I agree. So have an individual experiment with different running forms (scientifically, carefully, & open-minded) and see which form is most efficient and injury free. Apply this to many individuals and compare. That is when the basic principles emerge and that is something we can learn from.

Absolutely – I do believe there are general principles that apply. What
those are is the big question. For example, running science has focused in
large part on heel-toe running for the past 30 years because that is what
most people do, but now with the minimalist movement and recognition that
form may have been overly tied to our shoes during that time period, a lot
of the general principles we have developed are being called into question
and there is a lot of uncertainty right now. Does what we have learned
about pronation in heel strikers apply to mid or forefoot strikers for
example – probably not entirely, so you need to be careful when you apply
principles generated by a lot of the past studies. I can virtually guarantee
that the population in most of the injury studies we have consisted mostly
of heel strikers wearing typical running shoes. Do a similar study on
minimalists in flat shoes and predominant injury types are likely to change
(things like met stress fractures, calf/Achilles injuries probably become
more common).

It’s a complex, yet exciting time to be trying to figure this all out, and
each runner is part of the learning process.

Pete

Sure, a race chip time is accurate – but how reproducable are the results? How deep a data set is needed from a runner to establish reliable, reproducable data?

And that’s just one issue w/r/t timing. What about other, difficult-to-quantify data, like pain?

The difficulty in having rigorous data is a big hurdle to a lot of research – at least when trying to state a reproduceable thesis.

Fitz,

Yes, I agree totally. Repetitive, unvarying stress is a killer. Add in a
biomechanical flaw, a bad shoe, or excessive fatigue and something is bound
to break. I’m a big believer in variation – I do it with footwear and
elevation, but mixing in trails, cross training, strengthening are probably
also good approaches.

Pete

I didn’t take it as a dig, no worries. There are a lot of people on
both sides who are dogmatic that minimalism is either the only way or
that it is crazy. I prefer a middle ground, though my personal tastes
are more toward the minimal end of things. It’s true the flats have
always been there, but even today, if you go to a mall or big box
sporting goods store you rarely see them on the wall. Went to my local
Dick’s a few weeks ago and of 92 men’s running shoes on the wall, not
one was a flat or a minimalist style shoe. Lots of people still have
no idea that other options are out there.

Pete

My lengthly running “career” has allowed me the opportunity to modify one variable at times. One thing that has absolutely helped in this is having a benchmark race. I do the same 5 miler here every year for the last 12 years and a few years before that. This, coupled with some comprehensive logging, helps. As does educating myself about as many running studies as I can find ( and not just ones I want to agree with)

My general approach is an experiment of one. I am not afraid to try varied approaches and analyzing if they are working. While results are nice, I simply enjoy the process of becoming a better runner. Even if I make a few mistakes along the way.

That’s why for shoes, i advocate for shoe rotation. As for your specific examples of Kinvaras, Fasttwitch and Grid A4 Racers, I am and have been running in all three and have personally found that only the Kinvaras hold up in the longer distance races. I use the last two only for 5K-10K distance races.