of travel. Pretty cushy, surprisingly stable. However, I would pay anything for more cushiness, so if these shoes will enable me to walk with less pain, I am ready. Fortunately, so is my 401K.
5
67 years old. Running since 1976. Have never run a marathon. Have been jogging in New Balance 1340-V-2's for about the last four years, very stable but heavy. Just bought a pair of Saucony Hurricane 22's , brand new model. Have jogged about 27 miles since Feb. 3rd. Light, foamy, springy, but not stable. I'M THINKING ABOUT HOW MY FOOT IS HITTING THE PAVEMENT. This article hit "a chord." If you find a pair of running shoes that you love, buy ten pairs. The next "new " model won't be the same.
12
Shoe companies are out to sell you something, then sell you something else.
7
@Diego
But why not? If you like their shoes, you'll probably like their shorts, tees, socks. And, I need to replace the shoes twice a year, as well. I'm real happy with the company I'm using.
Until recently running shoe soles did not project behind the heel. Now most do, and that could be the reason for the increased landing force.
The shape of the shoe soles and landing zones are not mentioned in the studies, so we have to assume were not considered. As usual, "more research is needed".
5
PK, hoping to do a little crowdsourcing here. I'm interested in trying a more cushioned running shoe like the HOKA One one's. I'm a fit 56 yo, avid ice hockey player and fan who runs between games to stay fit for hockey (a low-impact sport if you can avoid the boards and your fellow skaters). Been playing hockey and running for decades. I'm a low-mileage runner (10-12 miles/week) due to body type (solid 6' 190 lb), occasional hip and knee pain, and big toe issues due to gout (now under control with meds). I have run in Asics for a long time but hips and lower back starting to bother me. Would like to be able to run longer (rest of my life!) but reduce wear on my knees, hips and lower back. Do y'all recommend trying the HOKA's (or any other maximally cushioned shoe) and if so, which model? TIA
5
@Terence Hello - I'm a 54 year old former runner and now mostly distance walker. I've had two pairs of HOKA-brand shoes. They do feel mighty comfortable but just like the article stated, at times I do feel a bit unstable due to the height and have noticed a slight ankle roll from time to time. That being said, I'm still a customer and will continue to be. I just watch my step more carefully when I venture off the road. Definitely take them on a test run first - if you can - before you commit.
4
@Terence I love my Hokas (Gaviota 2), but I got them after taking quiz on the Brooks Running website and buying a pair of Ariels. I used my results there to look for similar features in other shoes, since I knew I needed some cushioning and help with overpronation but not much beyond that. Both pairs turned out to be great. Hope that helps!
3
@Terence I'm 56 too and have been running in Hoka's Bondi for about 5 years, and LOVE them. Before I was a minimalist and was always dealing with foot, knee and hip pains. No more. Personally, even trail running, I have not experienced the instability referred to. Good luck!
7
Reynolds does readers a tremendous disservice by combining Vaporfly's (or Next%) with HOKAs into one big 'Maximalist' or 'Super Cushioned' category. This is really misleading. There are racing shoes designed to go for 100 miles (Vaporfly/Next%) in RACES, and cushioned training shoes designed to go for 300-500 miles in a variety of conditions (e.g. HOKA Bondi).
The studies Reynolds cites are underpowered, poorly designed, and don't really lead to any meaningful conclusions. But unfortunately this is typical of the journalism that Reynold's practices. A gee-whiz kind of 'gotcha' journalism designed solely, it would seem, to engage runners who read the NYT to click away.
This is not good science journalism. Its not good running journalism. I'm not sure if its good at much of anything, other than confusing beginning runners.
If you are an experienced runner: nothing in this article matters to you. The science is weak, and Reynold's treatment of it is even weaker. Runners in this category know very well that shoe choice matters, and that you can experiment to find the tool that works best for you in a specific set of conditions (e.g. 5k vs. trail, vs. high-mileage trainers).
If you are beginning runner, read anything other than Reynolds if you want to learn about shoes. Literally: ANYTHING. There is nothing of substance to learn from reading this article.
