Pronation and gait analysis...does everyone care?

I can't be the only one who thinks "meh" and is cynical about all the analysis around at the moment.

I've managed a couple of marathons, an off road ultra, and never bothered with analysis or thinking about pronation. I'm not challenging for gold, but I go for a 30km run most weekends so like to think I'm no couch potato.

I did get some advice in the Asics outlet store once, went in one ear and out the other, they just grabbed some pair and shoved them on me. And you know what, they were absolutely grand!

I appreciate that at an elite end, runners may look at this stuff to fine tune performance, but what gets to me is people who analyse it because they want to stroll some 10km fun run in about 3 months time. I think of all the greats, the Zatopeks and Bannisters, and wonder did it cross their mind? Are we not a little guilty of overanalysing what is a wonderfully simple sport...or am I completely wrong?

menoscemo

Deleted User wrote: »

I appreciate that at an elite end, runners may look at this stuff to fine tune performance, but what gets to me is people who analyse it because they want to stroll some 10km fun run in about 3 months time. I think of all the greats, the Zatopeks and Bannisters, and wonder did it cross their mind? Are we not a little guilty of overanalysing what is a wonderfully simple sport...or am I completely wrong?

Yeah possibly so. I think 'back in the day' your Bannisters and Zapoteks would have been using very minimalist shoes to say the least though (they would have basically been wearing a pair of plimsoles?). There wouldn't have been any such thing as motion control/support I guess and no heels in the shoes they wore. There wouldn't have been any choice and you would have been forced to have an efficient, midfoot striking form

The danger (for me anyway) would be inadvertanly buying a pair of motion control shoes as I know from experience that will aggravate any niggles I might be carrying. I am happy to pick up any type of shoe on offer once i know it is 'neutral'.

griffin100

I'm a bit cynical when it comes to gait analysis. When I started running as a 16 stone plus couch potato I went to Lifestyle Sports to buy a pair of runners (how naive was I?). I was lucky enough to talk to a girl who was a runner herself and she recommended Nike Pegasus. All grand and I started my running. After about a year I decided after reading all about gait analysis on various forums I went and had it done in a well known running shop. I was told my Pegasus were no good for me and was sold Mizzuno Wave Inspire - long story short ended up in Physio for knee problems that disappeared the moment I went back to using Pegasus. Have worn Pegasus since then with no issues. So for me I take the whole gait analysis with a pinch of salt! I'm sure it works for some but it didn't do me any good.

To me it's a part of the whole marketing racket that now exists around running. No longer is running simply putting on a pair of runners and shorts and setting off. Now you need gait analysis, compression socks, recovery food, hrm, GPS, gels, etc etc. I did the rock and roll HM last week and the amount of runners carrying numerous gels and wearing lots of compression gear was something I've never seen before outside of a triathlon.

ecoli

I would say that gait analysis in itself is a bad thing as long is it is used with perspective as a guide rather than a determinant as like anything there are limitations

- Doesn't take a look causes further up the kinetic chains
- Only as good as the person trained to conduct it

Yes there will some using it as a marketing tool but not always and can be a step up from the old ethos of "oh Kayano's are the best runner we will throw you in them"

Garmins, gels, gait analysis etc all have there place provided they are not relied upon.

Personally I have only had gait analysis done once at a time when I knew myself I was bio-mechanically weak and ended up causing alot of problems but got green light in what I was wearing. Most issues stem from beyond the shoe so neither the shoe or the gait analysis will fix it.

Trampas

People going in and don't run as they normally run.

Go in with the mindset that they should run like this and come out with the wrong shoes.

Golfers are just the same when going for club fitting. Swing like they should be instead of their normal swing and come home with the wrong clubs.

kerrylad1

Best advise I would give is to go and Spend £60 and see a podiatrist.Some guy working in a store,who has done a few hours on a course,will not be able to tell you properly,weather you over pronate or whatever.I speak from experience,out injured :mad: for the last 6 weeks as a result of wearing the complete opposite runner's to what I should have being wearing.

krafty

Deleted User wrote: »

I've managed a couple of marathons, an off road ultra, and never bothered with analysis or thinking about pronation.

