Minimalism: the view from the trenches

As the debate over barefoot and “minimalist” shoes heats up, we’re hearing lots of opinions from scientists, shoe companies, and self-proclaimed experts. But we haven’t heard much from the people who deal with runners — and their shoes — on a daily basis. Canadian Running senior editor Alex Hutchinson spoke with Bert Barcelos, manager of the Boutique Endurance running store in Montreal, and John Lofranco, coach of Concordia University’s cross-country running teams.

AH: What’s the level of interest in barefoot or minimalist running among the customers who walk into your store (Bert) or the runners you coach (John)?

BB: In over 15 years of working running retail, I have not seen the same excitement and interest for any particular running product as with minimalist. A few Saturdays ago, we had 12 people in the store trying shoes. Eight out of 12 ended up buying minimalist running shoes. From the buying perspective, it’s been difficult, as many suppliers are out of inventory. And the selection in this category keeps growing: the shoe companies are keeping an eye on each other.

JL: I coach mostly university and post-collegiate track and cross-country runners. I would say there is some interest. I think that group of runners tends to think less about gear and such, though. That may make them minimalist by default: they do what feels good to recover from the hard training that we do. A few people have the Vibrams, which they use to lift weights in, but rarely to run, and most people definitely like to do workouts in flats or lighter shoes. A few do warm-ups and cool-downs barefoot on the grass around the inside of the track.

AH: Last year, a Nike-funded study published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine found no benefit to prescribing stability, neutral or motion control shoes based on foot type; in fact, motion control shoes seemed to have higher injury rates for all foot types. Do you believe there’s still value in dividing runners into these categories?

BB: I believe there is value in taking the time to prescribe a shoe that is comfortable for the runner, regardless of the category. The motion control category has always been a small part of our shoe sales, less than 10 percent, and we haven’t found that those runners are injured more frequently.

JL: I do not believe there’s any value to it at all. In my first year of university (1996) I had some knee trouble, and I was told I needed orthotics because I overpronated. I got them, but the knee problems continued, and I also suffered several serious ankle injuries. Every time I went into a running specialty store, I was told to wear stability shoes. I always found the so-called neutral shoes to be most comfortable, but I was always told “you can’t wear that, you’ll get hurt.” In 2001, I moved out east and the trainer at UNB, where I was at school, looked at me for the knee problems and told me to ditch the orthotics and just wear neutral shoes. I was happy to try anything. So I did, and never had knee problems again and I was able to double my mileage to 120-130K per week in a couple years. So it took a hockey trainer using common sense to get me out of that running retail loop.

AH: Bert, you say there’s value in taking the time to prescribe a shoe that is “comfortable for the runner.” Some researchers, like Benno Nigg at the University of Calgary, argue that comfort is in fact the best guide to choosing shoes. How do you get people to figure out which shoe is most comfortable?

BB: We start by looking at the runner’s feet, measuring them, then bringing out a few pairs for trying on. Three to five is usually is enough. From these we examine the runner’s gait visually on our 20-metre Mondo track surface in the store. If need be, the customers are free to try the shoes on the sidewalk in front of the store. We ask about the general feel, the “ground feel,” and most importantly, the comfort. I also believe that the “first feel” is very important in the selection process.

JL: I know that for me, I can tell right away. But then again, I have a lot of experience with shoes on my feet. When I worked in shoe retail, too often customers wanted me to tell them what shoe to pick. I don’t see how that’s possible. The best thing to do is, as Bert suggested, give them options and try to gauge from their feedback which one they like best. But really, people should be able to try on a shoe and know. It’s their own feet, after all.

AH: One final quick thought: what will running shoes look like in 10 years?

JL: Considering a lot of designs we are seeing today are very similar to shoes we saw 20 or even 30 years ago, I don’t know that shoes will change much in terms of how they look. I am going to go out on a limb though and say that maybe by that time the idea of a “made to order” shoe will be mainstream. I don’t mean just like Nike id where you pick the colours of the laces, but where you can do a mould of your foot and have a shoe with not only custom colours, but custom fit. The challenge will be to make it accessible and cost-effective somehow. I’m sure someone will figure that out.

BB: I agree with John: the shoe itself will look similar. I think we will see some really great new lightweight midsole materials and outsole designs. Some new brands will continue to take market share from the big players.

Alex Hutchinson will give a free talk on The Science of Running at Boutique Endurance in Montreal on Friday, June 3 at 7:00 p.m., based on his new book, Which Comes First, Cardio or Weights? After the talk, Alex, Bert and John will answer questions about running, science, minimalism, and anything else you’re interested in!