9
@anonymous The studies were published in very reputable journals, the 2nd study was in the American Journal of Sports Medicine, the most respected sports medicine journal in the world. As a fellow scientist, I can attest they are well-designed and adequately powered, or else they wouldn't have been published in such prestigious journals. If you have nothing nice to say about the authors or the research, maybe you should just not say anything, Mr./Ms. "anonymous"
15
Of course, once the barefoot-style running shoe was found not to be so beneficial and sales slipped, the manufacturers had to find something new they could foist on gullible consumers. The idiocy of consumers never ceases to amaze me.
8
These studies reinforce what any logical person would think about running on oversized soles. The entire system is disrupted: depth perception, locomotor function and gate it is all modified. Why would anybody think that modifying the natural form of one's foot plant makes sense is beyond comprehension. Is bad enough that most people run on asphalt and hard treadmills. Hip and knee replacement anyone? They should sell coupons with the running shoes.
Cities should invest in running alleyways with sand and earth rather than asphalt.
13
@Andy
Actually this study isn’t that well rounded. The most important thing is to wear more than one type of shoe if you run a lot. I run around 70 miles a week and wear a variety of stack height shoes. Sometimes the day after a race or a hard workout the cushy slow shoes (Hokas, new balance 1080, Nike infinity reacts) help you.
1
Cushy stilts don't really seem like the best idea. I've never tried them, but why would I? As I've moved from taller running and hiking shoes (but "normal tall", not as tall as shown here) to lower running and hiking shoes, my tendency to twist my ankle has diminished to next to nothing. I was even hiking in heavy duty boots to protect my ankles. Turns out I just needed a lower, more stable shoe. I'm not weak, I'm just tall and thin - like so many runners. What I give up in padding, I make up for by not running on pavement. My Inov8 Parkclaws were a great investment.
4
@TMJ Why? Because I’m short!
Some running shoe advice that helped me continue racing into my seventies is that once you find a shoe that works for you stick with that brand and model. Resist the urge to experiment. I would say the same goes for your running form unless an experienced coach notices a serious deficit. We are all unique so running styles and shoe choices are unique as well.
15
The critical word in these type articles in phrases like this one's "could affect" or others "may ..." are of course "could" or "may" Perhaps the NYT could spare us the ton of these speculative articles until results are in and and use the space for hard news.
@Duke or you can write an article yourself from the hospital bed when you recover enough from hip/ knee surgery.
4
More evidence that the purported benefits of these shoe modifications are lost on the vast majority of runners. Most of these changes are industry hyper, designed to increase revenue for the $19 billion running industry. Most people do well with a neutral shoe with adequate cushioning. Most people run the way they run, despite the shoe.
www.footandankle.md
6
@James R McWilliam, MD "Most people do well with a neutral shoe with adequate cushioning. Most people run the way they run, despite the shoe."
Thanks Doc, but I feel more comfort and have faster recovery with my neutral Hoka's with plush cushion. I also hope that the extra absorbshon will prolong my running years (age 65).
1
Even a better way of making this issue moot? Don't run.
I started doing moderate running in my 20s and 30s and although careful stretching, proper shoes etc. was running into all sorts of problems with aching knees, legs, feet, lost toe nails, fungi etc. etc.
A doctor told me in my 40s to forget running and take up moderate exercise.
I did it and a thank her to this day, the best advice ever given to me.
I am in my 70s in very good shape with no procedures, operations, problems re my bodies bones, ligaments etc. while my gym rats friends are all cripples now.
Ok, let's hear it from the gym rats, ie I am in my senior yrs. and have no problems with anything. You are either fibbing or a freak of nature.
10
@Paul - As of yesterday I'm 71. I have run for many years, many laps around Marine Park in Brooklyn and other places all over the world. My life revolved around it. Until I stopped for 3 years. I restarted jogging about 6 months ago. During those 3 years I put on weight and felt progressively worse. Today I'm 10 lbs lighter and feel light years better.
Running can be "moderate exercise". 2 or 3 miles at my own pace does wonders for me, mentally and physically. Don't underestimate the mental benefit. I am not a gym rat, nether am I fibbing nor a freak of nature.
I'm glad to hear you are well, many more happy years to us both.
19
@Mike thank you for your reply. Even moderate running caused a great deal of problems with my feet. I stopped it in my 30s and never looked back.