You're lucky. I broke a metatarsal in my right foot two years ago. It changed how I land on the ground as I run, and these changes have shown up as a troublesome IT band friction. Getting physio for it. But gait & pronation (or lack thereof) are now always on my mind.

Deleted User wrote: »

Are we not a little guilty of overanalysing what is a wonderfully simple sport...or am I completely wrong?

In general, I think you're right. I remember the first 5K run I signed up for in the phoenix park and thinking how serious & fast these guys must be with their heart-monitors strapped on.... The best advice I received was don't over-analyse, just run more, and build distance slowly.

moc moc a moc

It's worth considering that humans have been running marathons for literally thousands of years before pronation and gait analysis came along.

robinph

moc moc a moc wrote: »

It's worth considering that humans have been running marathons for literally thousands of years before pronation and gait analysis came along.

But also before the lifetime of wearing shoes came along that probably caused the funky running gait anyway.

uberalex

moc moc a moc wrote: »

It's worth considering that humans have been running marathons for literally thousands of years before pronation and gait analysis came along.

With all due respect, not on tarmac, not in shoes and not in the same way. I don't think the naturalistic argument is a very compelling one.

TFBubendorfer

I'm highly sceptical of gait analysis, and I find it rather disturbing that every time someone here asks what shoes to wear they are sent to some shop where they provide gait analysis.

The analysis is usually done by some sales guy who wants to sell you a shoe. Spot the potential conflict of interest? Even if the guy/gal in question is highly ethical and genuinely tries to find the best shoe for the runner in question, the entire pronation/shoe type theory is based on very shaky foundations.

I haven't ever had analysis done and I highly doubt I ever will. I have been running for 10 years and it's been well over 6 years since I last missed a run due to injury. Besides, I have run in numerous different shoes and can only think of 2 or 3 pairs that I did not like. My thinking is, if the shoes feel comfortable they are suitable. No need for further analysis.

pconn062

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

I'm highly sceptical of gait analysis, and I find it rather disturbing that every time someone here asks what shoes to wear they are sent to some shop where they provide gait analysis.

The analysis is usually done by some sales guy who wants to sell you a shoe. Spot the potential conflict of interest? Even if the guy/gal in question is highly ethical and genuinely tries to find the best shoe for the runner in question, the entire pronation/shoe type theory is based on very shaky foundations.

I haven't ever had analysis done and I highly doubt I ever will. I have been running for 10 years and it's been well over 6 years since I last missed a run due to injury. Besides, I have run in numerous different shoes and can only think of 2 or 3 pairs that I did not like. My thinking is, if the shoes feel comfortable they are suitable. No need for further analysis.

That has nothing to do with gait analysis or lack of it, you are simply lucky enough to have been born with good natural bio-mechanics, simple as. Some people aren't so lucky so need a shoe that bests suits their own gait, be it over pronation or supination. Now, I have had gait analysis done but I don't see it as the be all and end all, but most people are not lucky enough to be able to train for years at a time without injury and this mostly comes down to the bio-mechanics you were born with.

nerraw1111

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

The analysis is usually done by some sales guy who wants to sell you a shoe. Spot the potential conflict of interest?

As opposed to the mythical shoe salesman who doesn't want to sell you a shoe?
There's only ever been one Al Bundy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VW8CqnfhrrY

robinph

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

The analysis is usually done by some sales guy who wants to sell you a shoe. Spot the potential conflict of interest?

But you are already bought into the idea of buying a pair of shoes just by going into the shop, so there isn't a conflict of interest there. If a Nike employee is trying to tell you you should buy Nike then it is obviously biased, but a guy in a shop that sells Nike/ Asics/ NB/ Brooks/ etc telling you to buy brand X is not...unless he gets a greater commission from one brand or another.

Now if the different types of shoe actually make a difference or not is another issue, but I'd not be suspicious of the intentions of an unbranded store selling you a shoe of brand A, B or C.

