Comments on: Do Runners Really Know How Much They Pronate?

By: Pete Larson

Pete Larson — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Presumably most of the people in this study self-assigned themselves based on information they received in a shoe store...a gait analysis in such a setting is completely subjective and not based on any real conception of what "normal" is. Ian Griffiths post that I linked yesterday made the point that we consider to be normal, i.e., neutral, may in fact not be normal at all, and that mild to moderate eversion may in fact be the norm Furthermore, treadmill gait analysis measures what the shoe does more than what the foot does - bone pin studies have shown that even if it looks like a shoe allows a neutral gait, the foot is still everting just as much inside the shoe.

----
Pete Larson's Web Links:
My book: Tread Lightly - http://ow.ly/bdUO0
Blog: https://runblogger.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/oblinkin
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Runbl...

By: Pete Larson

Pete Larson — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

In reply to Ana-Maria.

Great point, and another important issue. Things can change with time, so what works for awhile may not work forever, especially for a new runner who adds mileage and gets stronger and starts to refine their form. A recent study indeed showed that form and economy change over a period of time in new runners.

----
Pete Larson's Web Links:
My book: Tread Lightly - http://ow.ly/bdUO0
Blog: https://runblogger.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/oblinkin
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Runbl...

By: Pete Larson

Pete Larson — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

In reply to Lightning_Racer.

Example: http://www.runnersworld.com/co...

----
Pete Larson's Web Links:
My book: Tread Lightly - http://ow.ly/bdUO0
Blog: https://runblogger.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/oblinkin
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Runbl...

By: Gabe

Gabe — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I'd love to see a 4th picture: the same runner without any shoes. I bet he would overpronate even less, if at all. The third picture is really telling of how shoes can create an artificial rolling in of the foot and lead to injury.

By: Ana-Maria

Ana-Maria — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

This is great info. I am one of those runners who has been assessed as both overpronator and neutral. One thing I have noticed with my pronation (mainly from looking at the bottom of old shoes and checking the wear) is that it has changed over the years as I increased my mileage and got much faster; I used to wear out shoes on the inside of the sole and on the heel, and now the shoe wears out uniformly. So, could it be that one can go from overpronator to neutral simply by running more, as the foot naturally finds the most efficient way to land?

By: Pete Larson

Pete Larson — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

In reply to Gabe.

It’s in this post: https://runblogger.com/2010…

By: Pete Larson

Pete Larson — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

In reply to Jens.

Couldn't hurt, might give some sense of mediolateral stability

By: Alan Ashley

Alan Ashley — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

So based on this, runners should move/start with a neutral shoe and go from there. I'm not sure what would then trigger the need for possible pronation support shoes. Would that be injury, soreness or some other aspect of running that says hey, maybe a support type shoe would be best.

By: Dan

Dan — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

And if you supinate? Why is there very little guidance or talk about correction or need for correction if there's supination. Currently I don't load my big toe enough and compensate with my small toes. Thoughts?

By: Pete Larson

Pete Larson — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

In reply to Lightning_Racer.

I wouldn't disagree with this, but you know yourself a lot better than most runners probably do. There are absolutely shoes that cause you to evert way more than you would normally when barefoot, and this can be a problem. For me, the New Balance MT110 is one such shoe - the sole is slanted from lateral to medial, and it caused me a bout of posterior tibial tendonitis - I can feel my feet slant inward just standing in them, and I don't even need a gait analysis to know what they are doing to me. So I don't have a problem screening shoes to determine if they cause abnormal motion, I object to the blanket categorization of runners as neutral, overpronators, or underpronators based on a largely subjective process that has been pretty much debunked by recent science, especially given the fact that pronation has not been strongly linked as a risk factor for injury except in more extreme cases.

----
Pete Larson's Web Links:
My book: Tread Lightly - http://ow.ly/bdUO0
Blog: https://runblogger.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/oblinkin
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Runbl...

By: Jens

Jens — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Peter,
We know how important the one-leg stand is. What would you think about trying on shoes and checking how comfortable you are doing a one-leg stand in them? Without disregarding a trial run, of course.
Thanks!

By: Lightning_Racer

Lightning_Racer — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

If you have access to a treadmill with slow-mo video (gait analysis), which many do through their local running shops, I don’t think this study adds anything at all. Who cares about self assessment in three broad categories? And if you are not running barefoot, it doesn’t matter what your change in eversion is when you are running barefoot. If I had been in this study, I don’t know that I would have liked to have put myself into any category. I know from gait analysis that my degree of pronation/change in eversion is very different depending on the shoe, how I would place a shoe in a category based on what it does to my change in eversion in a gait analysis sometimes doesn’t fit what category shoe is labeled to be in (looking simply at rank order of degree of stability in a shoe). I haven’t tried barefoot on the store treadmill, though I’m assuming neutral, and if I’m wrong, it doesn’t matter. I don’t think someone can tell if they overpronate by feel – they need to see it in a photo or video of themselves while running, whether by a still photo (like your far right photo) or in a gait analysis. Based on that belief, I think people in the study probably self categorized based on what kind of shoe was working well for them prior to the study – and the study doesn’t show that they were wrong, because it didn’t test them in their preferred shoe model. In some ‘neutral’ shoes I overpronate a lot, sometimes even farther than your right photo, and in other ‘neutral’ shoes, I don’t overpronate at all. Even in some ‘stability’ shoes, I overpronate a lot. So the model of ‘neutral’ shoe that they chose would have totally affected my ‘shod’ results – and the study participants ‘shod’ results. They are trusting the shoe category too much if they think the conclusions say much about the runner’s self assessment of pronation or overpronation.

Now the degree of overpronation as viewed or measured by change in eversion while running (easily seen at many local running shops on a treadmill with slo-mo video) is actually a very useful concept for me. If I run in a shoe where I look like your right photo, my knees start hurting within a few miles. If I run much in a shoe that allows a medium amount of change in eversion, my knees might not hurt when the shoe is new, but my knees will hurt after a relatively short shoe lifespan as the midsole foam breaks down unevenly and running in the shoe starts looking like the right photo. If I run in a shoe that that don’t overpronate in, the midsole stays level as it compresses, I can wear the shoe 1,000s of miles and never have knee issues.