To say that “minimalism is dead” when most of the “minimalist” products were/are FAR from truly minimal is the epitome of bad thinking.

To equate the flattening of VFF sales with some opinion that the market has about minimalism is also way off-base.

Zero-drop does not necessarily equal “minimal.” Nor does light-weight, for that matter. Even some minimalist shoes that have narrow mid-foot areas are, arguably, not minimalist.

In other words, the major shoe companies, who rode the minimalist bandwagon by NOT making truly minimalist shoes are now arguing that minimalism is dying… because their non-minimalist products didn’t take off (and threaten the rest of their product line).

ARGH!

Sounds like we are on the same page.. end of the day, no one has all the answers! I am just glad to still be learning! Hope the exam went well.. I still, after all these years, wake up in the middle of the night in November every year, worrying I have not studied enough!
In relation to FluidAxis vs the Formotion.. the principle is quite different. the Formotion was trying to identify a decoupling around the midtarsal joint, which as you know because of its complexity and biaxial alignment, is extraordinarily difficult. FluidAxis actually takes a simple premise, that most shoes, including a lot of ASICS shoes, are decoupled around the ankle joint axis.. think the Free as an example that is easy to imagine. I am not convinced this is the way to go, so Fluid Axis decouples along an estimation of the STJ axis for the neutral runner. We have built a second shoe that shifts the axis laterally to increase the medial platform for an over pronater. The cool thing about this is that we put absolutely nothing into the shoe, it weighs 7 oz and it is for an over pronater. the lab testing is extraordinary, so i am excited. I know a few other brands are looking in this direction as well.
best
s

Agreed, more movement is good, and I also agree that the notion that we all need to have our “broken” biomechanics fixed has been taken way to far.

—-
Pete Larson’s Web Links:
-My book: Tread Lightly: http://ow.ly/bdUO0
-Blog: https://runblogger.com
-Twitter: http://twitter.com/Runblogger
-Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/Runbl…
-Discussion Forum: https://runblogger.com/forum

Hey Dustin and Brian.. could not agree more! great comments, and I think maybe we are now getting somewhere! Dustin.. Ryan sounds like a guy I need to meet, wish i had the chance to chat with him at TRE! End of the day it is and always has been about the runner. Mix up the training.. the footwear, terrain and surface and you have a better chance of staying injury free.. Happy holidays..
www,facebook.com/bartoldbiomechani…

I thought I would chime in to clarify a couple of points, because as always it is sometimes a little difficult to get an accurate flavour for opinion from the printed word! When I made a comment about minimalism being ‘dead’, it was in the context of the DISCUSSION being dead, in other words, I am not, and never have been anti minimalism, and I strongly believe the truth for most runners lies somewhere in the middle. What this discussion has brought to the table has been incredibly valuable, and has resulted in product that has allowed many runners to evolve, experience different running choices, and, in some cases, have success with recalcitrant injury. I think the argument that minimalist is best, or that traditional is best, is dead, because it will be different for each runner, dependent on so many factors. I think that after the initial rash of enthusiasm spurred by as you point out a very vocal minority (on BOTH sides of the argument), most runners now understand that this is not about “do this and that will happen’, but more..”lets change it up a little and mix the training up using different terrain, different surfaces AND, different, less structured footwear. For some, this different less structured footwear will evolve into the only shoe they wear, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that… providing they do not presume that because it worked for them, it will work for all others. This is akin to the running shoe industry saying (which they absolutely HAVE been guilty of in the past),..”wear only a motion control shoe because it cured my x, y,z. It just does not work that way because of the variability of the human animal!
i think you hit the nail on the head when you said ‘Minimalism is not dying, it’s evolving. We are learning through self experimentation – for example, I still like to run in a barefoot-style shoe from time to time, but I prefer a bit of cushion for most of my runs… spot on, and if that works for you or anyone else reading this blog, then that is absolutely what you should do because.. it works for you!

I wish we could have a bit more discussion on the physiological side of being fit to run.. the strength and aerobic side of training, rather than the idea that shoes will magically do it for you..any type of shoe.. or barefoot for that matter. However, the argument got so skewed, so.. angry, the really important things in terms of going faster and injury prevention maybe got overlooked.