TFBubendorfer

nerraw1111 wrote: »

As opposed to the mythical shoe salesman who doesn't want to sell you a shoe?

robinph wrote: »

But you are already bought into the idea of buying a pair of shoes just by going into the shop, so there isn't a conflict of interest there.

And you've never heard the stories about the sales person who sold/tried to sale the most expensive running shoe on the shelf to the hapless customer?

And, like I've said already, the quality of the "analysis" is usually less than brilliant. If you spend a day in some lab being analysed you can take something from that. Being watched for a few minutes on a treadmill in a shop, on the other hand, won't help you at all.

Laois_Man

I tend to agree
My gait is rubbish....bad overpronator. But I have to run a good few miles for it to get really really bad.
Jumping onto a treadmill on a shop will not replicate my form at the 18 mile mark of a marathon!

robinph

Maybe I just look broke when I've been in for gait analysis before and they've not tried to sell me the most expensive ones.

thirstywork2

Deleted User wrote: »

I can't be the only one who thinks "meh" and is cynical about all the analysis around at the moment.

I've managed a couple of marathons, an off road ultra, and never bothered with analysis or thinking about pronation. I'm not challenging for gold, but I go for a 30km run most weekends so like to think I'm no couch potato.

Does it matter if you are an ultra runner or C25K?

I did get some advice in the Asics outlet store once, went in one ear and out the other, they just grabbed some pair and shoved them on me. And you know what, they were absolutely grand!

So the above advise worked out well and yet you knocked it ?

I appreciate that at an elite end, runners may look at this stuff to fine tune performance, but what gets to me is people who analyse it because they want to stroll some 10km fun run in about 3 months time. I think of all the greats, the Zatopeks and Bannisters, and wonder did it cross their mind? Are we not a little guilty of overanalysing what is a wonderfully simple sport...or am I completely wrong?

Again knocking people who choose to run a shorter distance.Zatopek & Bannister not very relevant considering technology has advanced.
Agree things can be over analysed but I spent my underage years running in a stability shoe when I supinated badly.
There is not enough specialist stores in Ireland and yet people try to knock it.
It's great your shoes have worked out for you but I see people everyday having done a gait analysis and been sold a pair of inserts along with a motion control or stability shoe and this bugs the hell out of me.
You will find most people who work in a specialist store are runners and do CARE about other runners.

adrian522

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

I'm highly sceptical of gait analysis, and I find it rather disturbing that every time someone here asks what shoes to wear they are sent to some shop where they provide gait analysis.

The analysis is usually done by some sales guy who wants to sell you a shoe. Spot the potential conflict of interest? Even if the guy/gal in question is highly ethical and genuinely tries to find the best shoe for the runner in question, the entire pronation/shoe type theory is based on very shaky foundations.

I haven't ever had analysis done and I highly doubt I ever will. I have been running for 10 years and it's been well over 6 years since I last missed a run due to injury. Besides, I have run in numerous different shoes and can only think of 2 or 3 pairs that I did not like. My thinking is, if the shoes feel comfortable they are suitable. No need for further analysis.

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

And you've never heard the stories about the sales person who sold/tried to sale the most expensive running shoe on the shelf to the hapless customer?

And, like I've said already, the quality of the "analysis" is usually less than brilliant. If you spend a day in some lab being analysed you can take something from that. Being watched for a few minutes on a treadmill in a shop, on the other hand, won't help you at all.

I would have thought it was obvious the sales guy wants to sell you a shoe, that's his job. And if I'm in a shoe store it's safe to assume I want to buy a shoe. I don''t get the issue with any of that.

How do you know what the quality of the analysis is like if you've never had it done?

I've been in to AK 3 times and never got the impression I was being advised towards the most expensive shoe and the sales assistants always seemed to know what they were talking about.

I guess it could be hit and miss depending on how is doing the analysis but I don't think it's fair to say that the analysis is usually less than brilliant.

TFBubendorfer

adrian522 wrote: »

How do you know what the quality of the analysis is like if you've never had it done?

Because I've been talking to plenty of runners who have been less than impressed with the analysis and subsequent advice they had received.

adrian522 wrote: »

I've been in to AK 3 times and never got the impression I was being advised towards the most expensive shoe and the sales assistants always seemed to know what they were talking about.

