Shoe Review Times TWO: Newton Running's Distance & Fate!

Yes, I've been busy testing shoes again.  And no, I'm neither getting paid to do so, nor am I getting free shoes.  HOW do I go about getting one of those gigs?!  Because I think I've proven my expertise in such matters.  ;)

Anyway... I've been slogging through yet another hot, humid, Florida summer and about the only ray of light (you know, beyond the many cancer- and heat stroke-causing rays emitted by the freaking sun) in my training has been the glory of Newton Running shoes.  I already detailed my experience with the Gravity '13 model, and I'm happy to report that I'm still running in it and still loving the ride!  BUT... the more I run in them, the less comfortable every other shoe feels.  And I really do need to alternate.  So I grabbed a pair of an earlier model Distance on clearance, and a month or so later, a pair of the new Fate. I've been running quite a bit in both. Results?  Read on!

Newton Running Distance

The Distance is Newton's second main neutral shoe, very similar to the Gravity in shape and form, but with less weight.  I find the "Distance" name a bit misleading, as this feels like a speed shoe to me.  Just picking them up out of the box, I could feel they were lighter than the Gravity, and immediately noticed the different heel...

Distance sole

 

Gravity sole

See how the Gravity has that extra, black layer of outsole?  That's a pretty rugged rubber that doesn't wear quickly.  See how the Distance has no such extra layer?  Its heel is the soft, foamy material found in the midsole.  What this means for a heel striker is some major wear and tear on the heels.  What it means for this forefoot striker who's pretty light on her heels even while walking is limited wear and tear on the heel, but lots of extra pep thanks to losing the excess weight!  These shoes are FAST, I tell ya.

That said, the lack of extra stuff on the heel also means less stabilizing back there.

Additionally, there's not much in the upper to control heel movement, nor to support the Achilles; the mesh of the Distance is a bit more stretchy than the Gravity, and allows my feet to move around more.  In some ways, this is good: nothing in this shoe pushes or pulls in any uncomfortable way.  But the lack of ankle stability is dicey with my bum Achilles; I've only taken these up to six miles at a time so far, as that's about the point at which I feel like I need extra support.

I may never wear the Distance for longer runs, but they're still a great addition to my shoe line-up!  They have all of the awesome energy return of the Gravity, thanks to those super lugs, fit my feet and mechanics beautifully, and deliver a super-peppy ride.  I've been enjoying them for both speed work and, rather surprisingly, as a walk-around-theme-parks shoe.


Moving on to my newest shoe...

Newton running Fate

The Fate is one of Newton's new line of 5-lug shoes, and falls into its middle, P.O.P. 2 category.  What the heck does that mean?!  Well, here's a guide: Choose Your Ride.  In my view, the P.O.P. refers to how much "pop" one gets from the lugs, with P.O.P. 1 giving the most energy return (Gravity falls into this category), P.O.P. 2 giving a little less "pop" and a little more cushion, and P.O.P. 3 offering more cushion and a ride similar to traditional running shoes.

Full disclosure?  I couldn't have cared less about which P.O.P. level I was selecting: they had me at lime green. 

Okay, yes, the color is awesome, but how's the ride?  Let me tell ya...

Starting at the top, the upper is really, really nice and, in most ways, a big improvement over previous Newton models.  All of that green is a fine mesh that's super stretchy: there are absolutely NO potential hot spots likely to cause rubbing, that I can tell.  It's almost a sock-like fit, but not quite - though, I do feel like I could size down a half-size in cooler months and it would fit more sock-like in the smaller size.  My only real gripes are that the tongue could be a bit more plush (I can feel the laces clearly through it on my instep - not problematic so far, but could be on a very long distance), and the heel is a little loosy-goosey, thanks to the soft, stretchy material.

Fate and Distance, side by side

Underfoot, the Fate is a pretty neat ride.  The lugs are less pronounced than on the Gravity or Distance, and I'm less aware of them under my feet while running, though they still give a nice energy return on liftoff.  Beyond that, the Fate's sole offers far more cushioning than the Gravity or Distance, but in such a way that it doesn't feel spongy.  It's more a reactive cushion, if that makes sense, reducing some amount of impact without making me feel as though I'm sinking into mud.  This is HUGE for me, as other highly cushioned shoes have left me feeling like it took a lot more effort to pick my feet back up after landing.  Not at all so with the Fate!