Don't get me wrong, I walk a lot , do stretching exercises etc. every day but stopping running was the best thing that could happen to me.
By a gym rat, I mean people who run marathons, or even a few miles a day. It is tremendous wear on the body and does as much harm as good imo.
5
@Paul It sounds like you needed better socks. I recommend Injinji to everyone, particularly their NuWool series.
3
Like so many, I got “those shoes” for my races just to level the field with the rest of the guys up front who also have them.
But even if they weren’t $250 (over $1 a mile factoring in their short lifespan) without ever going on sale I wouldn’t train in them. They feel unnatural and force a different striking pattern.
But legs do feel fresher after racing 20mi and recovery after marathons is much faster.
All in all, a good thing flats are pretty much dead now cushioned shoes are barely heavier.
5
What is Gretchen's runnig program like? How did she do in statistics and partial differential equations?
I have bilateral plantar fasciitis. Walking was a major issue; forget about running. Tried multiple brands over the years, with & without specialized insoles, with minimal improvement.
For my feet, Hoka One One Bondi's are the best shoes ever! That's all I wear, period. Right out of the box - no special insole needed. And being 5' 2", an added bonus is the extra height they give me. My feet are happy again.
But wear what works for you - get the right shoes FOR YOU. If you pronate, if you supinate, whatever - get the right shoes for you.
14
@Maryk You are not alone! I have the same issue and can only wear Hokas. I do not run but do work on an eliptical, which was exacerbating the PF. I do include a custom orthotic--seems to alleviate the pronation problem runners are discussing here. I agree- that we all should do what is right for us- no need to force anything that does not work on someone else.
1
These sorts of shoes may or may not be beneficial, but I know one thing: I wouldn't want to turn an ankle in one of those big babies!
4
Missing from the study is the weight of the shoe, which is crucial. A heavy "maximalist" shoe will be different from a lighter weight one.
However, my experience with so-called maximalist shoes—Nike and Hoka—tells me that stress is increased also on knees and hips. This is especially true for older runners like myself.
And once you get accustomed to "maximalist" shoes, it is difficult to go back to traditional shoes when you need to; for example, running cross country or track. Unless you retrain yourself very carefully for the transition back to traditional shoes, you risk injuries such as plantar fasciitis.
1
One year it is minimalist shoes the next year it is maximalist shoes.
No one knows the answer and this is just being done to make money.
Find the ones that are comfortable for you.
6
I had not been able to run more than 3 miles without pain for 20 years. I got a pair of HOKAs and I've been able to run 5-10 for a few years now. I run more slowly. I run more carefully, but I can run!!!
13
Shouldn’t they correct stride and strike before these tests? So many people just smack down...it has to attack their weakest point:foot, ankle, knee, hip, back...cushion makes it more palatable only.
3
We evolved for four million years running barefoot. What's changed that we need to run on fat pillows?
6
@Richard Schumacher
In my experience it makes a big difference to run on hard surfaces such as asphalt or pavement compared to trails.
5
@MrMortensen Don't run on hard surfaces! That's the point. You'll damage you joint's cartilage and there is no human made replacement that can match what the " unsophisticated" nature has created.
Maybe wear a helmet, too.
9
Yeah I don't run much so the first time I do, I tend to get a blister. So I've got this garish pair of neon things now. Hopefully they anchor the heel a little better. Also sold them to myself with the idea the shock absorbers would be good for the knees. They sure are cushy... I probably won't put enough miles in to worry about ankles.
I had been a recreational runner, running 18 to 26 miles per week until I developed multiple stress fractures, all in my 5th metatarsals. I then switched to biking. More recently, after hormonal suppression for prostate cancer, I developed asymmetrical arthritis in both knees. The medial aspect of the knee was bone on bone, but the lateral aspect had considerable cartilage. I had my gait analyzed and it was found that I had high arches and over supinated. I was pushing off with the lateral, not the medial, aspect of my foot. My form was terrible. I needed footwear that promoted pronation. It's a mistake for people to assume that any shoe is right for them without considering the anatomy of their feet and their stride.
9
"They continued to thwack the ground and roll at the ankles a bit more in the stacked-sole shoes than the neutral ones."