Staff in AK are runners themselves and know what they are talking about. Not every shop falls into that category, though. I still won't ask them to analyse my gait, though.

And before you accuse me again of talking about a subject I know nothing about because I never had my gait analysed, here are some links:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/fitness/debunking-the-myth-of-specialized-running-shoes/article4268207/

http://www.championseverywhere.com/why-gait-analysis-doesnt-work-future-of-the-shoe-industry

There's also an old thread here on boards about the same subject, and plenty of mixed opinions:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=60717949

adrian522

Sorry, I didn't mean at all to suggest you didn't know what you were talking about, I was just wondering where were coming from having never gone for the gait analysis yourself.

For what it's worth I think some people put far too much stock in the analysis of their gait but I do think it can have value. For example when I started running I was a fairly severe over pronator but now I'd be more of a neutral runner.

I agree that the analysis is only as good as the guy(or girl) doing the analysis but I certainly think it has value, but often people don't look at things like form, foot strike etc.

thirstywork2

thirstywork2 wrote: »

Again knocking people who choose to run a shorter distance.Zatopek & Bannister not very relevant considering technology has advanced.
Agree things can be over analysed but I spent my underage years running in a stability shoe when I supinated badly.
There is not enough specialist stores in Ireland and yet people try to knock it.
It's great your shoes have worked out for you but I see people everyday having done a gait analysis and been sold a pair of inserts along with a motion control or stability shoe and this bugs the hell out of me.
You will find most people who work in a specialist store are runners and do CARE about other runners.

It's not even the whole analysis in shops thing that gets me. Although that is part of it.

It's the whole over-analysis by people before they even get off the couch. You hear people analysing their gait and their runners and even tactics before they have tested their running. If anyone asks me about running, particularly when they say that their goal is some local 10km run/amble, I usually just tell them to get into TK Maxx and grab a pair of New Balance for €35 and get out there, and start worrying about the whole pronation and tactics stuff when they decide that they will get into the sport in a big way.

I should confess that I too may have been a little guilty of it. In my first 10km I was asking a very experienced local runner about tactics and he just stared at me, a little contemptuously, and said "it's only 10k, you run it as hard as you can".

To a certain extent, it kinda put me off road running a little. Everyone lining up with their Garmins and then many just trotting around in slow mo, and at the end whinging about too many bends or not enough water stations on a 10km. It's not a big deal, but found it mildly irritating. I have no issue with strong runners having gripes, or valid complaints (the absence of water stations on a Killarney run last year in very hot weather was certainly one legit one imo) but I think a lot of people are putting the cart before the horse and loading up with gear and analysis before even deciding if they like the sport. The first IMRA run I did, the organiser pointed to the top of the mountain and said "it's very simple, you run to the top, you run back down". I just think there is not enough of that "just get on with it" attitude (even Nike said "just do it" in a famous campaign) out there.

sconhome

Deleted User wrote: »

It's the whole over-analysis by people before they even get off the couch. You hear people analysing their gait and their runners and even tactics before they have tested their running. If anyone asks me about running, particularly when they say that their goal is some local 10km run/amble, I usually just tell them to get into TK Maxx and grab a pair of New Balance for €35 and get out there, and start worrying about the whole pronation and tactics stuff when they decide that they will get into the sport in a big way.

It might surprise you but I often say the same thing to beginners who pop into my store with shoes they dug out of the press. I'll have a look at them and 9/10 I'll send merrily on their way to start their running journey.

Video analysis is simply a tool to help people choose shoes suitable for them.

eldiva

"TFBubendorfer wrote: »

And before you accuse me again of talking about a subject I know nothing about because I never had my gait analysed, here are some links:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/fitness/debunking-the-myth-of-specialized-running-shoes/article4268207/

http://www.championseverywhere.com/why-gait-analysis-doesnt-work-future-of-the-shoe-industry

One of the articles talks about not getting gait analysis but running form assessment, even though a humans gait cycle is part of their running form. A proper gait analysis should look at the the kinetic chain of the entire lower extremities and not just the ankle, something that AK does.

