Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.

From the New York Times:
Forget Barefoot; New Trendsetter, if Not Pacesetter, Is Cushioning

 

oh how things have changed.
interesting to read some of the news media stories over the recent 12 or so months and how so many of the 'fan boys' have changed their tune. None of them are admitting that they got it wrong.

 

I like this little gem-

But everything in between is different?
In fairness I am sure there are a lot of these comments that are misinterpreted or taken out of context...

 

Are "Maximalist" Running Shoes The Next Big Con?

 

This is a hoot to read ... one barefooters spin on that article:
Maximalist Running Shoes / Minimalist Thinking Skills

He is allowing no comments on the article. What is he afraid of?
I can't be bother deconstructing the whole article as I would be here all day writing, but its easy and lightweight; full of the usual lies, made up stuff and logical fallacies, but here are some snippets:

Maybe just go and read some barefoot websites and you see that quite regularly! (I know they are not the same as that is what the evidence says)

I noticed that the author was dead silent over the last x number of yrs when we were getting inundated with "anecdotes" from barefoot runners! Suddenly this is not acceptable way of writing an article because the anecdote is in the other direction? ... go figure the logic behind that one.

1. So its acceptable for "barefooter" to lie that you do not get injuries from barefoot when there is NO proof for that. I have asked repeatedly in many places why do barefoot runners lie and make so much stuff up for? (remember the running shoes cause knee OA lie that went viral in the barefoot community?)
2. Who has ever claimed that maximalist running shoes are healthy? I have never seen it, yet he complains about the lack of evidence for that claim (that no one is making!)

Yep, but they never claimed that they did. Funny how the minimalist running shoe manufacturers are somehow exempt from providing any proof that you get less injuries in their shoe, which is what they claimed! That is why Vibrams really had no choice but to settle their class action after the judge accused them of deliberately lieing over there being "ample" scientific evidence!

liar liar pants on fire (we been around that stump many times)

1. Please show us where these companies are actually claiming that their shoes reduce injury?
2. Please tell us why you are not asking the minimalist running shoe manufacturers to come up with "proof" that they do actually claim if you run in their shoes that you will get less injuries? .... go figure the logic behind that one as well.

I guess this is to be expected. At the run specificity level Hoka's outsell the entire minimalist category ... those who so firmly "hung their hats" on the barefoot/minimalist are in an embarrassing position as what they predicted did not eventuate. I guess it must be hurting sales.

 

Another piece of ****e:
Maximalist Shoes = Minimalism on Steroids
Gotta luv the way that the minimalist fanatics are now back pedaling and trying to rationalize what is happening in the running shoe market.
Why can't they just admit that they were wrong with all their previous predictions?

Simply what has happened is that barefoot/minimalism did not live up to all the benefits that were claimed; once the research was done, it showed that there are no systematic benefits (there was never any evidence for it in the first place despite the claims from the fans boys). Runners have voted with their feet and are no longer interested in it. Its that simple.

 

I see he has now posted similar content here:
http://onlyagame.wbur.org/2015/02/21/maximalist-running-shoes-trend

I called him out on this by posting this in the comments section

Lets see how this pans out.

 

Minimalism Is Dead – Long Live Minimalism!