This is a common misunderstanding - the idea that a highly stacked shoe must be something other than neutral. The maximal cushioned running shoes that mostly relate to this discussion are lightweight, low drop (or differential - the difference between stack heights under the heel and under the ball of the foot), and - yes - neutral.
They're all the things that used to define "minimal" but they also happen to cushion hard landings and feel very comfortable, and they even seem to encourage - most likely because of the low drop and prominent rocker - a more efficient mid foot strike.
When taken out of the total context of the runners' experience, certain data points gained from studies with small sample sizes, oddly chosen test shoes (such as taking a heavier, firm, older model and calling it "maximal" as one study did) produce confusion and support any conclusion people want to twist them to.
The best answer for anyone - since we are so different - is to actually try some of these various new design technologies for ourselves. If one solution suited everyone, there wouldn't be literally hundreds of fundamentally differently executed designs all promising to give your feet and body what they need.
User feedback, though - there are some answers to be found there.
Add me to the list of people whose ability to run was saved by Hokas. Since I started using them I no longer have pain in my arches, shins, knees and lower back. I learned about Hoka One One in an article about ultramarathoners in Outside magazine about ten years ago. Since then, Hoka has expanded their line, and not all models have the teetering sensation of the super thick-soled Bondi. My current fave is the ATR Challenger, which works great for me on street and trail. If it weren’t for Hoka, I doubt at the age of 61 I would be running at all.
33
Three studies this time.
The first study had 15 subjects.
I don't know how many subjects were in the second study because it's not mentioned in the abstract (which is unusual).
The third study had 20 subjects.
Conclusion: An unusual "Move" column. These columns usually publicize a single study that has little statistical significance. This one publicizes multiple studies that have little statistical significance.
20
Most "runners" I see have terrible form. There are a host of things they need to fix to get running right before they start fixating on miracle shoes.
12
The best running shoe is no shoe, and then work up from there. A bare foot does not actually strike the ground heel-toe. It lands flat, with the arch dropping down and then rebounding, like a leaf spring (look it up) in a cars support system. Then the foot pushes off its ball for the next step. Anything that impedes that action can cause problems. The idea that the higher the runner is off the ground the wobblier the ankle is a no brainer. Less stability, and less sensory connection to the running or playing surface is a recipe for injury both to the foot; and to your knees, hips and back. And the shoes featured decrease pedial strengthening since they take away the muscle stress that builds strong foot muscles and tendons. I am 72, play basketball every day with 20-year olds, and wear low-cut, minimal and super supple leather moccasins like tribes people worldwide wear - the closet I can get to bare feet. My feet are super strong, the opposing players can't catch me, I never sprain my ankle or lose my balance, and am pain-free. You perform best naked. Dress accordingly.
22
@David Rockwell There is no universal "best shoe". Look at the variety of foot shapes, arch heights, etc. What works for you isn't necessarily the best for me. To each their own.
9
"faster than less-cushioned shoes"
They're also faster than equally-cushioned shoes. For instance, my Nike ZoomX Vaporfly NEXT% are substantially faster than my Hoka One One Bondi 6 training shoes, and even slightly faster than my Hoka One One Carbon X tempo/race shoes. And cushioning does NOT always prevent injuries. While training for the Boston Marathon in 2016 and 2017, I got stress fractures in my tibia and foot while wearing Hoka One One max cushioned shoes. They're certainly more comfy though. Finally, as a supinator I feel the max cushioned shoes make me run more neutral, which is a bonus.
11
The issue is what helps get you out there, and keeps you out there on the road. Lots of running shoes under a table at the food court in the mall that will never see pavement...minimalist or maximalist?
5
I’ve been wearing Hokas since they first came out - at least ten years. I will never give them up. I haven’t had plantar fasciitis since I started wearing them. I now have high top versions for serious hiking, and have even golfed in my runners. At age 70, they keep me active and injury free.
My only request to Hoka and every other shoe maker: how about sizes for narrow feet?
24
@Stephanie Cooper
Me too. I have been running with Hokas (Clifton, Bondi) for the past 5 years or so. My shin splints and other injuries are things of the past now after starting to use them. That being said, strength training exercises for the legs seem to help quite a bit for reducing injuries.