The same article says how running form can be changed with 4 hours work, which I find a complete load of rubbish as it can take weeks. I'd use a more credible source of info than Champions are Everywhere as their ideology wouldn't be stone cold as they are promoting excess movement of kinetics chains which waste energy and they have told people if they can't squat they shouldn't run.

I'll admit that there are far too many people being put into structured shoes but gait analysis as a tool has a lot of significance for runners these days, whether it be used for recommending footwear or correction exercises

ArtieFufkin

I might have got lucky with my shoe choice. But before getting analysis at AK I had tendon and knee problems that would surface when doing high mileages.

After being fitted and changing my shoes I have not had any trouble at all (been using the same make/model for three years now).

NIMAN

My 2c worth.

For about six months I suffered with acute achilles tendonitis, couldn't even touch them.
Got orthotics, and inside 2 weeks the pain was completely gone.

Go figure.

thirstywork2

Deleted User wrote: »

It's not even the whole analysis in shops thing that gets me. Although that is part of it.

It's the whole over-analysis by people before they even get off the couch. You hear people analysing their gait and their runners and even tactics before they have tested their running. If anyone asks me about running, particularly when they say that their goal is some local 10km run/amble, I usually just tell them to get into TK Maxx and grab a pair of New Balance for €35 and get out there, and start worrying about the whole pronation and tactics stuff when they decide that they will get into the sport in a big way.

I should confess that I too may have been a little guilty of it. In my first 10km I was asking a very experienced local runner about tactics and he just stared at me, a little contemptuously, and said "it's only 10k, you run it as hard as you can".

To a certain extent, it kinda put me off road running a little. Everyone lining up with their Garmins and then many just trotting around in slow mo, and at the end whinging about too many bends or not enough water stations on a 10km. It's not a big deal, but found it mildly irritating. I have no issue with strong runners having gripes, or valid complaints (the absence of water stations on a Killarney run last year in very hot weather was certainly one legit one imo) but I think a lot of people are putting the cart before the horse and loading up with gear and analysis before even deciding if they like the sport. The first IMRA run I did, the organiser pointed to the top of the mountain and said "it's very simple, you run to the top, you run back down". I just think there is not enough of that "just get on with it" attitude (even Nike said "just do it" in a famous campaign) out there.

I don't get what you are talking about?What are the tactics?Tactics to buy running shoes?
Listen there are tactics in running,you don't just go out and run as hard as you can,usually a more even paced run is advised but then you don't seem like the type of lad that could take advise.
While I do think some people over analyse things (I got rid of my garmin)
Running shoes are the most important piece of kit they can get so why not spend time getting fitted out or taking them for a spin in a proper running store.

thirstywork2

thirstywork2 wrote: »

...you don't seem like the type of lad that could take advise.

You know me? :eek:

You seem like the type of lad that forms very strong opinions about people based on anonymous posts on the www!

By tactics I mean strategy in a race. As you yourself acknowledge. What exactly are "tactics to buy running shoes"?

sam30

In fairness orthotics and specialists running shoes have been around for 30-40 years and there is virtually no research to show they reduce injury or improve performance. Studies done in soldiers have shown that orthotics lead to less stress fractures than big heavy military boots but that is about it. The idea that pronation causes pain is a joke, so called excessive/late pronation may contribute to pain in one person and not another. The only way you know is by altering it(with tape/temporary orthotic) and seeing if u get change in symptoms. It is no more scientific than that.And id changing it helpsyour current pain it in no way follows that orthotics/shoe type will prevent future injuries. The whole industry is a scam honesty is needed

This Fat Girl Runs

I went for a gait analysis and got a couple of pair of shoes, but honestly by now I've forgotten nearly everything I was told about my gait except that one leg is neutral and one over-pronates. I'm not terribly worried about that though. I'd been running just fine for a year before I got the analysis done so.

What really helped was getting moulded insoles. I tried running with the shoe insoles and my feet hurt after just one run. Put in the moulded insoles and everything was grand.