The Emperor Has No Shoes

Because I'm a running shoe guy; and have been for over 25 years, friends and strangers often ask me what I think about this whole barefoot running thing. Is it really going to take off?
"I dunno" I say. "But you should go for it, and let me know how it works out for you".
Of course, I already know how it will work out for Fred and Wilma, but I think it is important for everyone to try something new from time to time and experience things for themselves.
I have found from my years at Everyday Athlete, no one style of shoe, and no one running technique is right for everyone. We sell roughly 35 models of training shoes and we like to think they are the best of the best. At my last count there were well over 300 different styles on the market. Most of them however are not functional running shoes. For instance the Nike Air Shox Turbo +9 is listed as a running shoe but no specialty retailers in the country sell it. The only people running in that shoe are folks who stumbled into a mall-store and thought $115 would get them a decent shoe. Oh well, live and learn. If everyone bought their shoes from me, Lance, Len, Greg, Shelby Steve, Scott, Chet, Ben, Cindy, or Miguell, then injury rates would be much much lower.
Anyway, back to barefoot running.
Barefooting may be great for some people, but it will certainly be disaster for others. Have you had bunion surgery? Steel plates in your ankles? Are you overweight? If so then you probably don't need me to tell you that exercising barefoot could be a bad idea. I also know that there are literally millions of runners who get their favorite Asics or Brooks every year and happily put hundreds of miles on them before shelling out another $100 for the latest update. I doubt even the most ardent barefoot running (BR) supporter could convince them to try something new. And why should they?
All the books, articles, and web sites regarding BR leave me nodding and scratching my head at the same time. The basic tenants of taking shorter strides and not landing on your heels have been standard coaching mantras for decades. Why all the fuss now?
Christopher McDougall, in his book Born to Run, touts the strength and health of the Tarahumara Indians of Mexico and attributes it in part to the fact that they don't wear expensive running shoes, rather, thin home-made sandals. The book goes on to explain how running "barefoot" teaches you to run correctly. But do the Tarahumara run barefoot?
As stated by the barefoot purists, "instead of each foot clomping down as it would in a shoe, [a bare foot] behaves like an animal with a mind of its own - stretching, grasping, seeking the ground with splayed toes, gliding in for a landing like a lake-bound swan". The barefooters say the sensitivity of your feet allow you to adapt to the grounds contours, firmness, and texture. But your swans -- I mean feet -- can't possibly splay and feel and grasp when they are inside a racing flat, or even a Huarache sandal. I am left to wonder, is it the thin sole that helps us run correctly, or is it the skin's contact with the ground that helps us, or is it the lack of an elevated heel? Which is it? It can't be all of them because you can't have a thin sole and skin contact with the ground at the same time.
Minimal shoes are referred to in the webliture as "transitional" shoes. But one danger of using these pseudo-barefoot shoes (like the Nike Free or the Newtons or most racing flats) is that they have just enough cushion to allow you to over-stride and yet they don't have the support necessary to compensate for the resulting heel strike. You just end up with two sore Achilles tendons and some fallen arches.
I would think that if you want to train your feet and legs to land lightly, you either go barefoot or wear a super thin (and fairly wide) shoe that allows your feet to feel the texture of the earth.
Needless to say, it's a tough sell for the BR's. Considering our society's passion for shoes -- all kinds of shoes -- one would think these crusaders might start with something simpler like peace in the Middle East or ending poverty. I admire their perseverance in the face of social, cultural, meteorological, and medical obstacles. Maybe if they can get rid of shoes, world peace won't seem so hard.
As a retailer I am of course interested in how this could change my industry and business model. I have a hard time imagining all my customers running without shoes. If a revolution does occur, what we will likely see, for good or for bad, is a proliferation of low profile racing type shoes, sandal shoes, or good old fashioned Keds (!?). But none of this is new. Nike made a cool shoe called the Huarache years ago. Spike-less spikes and racing flats have been around for a hundred years. And the Shoe Pavilion has a great selection of Keds right now -- and they come in lots of colors! All this is right at our fingertips but consumers sem to want more.
Maybe people LIKE to pay more for shoes. They have already shown a willingness to pay $100 for minimal shoes like the Five Fingers and Frees, (or $180 for Newtons) so the running specialty stores might not change much after all. Is BR just another side of our materialism? Instead of teaching yourself to run properly, BR's suggest you just take off your shoes then everything will naturally fall into place! It is as fast and easy as buying an orthotic. I think people just want a simple solution. Can't Merck invent a barefoot pill?
Finally, there are a couple interesting sociological aspects to this BR-polooza. First, with as much press as the barefooters get, you would think there would be more of them out there. Their websites are full of testimonials, and the apostles say it is spreading around the world (like a virus?) but alas, I have seen exactly one in the last five years. It all smacks of AstroTurf buzz generated from Knopf the publisher of Christopher McDougall's book. I think there might be something more significant going on here though which leads to my second concern.
What does it say about all of us who nod our heads in agreement with the less is more argument? Are we all so dissatisfied with our current shoe selection that we are ready to dump the whole lot and go sans shoes? Where does this restlessness come from? I think we feel disaffected because running is supposed to be an escape from a life filled with technology, and shoes have become too tech-y. The library is full of books about Americans' love/hate relationship with technology. I think Born to Run is another such book.
This schizophrenia can be seen in other sports as well, such as the proliferation of fixed gear bicycles downtown, in FINA's ban on full-body swimsuits, and the popularity of wool and silk as "high-tech" fabrics for the discerning outdoors-man.
In a different vein, I find that as we cling to our active lifestyles of 15 and 20 years ago, the cry of the snake-oil salesmen promising a fountain of youth sounds mighty enticing. Who wouldn't listen to someone who promises injury free running -- even if it means tip-toeing down the street with big callouses on our soles.
Finally, some BR's hint at a shoe industry cabal designing shoes that injure us so we buy ever more supportive and more expensive shoes. We all love a good conspiracy. Especially if it involves an industrial giant like Nike. I know lots of shoe designers and developers and I can guarantee that they earnestly are trying to make the best shoes for runners feet. But they know that if they stopped making cushioned supportive shoes, participation in running would plummet as fast as it exploded in the Seventies (when heel wedges were first introduced).
So the question remains; will large numbers of people try barefoot running or running in flats? I have no idea. If they do, I assure you retailers like me and the big shoe companies will modify our lines accordingly. Change is in the air in this era of Obama. I am just not sure if runners are poised on the edge of a cliff, or merely stepping between to boats? (Equally dangerous I would suggest). Are shoes going to the dogs, or are we slipping free of our shackles?
Stay tuned.