What do you look for in a running shoe? Why do you wear the ones you
currently have? Recommendation? Review? Like the design and took a
punt? Your running hero maybe wears them? You persuaded in the store?
Or maybe price?
I've had lots of favourite running shoes. In that regard I'm a bit
like a puppy. Oooh Saucony, I love them. Brooks, I love them. Salomon,
ooh like Killian, I'm very cool in these! Hoka, I really love them.
Loved.
Past tense? Here's the rub. My last couple of running shoes have been
Hoka One One Stinson Tarmac. Great shoes. My running heroes wear them,
Wardian, Canaday, Meltzer.... All great runners in Hoka's. Aspiring to
ultras I bought a pair and it was love at first run. Soft, supportive
and surprisingly responsive. Pricey sure. Garish - definitely. But
really great and unlike anything I had run in before. Read the hype
around them and it's hard not to be seduced and seduced I was.
I set about banging on about them to anyone that would listen. On my
recommendation at least 11 pairs have been bought. Those
recommendations were genuine too. I have never been so passionate
about a shoe before.
You can sense there's a but coming can't you.
But........... they are not durable and once they start to break down
they cause problems, for me, in the knees. Running shoes used up be
good for in excess of 500 miles. I've seen literature lately pointing
to a number of between 300-500 miles. With me and Hoka it's around 380
miles. At that point the outer rubber has gone and I am wearing
through soft foam sole. That doesn't last long. The shoe is no longer
balanced and that puts pressure on the knee. Patella tendinitis is the
current manifestation.
I'm not heavy, I weigh around 150lbs. I'm also quite light on my feet
and mid/fore foot strike.
My latest stinsons have done 450 miles and I retired them this
weekend. I did some research online and solicited some recommendations
for alternatives. Prompted by a review of the adidas boost on the
ultrarunner podcast website. Described as being more cushioned than
they looked. I also had a couple of positive recommendations from
mates that have them.
I looked at other shoes too, the Altra Olympus caught my eye for
obvious reasons. Then there were the usual suspects of Brooks, Saucony
and the New Balance fresh foam. The thing being that I wanted to try
them and not just buy online, if I were going to do that I would have
taken a punt on some Newtons.
I popped into Up and Running Cheltenham and had a chat with the guys
that work there. The most cushioned shoe they sell is the Brooks
Glycerin 12. They also sell the Boost. I tried those first. Initial
reaction was that they are thin. Particularly in the forefoot. They
also seemed very narrow, but then most shoes would compared to Hoka's.
I tried them on the treadmill and while the fit was good and the
material very soft around the foot the sole felt too thin. I think if
I were a heel striker then they would have been great but for me the
front of the shoe was not soft enough.
I tried the Brooks Glycerins and they felt great. Interestingly
considering they are the softest shoes in the shop they really aren't
that soft! They did, however feel cushioned enough and not that alien
from someone that has run over 1000 miles this year in Hoka's. The fit
on the Brooks is slipper like, the upper really soft around the heel,
much like the Boost, the lacing system holds the foot steady without
uncomfortable pressure. The design is awesome and appeals to my sense
of shoes that attract attention! They are bright blue, almost
metallic. I looked at some alternatives by New Balance and Saucony but
opted for the Glycerins.
List price they are more expensive than my Hoka's at £130 (versus £125
for the stinsons). Some store discount brought them down to £117.
I ran in them on asphalt the following morning. My initial thought was
I had wasted my money and that they were no good. I was actually
gutted. Then after about 3/4 of a mile I started to relax and the
shoes felt good. They are a solid build and nicely cushioned. They
feel very supportive and solid. I've not weighed them but would guess
they are heavier than Hoka. But that's key here, they feel solid, they
feel like they can work. A glance at the sole and there's a good
rubber there and a decent thickness too. They feel like they will last
and be durable. Time will, of course, tell on that but I have had a
number of pairs of Brooks over the years and always been impressed.
They have never let me down.
I also noticed my run form alter slightly to smaller strides. Higher
foot turnover probably as my body compensates for the change in
cushioning. Not a massive change but part of the process. A bit like
when you first run in minimalist shoes from a traditional shoe.
I loved my Hoka's and will almost definitely go back, maybe I will
just keep a pair for racing and wear other shoes for training. It
would be great if the road shoe could be made a little more durable as
that from my perspective it is all that needs changing. Adidas use
Continental rubber on their shoes why can't Hoka?
For now I am back in Brooks, they are a great shoe, my tendonitis was
less painful after one run in them. If this experience continues in
positive vein then I may stay with them, again. That's the point
really, if it's not working you need to look elsewhere and for
alternatives. There's so much choice and so much similarity now
between shoes that there's always an alternative. They all want our
£'s for the latest and greatest technology so shop around, try them at
the local running store for an informed view and, just as importantly,
buy them there.
Sent from my iPad