7
@Stephanie Cooper I also wear Hoka One One and have an A width foot, which is really narrow for a guy. I often purchase the women's model as that's a B width. That doesn't help you though!
3
@misterdangerpants Women's sizes run 1 larger and 1-2 narrower. I take men's 11B, but when not in stock take women's 12A or AA.
1
Supply the correct running shoe to the general public is tricky work. Years of running and selling running shoes have taught me, with the help of orthopedists, that each runner requires a particular shoe. Selling super cushioned shoes with no support to everyone who wants to run is a recipe for injuries.
We put 7 to 8 times our body weight each time we stride in a run. Better find the right shoe for the flat arch, low arch, high arch or injured foot than presume soft and cushy is the only way to go.
My advice? Don't fit your own foot. Talk to a pro.
4
The key takeaway from this article is the last quote: "“visit a running store and try them out before buying.”
What kind of shoe you run in depends on your running form and level of fitness. When I first started running, I was 210+ lbs and had a severe overpronation. At that time, I ran in heavily cushioned, max support sneakers.
Over time as I ran, lost weight, and paid attention to my running form, I've been able to move towards lighter and less supportive sneakers. Having someone at a running store that can analyze your gait and recommend what shoe works for you is key. What shoe works from person A will not necessarily work for person B.
7
After dealing with plantar fasciitis for years, my Hokas allow me to run pain-free. It’s all about what works for each individual.
20
@MK I also have PF - on both feet. Just walking is an issue; forget about running. Hoka Bondis are a godsend!
6
@MK Do they have arch support? I was told that it is just as important as cushioning.
1
I have high arches and have custom orthotics in my shoes. The combo of custom orthotics and the Hoka Clifton have been perfect for me.
2
Too many variables to discuss intelligently... My sub-6:00 minute 5K and 10K miles are way-way behind me. When sedentary folks jump into HIIT classes or race training programs, the problems begin. I don’t need a fast shoe. I need a shoe which will allow me walk or jog. My glory days now are being able to happily plod along while others my age and younger are sidelined.
18
"...stacked soles of the maximalist shoes seem to subtly affect balance."
Anything that "seems" to "subtly" affect something like balance which so many other things affect dramatically like vision and inner ear function, suggest that the worth of these shoes is mostly the cool factor.
As Dr. Hannigan says, ease into them slowly or you may what, lose your balance?
2
I tried a pair of Hoka Ones in a shoe store one time. Felt like standing on a phonebook. I was afraid to even walk around the store because it felt like I may fall over. I'm definitely a minimalist. Unfortunately, the only significant running injury I ever had can be traced to a pair of zero-drop, no cushion shoes I ran in when MacDougal's book was popular.
My current running shoes are racers but they do have lightweight cushioning and an 8 mm drop. My feet sing when I wear them. So, that's all I've been using for years now. The company keeps updating the version but it's about the same. It's a little tough on technical trails, though. That's when I would wish for those Hokas.
1
When I had a terrible overuse injury, these sneakers and deep muscle stretches, along with working out the knots, was the only thing that worked. I still wear Doc Martens because they are the cushiest dress shoes I can find.
We should run in what we are comfortable in, because this will never be a science. There are too many body types, too much change (gain weight, lose weight, sprain an ankle, spend too much time in a cubicle, add muscle mass, get a year older, etc) to ever do it scientifically. And injuries have incredible diversity that usually gets missed. I certainly don't think the podiatrists know what they are doing, unless their field is supposed to be selling stuff. PT on the other hand has been invaluable. Massages and PT should be the core of this field, not shoes and accessories.
But anyway, soft running sneakers can be invaluable to normal people beyond their value in running and exercise. Despite my skepticism of orthotics, I know support cannot be overlooked for some of us.
12
@mjw Actually what you are advocating for, I think correctly, is the science of matching the proper shoe to the runner. One type does not fit all runners. Science helps knowledgeable sales staff analyze your particular running style and shoe needs in selecting the best match for you.
4
We all have different structure, different anatomy, so one size does not fit all. I alternate shoes a lot. Some minimalist, some cushioned. Repetitive striking on all the same places continuously leads to problems. See carpal tunnel in those that repeat and repeat the same motion.
