File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
vibram five fingers. what do you think of them and has anybody used them?
>> Anonymous
sorry, but that really does look like the most retarded pair of shoes I've seen in my life.
>> Anonymous
... they look good for white ninjas.
>> Anonymous
OP here, apparently they are the greatest shoes you can ever wear for running and the likes.
>> Anonymous
>>83680
But my second toe is bigger than my big toe. Do they make any like that?
>> Anonymous
needs moar loose shoes and tight women
>> Anonymous
bump
>> Anonymous
if i ever see a person running with these on...

i'll fucking curb stomp his toes
>> Anonymous
FUCKING AWESOME HOLY SHIT LOOK AT THOSE SHOES THAT LOOK LIKE FEET OH MY GOD
>> Anonymous
honestly, they look brutally efficient... but yea they do look gay as fuck
>> Anonymous
they look like gorilla costume feet
>> CrossFitter !!B/qKSvIDE0V
>>83670
I own a pair of the Sprints, and they're great. Very comfortable, very durable, just enough to protect your feet from getting torn to shreds or burned (asphalt gets hot during the summer).

>>83684
www.vibramfivefingers.com
There's some specific length requirements on that site.
>> Anonymous
>>83744
Going to that site's faq is enough to make me want to stab the owners of these shoes. Here's why:
ARE VIBRAM FIVEFINGERS A GOOD CHOICE FOR VEGANS?
Yes! Currently, every style and color of Vibram FiveFingers is made from vegan friendly materials. By the way, we also make dog toys for my good dog (http://www.mygooddog.com/) and we provide soles for Ruff Wear dog booties (www.ruffwear.com/grip_trex_dog_boots).
>> CrossFitter !!B/qKSvIDE0V
>>83756
While I agree that's a good reason, and I saw that before buying myself, it doesn't make the shoes any worse.
>> Anonymous
>>83757

So, how much are they and how much cushion to they provide (like...sprinter's shoes, converse all stars, what?). I want a pair like boots so I can be super ninja and throw knives with my feet.
>> Anonymous
they look better for stealing a television in the middle of the night than running
>> Anonymous
Oh so I checked the price and uh....I am not eccentric enough to wear funny looking shoes and pay that much for 'em. I tell you what though....those camo ones are pretty hawt: http://www.kayakshed.com/vibramfivefingers.cfm?CategoryID=198.
>> Anonymous
honestly these look fucking cool and would be good for a bunch of things, but i really wouldn't want to run around outdoor in them too much. i'm thinking broken toes, because each one will individually wear impact rather than the shoes dissipating it over all of them.
>> Anonymous
People who run in those are the same idiots who go around saying everyone should run on their forefoot all the time, which is just idiotic.

Good for kayaking? Yes!
>> The Bringer of Truth
>>83783
forefoot?
>> The Bringer of Truth
>>83783
I don't think humans have forefeet. Quadrupeds do, it kinda goes with four feet. Makes sense?
>> Anonymous
>>83787

The frontal portion of the foot, as opposed to the rear portion.
>> The Bringer of Truth
>>83791
Not that they mean the same thing. :\
>> Anonymous
>>83791

No.

Is English your first language? Or are you making a bad joke?
>> The Bringer of Truth
>>83796
I was making a bad joke.
You probably should have asked if English wasn't my first language and the alternative was making a bad joke.

Is English not your first language?
>> Anonymous
>>83800

I know what it is now! You're a smartass!
>> CrossFitter !!B/qKSvIDE0V
>>83783
Have you ever tried running on heels without a pair of running sneakers? Or even barefoot? Did it feel comfortable?

Simply put, humans can only run heel-toe because of shoes. People ran without Nike, New Balance, etc. for thousands of years. Do you think they ran heel-toe?
>> Anonymous
>>83809

So if I were to run barefoot, on my forefeet, on grass or sand, would that be a good idea?

I have a pair of running shoes, but they seem almost superfluous. It doesn't make sense to me that the human body would be so poorly evolved that we NEED shoes.
>> Anonymous
>>83823
but trying running down a city street barefoot and see how far you get.

we're not in kansas (the savannah) anymore dorothy.
>> Anonymous
>>83823
meh, i should specify. people still break bottles on the beach and there are still pointy rocks in the park. so you get my drift at least.
>> Anonymous
>>83809

How far are you running? I've tried this whole barefoot phenomena/forefoot thing and I think it's ridiculous, at least for distance. For sprinting, it's completely natural.

