Today is sunny and unseasonably mild (forecast high of 70 degrees). And, it's not just today but as far as the (meteorological) eye can see: which is about ten days. The ten-day forecast from the Weather Service for Hog Heaven calls for nothing but spring-time: highs in the mid-60s to the mid-70s under mostly sunny to partly cloudy skies.
Thus, it was with a smile that I went out for a one-hour maintenance run this morning. A run that quickly morphed into a 90-minute maintenance run. That's what spring will do. I ordered a new (3rd generation) iPad and it's scheduled to be delivered on Friday. It'll require a signature so I'll need to be home when it comes which could be any time from about 9:00 until 11:00. So, I'm rescheduling my long run from Friday to Thursday. That means cross training tomorrow.
Phil Knight and all those folks in Beaverton, Oregon, who depend on runners forking over big bucks for running shoes made in Vietnam (and other exotic locales) for pennies a day must be breathing a sigh of relief right about now. Trashed by author Christopher McDougall in the best-selling barefoot-running primer Born to Run, Nike, et.al. hurriedly added some minimalist shoes to their lineups. Now, they may have found some minimal vindication in a new study out of the University of Colorado. The full study can be read here: Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
A quick summary of the study can be found here: http://sweatscience.runnersworld.com/2012/02/barefoot-versus-running-shoes-which-is-surprisingly-more-efficient/
For the time-challenged, here are the main points from the study:
1. Running in shoes takes less energy than running barefoot.
2. The heavier your shoes are, the less efficiently you run.
3. Running barefoot "offers no metabolic advantage over running in lightweight, cushioned shoes."
No comments:
Post a Comment