I have been busily contacting all the major shoe companies asking them to direct me to the evidence that their distance running shoes either prevent injuries or improve performance.
The most entertaining responses so far have been from Mizuno and Puma who both claimed that whether or not their running shoes prevent injuries or improve performance was a trade secret.
Refusing to tell consumers whether or not your product works is certainly a unique marketing ploy!
They are not alone. I have received a similar response from ASICS in the past.
I received a preliminary reply from Brooks in which it was clear that they did not appreciate the question. Hopefully their next installment is a little more enlightening.
New Balance referred me to a website where the use of their shoes is justified on the basis of the opinion of their podiatrists.
Saucony were a breath of fresh air, their representative laying out it clearly that there is no direct evidence that their shoes either prevent injury or improve performance.
I will keep you updated as more replies come to hand!
Friday, February 1, 2008
Is there a running shoe mafia?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Craig,
First of all, congratulations on all the good work you're doing. Your blog is a breath of fresh air.
Talking about breath, I would not recommend you hold yours waiting for replies from the running shoe companies because they are no longer in the business of selling sports equipment; instead, they sell fashion. Most of their "researchers" are trend and fashion consultants, not biomechanical engineers. NIKE total sales last year (not just running shoes of course): more that 17 billion dollars! So, why change a winning formula?
Cheers.
Thanks Joe
May I first point out to everyone that Joe is being very modest.
Joe is an orthopaedic surgeon with specific expertise in running shoes and injuries.
He has his own blog www.quickswood.com on which he posted a fantastic article in 2006 entitled "Athletic footwear and running injuries".
In this article he relates a particularly poignant anecdote where he asks the head of Nike's research lab whether or not their running shoes have proven benefit. The research director responds that he is not allowed to discuss such matters and that perhaps the good doctor might speak to the marketing department instead....
Craig, the only thing I would say is to stick with promoting the benefits of your product rather than spending time slagging the competition. If they don't give the evidence but you do, then that is a key competitive advantage.
IMHO only products with few benefits of their own need to be compared to the competition since they don't stand up on their own.
You know I am keen to see if BOG is a great new product so shout about the good stuff & let everyone else get into "brand wars"
Good Luck!!
I Craig
I found this blog trough a post at Core 77 Design Forum, I am a experienced Shoe fitter, in my opinion a shoe without laces it's hard to fit. Is your intention to make BOG laceless?
PS: I hate the fact of shoe design been so apart from ergonomics and Biomechanics as you can see by reading a few posts from Core 77
Thanks for you comments guys.
What are the key elements of fit from your perspective Paulo? If you would like to give us some design tips, any advice would be very welcome. We are keen to get this right!
hello again
From your perspective the key elements of fit are:
a) The running shoes should be fitted as close as possible as been barefooted; snug at forefoot, lose at mid foot/toes. (most running shoes lasts are too curved, resulting in too narrow shoes), to achieve this, shoe lasts should be straighter)
b)Running shoes need laces, a laceless shoe forces the wearer to fit it too snugly, contrary to point a.
c) Manufactures tend to overemphasizing cushioning ability of running shoes as the miracle response to running injuries, shoes should have as they say in Britain ; Structured cushioning; a balance between cushioning and stability.
d)Shoes should be built in different wides.
e) The most expensive running /athletic shoe is useless if not properly fitted because the wearer's feet aren't functioning as they should.
f)Fit should be checked:
1) Overall length
2) Heel-to-ball
3) Ball-to-toe
4) Heel-to-outer-ball
5) Ball width /vamp room
6) Heel
7) Quarter top edges
8) Instep
9) Throat
10) Medial arch
f)By my experience about 80 to 90% of runner's are misfitted.
g)Most running shoes aren't sold in specialized stores as they should, athletic manufacturer's are aiming for mass distribution, not for customer satisfation.
h)athletic shoes need to be more custom adaptable, ie: insoles like these: http://www.cyclefit.co.uk/sidas.html
could be standard in some shoes.
Thanks Paulo
Shoe fitting is certainly its own very crucial area of expertise.
You sound like you would make a very valuable member of our advisory board. Send me an email if you are interested.
There's a wealth of aticles on barefoot running on:
http://runningbarefoot.org/
and: www.oerlopen.nl
Primeval Runner George
Post a Comment