Just about every elite marathoner (sub 5 minute mile for 26.2) runs on the heel, so I see no reason to switch to some new fad and throw away the advantages of shoe technology just so I can run on my forefoot like the ancients.
>> Anonymous
>>83831
>>Just about every elite marathoner (sub 5 minute mile for 26.2) runs on the heel, so I see no reason to switch to some new fad and throw away the advantages of shoe technology just so I can run on my forefoot like the ancients

i think the point is this might be because they have to unless they want to spend forever building callouses and then still fuck up their feet if they step on broken glass by accident.
>> Anonymous
>>83829
>>83830

Well, where I live, I wouldn't have a problem finding an area of grass without a bunch of pointy objects in it. I live in a pretty rural area, but I can see where someone might have trouble in an urban area.
>> Anonymous
>>83847
well, i grew up in the country and still occaisionally fucked myself up on bad ground/thorns/thistles/discarded farm shit when kicking around in barefeet. the problem with running is that you don't always have time to look were you are putting your feet.

not to say you shouldn't or anything, just sharing experience.
>> Anonymous
>>83839

If they could run faster barefoot, they would be doing it.

But people have gotten faster as shoes have become more technologically advanced (less injury), so why put yourself into unnecessary risk when the shoes are working?

(there are shoes that simulate being barefoot and some runners do wear those, but it's one of those 'new agey' things)
>> Anonymous
so has anyone actually ever put a pair of these on?

they seem fun for wearing around the house or walking around without some clunky show on,

or for training, sprinting on an athletic field on running on the beach
>> CrossFitter !!B/qKSvIDE0V
>>83829
That's exactly what Vibrams are for. It protects your feet from glass, etc. without being overly bulky.

>>83831
I run 5k's with moderate frequency. I don't do marathons. The only way to win one of those things is to not run.


>>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17685722?ordinalpos=7&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pub
med.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

>Rearfoot strike was observed in 74.9% of all analyzed runners, MFS in 23.7%, and FFS in 1.4%. The percentage of MFS was higher in the faster runners group, when all runners were ranked and divided into 50 runner groups at the 15.0-km point of the competition. In the top 50, which included up to the 69th place runner in actual order who passed the 15-km point at 45 minutes, 53 second (this speed represents 5.45 m x s(-1), or 15 minutes, 17 seconds per 5 km), RFS, MFS, and FFS were 62.0, 36.0, and 2.0%, respectively.

>The findings of this study indicate that foot strike patterns are related to running speed. The percentage of RFS increases with the decreasing of the running speed; conversely, the percentage of MFS increases as the running speed increases. A shorter contact time and a higher frequency of inversion at the foot contact might contribute to higher running economy.


They don't specify what the difference between forefoot and midfoot is though. I've heard forefoot be referred to as the toes before, and midfoot as the ball of your foot. Either way, it's not heelstriking.
>> CrossFitter !!B/qKSvIDE0V
Anyway. I'm off to bed. So, I may or may not get back to this thread before it floats off.
>> Anonymous
>>83851
>>If they could run faster barefoot, they would be doing it.

not if barefoot was too risky to perform. if you loose a months training because you cut your foot badly, your career and therefore your bank balance is effected. also, this is a new product. things take time and tradition has an inertia all it's own.

>>But people have gotten faster as shoes have become more technologically advanced (less injury),

less injury compared to other types of shoes i'd hazard.

>>(there are shoes that simulate being barefoot and some runners do wear those, but it's one of those 'new agey' things)

the thread is actually about one of these shoes, would you believe.

until they take an olympic marathon runner and let him test one of these things out professionally, none of us here no the actual answer so this is pointless. i am considering a pair of these seriously though; not sure if i could find a pair in my country however.
>> Anonymous
>>83823
Well there's a species of lice that has evolved to only live in clothes, so yeah, there's been enough time sense we adopted clothes and shoes for Natural selection to completely fuck us over.
>> CrossFitter !!B/qKSvIDE0V
>>83920
Are you trying to troll or something? Lice wearing clothes is an utterly ridiculous proposition.

Anyway, for much of the history of the shoe, you had things like moccasins or thin sandals. Thick, supportive boots/shoes are relatively new, and evolution is a very slow process (or would it be unevolution?). Right now, your feet are probably severely atrophied, so beginning to run barefoot (or nearly so) will take a few weeks of buildup time, but they will still work fine.

>>83863
>i am considering a pair of these seriously though; not sure if i could find a pair in my country however.

You probably could get it shipped internationally, just email the company. If nothing else, there's eBay.

Another unmentioned advantage of the shoe is that some people have used them for 700+ miles, without significant signs of wear. So, they cost the same as a decent pair of Brooks or New Balance, but last twice as long.
>> Anonymous
>>83863

I meant the nike free, or newtons.

Vibram five fingers do not qualify as shoes in my eyes due to the fact they do not have a support base on the bottom; they are pretty much socks.

I think a marathoner would be insane to run on a pair of those; newtons I can understand. But Modern day support for racing and training is quite a good thing.
>> Anonymous
>>84897
yeah. i think ima gonna.
>> Anonymous
>>84908
if i was running on concrete like most marathons then i would probably want a built up shoe. but i don't run on concrete.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
look at this guy, he looks crazy
>> Anonymous
The thought of wearing this gives me the fucking heeby-jeebies.

I can't stand the feeling of stuff between my toes when I'm walking. Never wear flip-flops.
>> Anonymous
>>84930
christ, is everyone on 4chan such a bubble-boy neurotic bitch? because it seems like it sometimes.