7
While I agree that form may suffer with thicker shoes, and injury could easily result if pronation, for example, isn’t compensated for in the design, the use of force plates in the study design is flawed from the start. The important factor isn’t the force imparted to the running surface, but the force felt by the runners’ anatomy. Had they incorporated a device to measure the effect on the foot or leg, I suspect the result would show that effective thick, springy soles would impart far less force on the foot than minimalist shoes. The material in these soles stores some of the energy of the strike in the material rather than imparting it to the foot, which under some circumstances allows the runner to push off with more force with less expenditure of energy. This allows one to run harder and possibly faster, which would appear as harder strikes on a pressure plate. Think boxing gloves; if you strike a solid surface covered with a pressure plate, you will not hit it very hard if you are bare-knuckled, but may greatly increase your strike force if you are effectively padded. I have foot issues that would completely keep me from running at all now, were it not for the new shoe designs.
17
I have the feeling there's a basic but crucial insight missing here. Midsoles in running shoes offer additional suspension to our own physical suspension system. Our bodies will happily accept such outside assistance and react by doing less themselves. Or to put it differently: Midsoles allow you to run even though your body might not have a fully developed suspension system itself. What the studies cited in the article tell me is that the thicker the midsole is the less your body has to chime in. That's good because it lowers the threshold for starting to run, but it might not be beneficial in the long run because it might inhibit your body to better develop its own suspension system.
Minimal or barefoot running shoes, on the other hand, do not offer any suspension. They require our bodies to do ALL the suspension work. Compared to running in cushioned shoes this requires pretty well developed muscles in the entire lower body. If you do not have or develop these muscles, barefoot running will definitely be a liability to your body. Once you develop them, however, minimal or barefoot running can be pure bliss.
27
@Arne You are absolutely correct. I will say, though, that for most of us who are running on the road, barefoot running is not a realistic possibility. I've heard too many stories of runners suffering stress fractures in their feet from the repeated landing on such a harsh, unyielding surface, though I personally did run in minimalist shoes for some time without injury. At a certain point, though, I risked the same sort of overuse injuries. Now, had I been running on a dirt trail instead,I likely could have done it indefinitely.
One thing that has always annoyed me is "arch support" in running shoes. My feet have high arches which, when running, work as intended: they flatten to absorb force. Too many shoes have high arch support, and all it does is prevent your foot's arch from acting as it's supposed to, by flattening out to absorb force, and instead your knees and hips take an excessive amount of jarring force.
18
@Joanne Very few running shoes include any arch support at all. They are 100% flat inside. Take the insole out and have a look. You might see the insole curve up the side of the shoe (provides little/no support), and you might feel the side of the shoe against the side of your foot (if the fit is snug). This is a common misconception.
Specialist running insoles such as those by Powerstep or Superfeet allow a runner to add arch supports to a running shoe. Those are rigid and stiff under the arch of a foot.
Barefoot running requires a runner to learn good running technique, often after years of running in heavily-cushioned shoes. Injury is certainly a possibility before you adapt to a more natural running style. It takes a while (years) to learn or re-learn.
4
@Joanne You wrote exactly what I was thinking, while I am not a runner/jogger or sprinter, I am an ex-professional ballet dancer and talk about foot and knee issues=jackpot. One thing for sure is ballet dancers have exceptionally strong feet we have to have and I think because we are in shoes with 'no-nothing' that's where the strengthening takes place. I wonder if runners wouldn't benefit by adopting some dance type exercises in order to prevent or limit injuries. They(runners)might then find they would need a very different shoe from what they are used to or not?
4
In 2016 I was running in a new pair of cushioned running shoes. (I had been wearing that brand for probably 2 years). I rolled my ankle for no reason, on a dry flat road and broke it. My doctor believed that the height of the shoe contributed to the fracture. I feel that they were unstable. If I had rolled in flatter shoes, the height difference may have only resulted in a sprain. I’ll never really know, but I never wore those shoes again.
19
Any runner who either pronates or suppinates shouldn't be running in neutral running shoes - full stop. These "studies" were flawed from the very beginning. A tire manufacturer would never submit racing slicks for a snow tire test.
I'm a neutral runner so I run in neutral running shoes. Hoka's are what I've been running in for the past 4 years and they're wonderful FOR ME. Anyone who wants to start walking or running should go to a reputable running shoe store but watch out for customized insoles some will push onto you.