So for me, the argument is dead.Time to move on to new ideas to help the runner. The fact so much new product has hit the market is fantastic for the runner, and gives them choices and opportunities that have not been present in the 30 odd years I have been involved. Bravo!

Finally, my comment about the lack of science pertains to both minimalist and traditional shoes. Minimalist footwear will decrease your external knee joint moments, so for someone with persistent patellofemoral pain, minimalist or barefoot may well be the answer. But minimalist or barefoot will increase the external ankle joint moments, so the runner has to factor this into the equation and be judicious in their choices. My main beef is with the (somewhat extreme) points of view that insist that a particular way of running is best or will ensure no injury, or a particular shoe or lack thereof will make you run in a particular way (FF RF, MF.. floating!).. This is not necessarily the case for all runners, and that is ALL I am saying.

Runners come in all shapes and sizes.. some do fantastically with Hoka.. some with Vibrams, some with a Brooks Beast.. the knack is.. to try to figure out what works for you.

Wishing you and your family a very Happy Christmas and holiday season, and hope to catch up in person next year.

best

Simon

Thanks for the clarification Simon, I think we then are largely in agreement. I had considered attending TRE this year, but it fell in the middle of my final exam week and I couldn’t skip that obviously! Hope to get there next year.

Quick question (or maybe not) for you – how does the Asics Fluid Axis differ from what adidas did with Formotion?

Merry Christmas to you and yours as well.

Pete

—-
Pete Larson’s Web Links:
-My book: Tread Lightly: http://ow.ly/bdUO0
-Blog: https://runblogger.com
-Twitter: http://twitter.com/Runblogger
-Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/Runbl…
-Discussion Forum: https://runblogger.com/forum

Anyway, the authors advocate against going through a series of shoes with gradually reduced cushioning and stabilization devices. They say “take off your shoes right away and transition by running barefoot starting with very short times/distances, while listening to your body in order to not overdo it”. For our purpose, it could be converted into “put on a pair of minimalist shoes right away and start short and slow, but don’t go through a gradation of shoe types to slowly bring you to the minimalist shoes”.

Of course, it doesn’t mean that the other shoes (call them “transitional”, or “zero-drop cusioned”, or “low drop slightly cushioned” or whatever) would not have their place. You’re very right in saying that it’s about choice and variety. People have various situations, needs, preferences, and applications… and of course feet :) So, it’s nice they may find something suitable for themselves, not necessarily positioned along a special “transition lineup”. What do you think?

Cheers from Europe :)

hi simon, i’m a run specialty dealer and i’m still not 100% clear on fluidaxis. my rep tried to explain but i’m not sure he understands it either because i get the “it works” explanation.

1. how does decoupling the outsole/midsole along the STJ axis affect a runner’s mechanics?

2. i notice there is a decoupling perpendicular to the STJ axis, which i understand works as an improvement over the nike free concept because the shoe will bend at the approximate angle of the STJ axis (which is the angle the foot bends forward as it dorsiflexes when you take pronation into account).

3. last, it seems the stability paradigm is evolving as well (some day dying). as i understand it, stability shoes do not change how much the foot pronates…they change muscle firing patterns. is that an accurate assessment?

it seems like the old “stability shoe for a pronating foot” doesn’t quite hold weight according to the literature. i read a lot of the Gait Guys material and they recommend stability shoes based upon foot type…rearfoot valgus, forefoot valgus, etc…not just based upon pronation.

what are your thoughts on that?

i was glad to get a better understanding of your philosophy in your reply to pete’s blog post. thanks!

eric johnson

ultramax sports
springfield, mo

the born broken part is about how people are basically treated that way that they NEED said product or they’re doomed to injuries or something, it’s ridiculous

also, i should have added “as much as possible” to the letting the body do what it wants to part, i know people are weakened, and everyday i notice it more and more and people don’t have a clue

but i mean that since society has become accustomed to sitting in chairs most of the day, point is that getting off the couch or chair and move needs to be stressed more than it is

i don’t mean that people need to just move like they’ve been doing it everyday, but just start in the right direction is all