has anyone proved that track shoes are faster than bare feet?

Answer 1

Running barefoot only gives you blisters when you start training, when you switch from shoes to bare feet. I know several barefoot runners who have no blisters whatsoever even after a marathon; they're barefoot all the time and their feet can handle it. The African runners don't suffer from these blisters, nor did a guy who walked the Nijmegen 4daagse barefoot (hiking not running, but marathon distance and 4 days in a row). Some shoe wearers really hurt their toes; my mom told me at the last Olympics she was watching the marathon runners right at the finish taking off their shoes & socks and they all had bloody toes! I'm not a long-distance runner myself but on my 10-mile hikes I've never had a blister even if it's asphalt all the way.

I don't know about the speed factor, I'm not much into competition, but it runs much lighter for sure. And indeed several barefoot runners have won races.

Answer 2

There has been some studies done on the difference between bare feet and spike track shoe running on artificial tracks. The conclusion was the speed is the same. However, I doubt this study since there are too many variables between people and their feet, and the tracks. I also would consider the weather and whether the track was wet or dry. Realistically most people are not capable of running well without shoes.

Answer 3

When I first heard about people running bare feet in races like 5K all the way up to marathons (some through trails!), it sounded like the craziest thing in the world. When I saw it in person, I was just shocked as the runner passed me by.

While it sounds just incredible, there does seem to be some merit to it. For example, in the 1960 Rome Olympics, Abibe Bikila from Ethiopia won the marathon running on his bare feet, while running twenty miles over the cobblestones of Rome, mind you. I'm not recommending that you go out and try running on your bare feet, but I'm telling you that there are lots of athletes who believe that there is something to this. It is painful, and it requires that you pop huge blisters at the end of a run, but some runners swear by it.

Proving that running bare feet is faster, however, is difficult, if not impossible. For example, if an athlete improved his time after running with bare feet in a race, does it mean that running with bare feet is better? It could be that the athlete simply improved because of additional practice.

Still, shoe companies are taking notice. The Nike Free line of sprinting shoes have soles that are designed to mimic the feeling of running bare feet. They do this by making soles that are not as rigid so that your feet has to learn to balance on an unstable surface. Their argument is that you strengthen your feet and lower leg to reduce injuries and improve performance.

I am sure that shoe companies have already devoted lots of money towards studying how bare feet affects the performance of runners. We will have to see how it all turns out.

Answer 4

Zola Bud is that you?Just kidding. I'd sure like to have a pair if they do. We use to train on golf courses and beaches barefoot,,,it was the best.


FYI- Zola beat the 1984 5000 record of 15:01:83 barefoot!