26
@str8shooter618
The study proved to the researchers that it was the excess cushioning of the shoes that caused the otherwise normal runners to pronate.
3
@str8shooter618 Massive oversupinator here with really high arches. Shin splints and stress fractures took me out of the running game for a couple decades due to essentially running on the outside edge of my feet despite efforts to rebuild my stride and be mindful of pronation.
Tried Hoka Bondi 1s years ago and was able to complete a few half marathons and Ragnars without any issue. I've been on Bondis ever since, running at least a 10K 3-4 times a week with no injuries or need for anything but a roller. They're not the prettiest or fastest shoe, but they have singlehandedly allowed me to enjoy running for seven years now and hopefully many more. They are the right shoes for me and I'm thankful for the maximalist movement.
8
I ran thirty miles per week for years, but had to stop in my late forties due to knee pain. Then I read the book, "Born to Run: A Hidden Tribe, Superathletes, and the Greatest Race the World Has Never Seen," by Christopher McDougall, about a tribe of barefoot ultra runners in Mexico. Even if you're not a runner, it's a great book and I highly recommend it. That book inspired me to buy a pair of barefoot running shoes and try running again, and when I did I found the way I connected with the ground left my knees pain-free. For me, when it comes to running shoes, less really is more.
57
@AB I agree, once I started wearing minimalist shoes I never went back. I now have multiple pairs of cushioned shoes never to be worn again. My feet and legs feel more toned and any knee pain I had has disappeared since using the minimalist shoes. I wear them every day even at work. And yes 'Born to Run' is an amazing read.
11
I am gonna rail against companies, especially trusted name brands, that make footwear to appeal to the latest fad without doing the research into problems they might cause (literally) down the road. It's not only about these sneakers. I am thinking of women's stiletto heels with extreme pointed toes. The spine feels it, not only the foot. As always it's "buyer beware".
20
The difference is no one needs to wear stiletto heels but much of the country wears sneakers for activities other than running.
3
I recently bought a pair of Hoka sneaks. I've got to think they were one of the shoes being tested. Big puffy bottoms that feel like you're running on marshmallows.
For someone with problem feet, they are a godsend. I have hallux rigidus in both feet, also known as Big Toe Arthritis. Very little movement at the base of either toe. Already had surgery on the right toe, and the left toe is screaming for equal time.
Hoka's minimize the movement at the base of big toe, allowing me to move relatively pain-free. I can run again, and since we're built to move, that's a great thing.
65
@Sarasota Blues Bravo Hoka. i wear Bondi6 and it is amazing for multiple feet issues. The stability of the front of the shoe not bending at the metatarsals prevents impact and harm to this area. The roller bar adds ease of stepping off. NO, I am not from the company; I am a user who was saved by this shoe.
6
@Nettie Glickman
I have a slightly high right arch and darn near flat left one, the latter causing so much overpronation that my bunion is exaggerated, my small toenails are misshapen, and I'm getting tip-of-toe calluses on my middle toe, and occasional metatarsal bruising after tackling German cobblestones on a 2012 river cruise in Finn Comforts' supposed "walking" oxfords with poor cushioning.
My feet look like I got a L foot transplant from an alien (and I don't mean "immigrant"). I gave up running in my late 20s when I got compartment syndrome and now I can't go back to even light jogging lest I knock my knee implants loose. Not just that, but I have big toe and ankle arthritis in both feet and cuboid syndrome (mimics metatarsal stress fracture) in the L. So I walk, stationary bike, and do recumbent ellipticals.
For dressier or business wear, Finn Comfort Finnamic modified rocker soles (with built-in orthotics) work well for me. I used to wear Hoka Conquests (since discontinued) with Powerstep insoles for distance and Brooks Dyads with Superfeet for strength work. But now that I must wear custom orthotics and need a longer shoe, I find the Hoka Bondi 6 to be a Godsend--black and pale blue mesh ones in good weather and black leather in snow or heavy rain. Hokas are the only ones with deep enough toe boxes to accommodate my mismatched tootsies and custom orthotics, with enough cushioning to offset the rigidity of the orthotics' posted arches.
3