Fate's sole

I'm noticing that the Fate does a superior job, too, of helping me land closer to mid-foot, which reduces a lot of wear and tear on my metatarsals.  I usually end with some pain in that area after a long run in my Gravity's, but that hasn't happened yet in the Fates.  

The Fate's heel is a bit beveled, which helps guide my walking stride; a big plus when I'm fatigued and form starts to get sloppy.

See the beveling?

So far I'm really liking the Fate for easy runs and long, slow runs; it does a nice job of easing aches and pains without feeling like I have a couple of foam pillows strapped to my feet.  It's not as speedy as the Distance, but it just might out-workhorse the Gravity!  

A couple of minor quibbles: 1. these are pretty awful in the rain.  I ran about a mile in pouring rain the other day in them and they just fill up like tubs.  I don't mind being wet, but sloshy and heavy isn't great.  2. that soft, stretchy upper is very unforgiving of mechanical breakdowns.  My feet tend to start rolling outward on the run, and inward on the walk, when fatigued, and the Fate's upper does nothing to prevent this.  I hesitate to move to the Kismet stability model, as any amount of stability seems to invite ITBS into my life.  I've found, though, that a light support insole on tired days fixes things up nicely.  So nothing terrible here, just a couple points to note for those considering the Fate.


So far, as you can see, I'm thrilled with my new-found love affair with Newton Running.  They truly are the only shoe I've tried so far that doesn't irritate my left peroneal tendon, and (knock on wood) I've successfully worked back up to 9+ miles in them with no sign of ITBS.  I don't think the shoes house any sort of magic, mind you - only that I've maybe found some shoes that work properly with, and enhance rather than fight against, my mechanics.  Are Newtons the right shoes for you?  Only one way to find out - give 'em a try!

Yet another SHOE REVIEW! Newton Gravity 13.

I’m starting to feel like The Girl Who Cried “SHOES!”  In the couple years I’ve been actively training for long distance races, I’ve tried a lot of running shoes. 

A LOT. Of running shoes.

Going from memory…

There were the Mizunos: Enigma, Creation, Inspire, Precision, Sayonara, and Evo Cursoris.

The Asics: Nimbus 11 and Phoenix

The Newtons: Lady Isaac S.

The Altra: Intuition.

The Brooks: PureCadence, Pure Flow, Ghost, Ravenna.
The Nike: Lunarglide and Free Run.

The Hoka One One: Bondi B and Kailua Tarmac.

That. Is. A. LOT. Of. Shoes.

And of the ones listed above, how many did I actually keep and run in regularly?  A few.  Thank goodness for excellent return/exchange policies!  The Mizuno Inspires worked pretty well for a while before I ditched them in favor of a lower drop shoe that seemed to aggravate my IT Band less.  The Altra Intuition was taken over by my mother, who loves them for work as a home nurse.  I still have the Free Runs and, though I don’t like them for running, I use them for running errands.  I adore the Mizuno Evo Cursoris (no point in a review, though - they discontinued it), but it’s not a distance shoe; I reserve it for short, speedy runs.

I ran in the PureFlows for the better part of a year and they were perfect! (Ironic that I never reviewed them!)  But the new version, the PureFlow 2, has been nothing but trouble for my left foot for some reason.  I’ve put 100 miles in my pair of 2’s and every time I run in them, I get stabbing pain in my outer left foot.  I finally gave up and moved on.  That’s right, to more new shoes.  It’s review time again…

After much research and deliberation (and realizing there aren’t all that many options left that I haven’t tried…), I ordered a pair of Newton Gravity 13’s.  Not the new Gravity, but last year's model.  Because - duh! - they were $75 less than the new model.  

First thoughts:

• I LOOOOOOVE the colors!  Truly love.  And that's saying something, as I'm sick to death of pink shoes.  But this is such a pretty pink, with so much depth and energy.  (No offense Pepto-pink Evo Cursoris)  And the contrast of the blue, green, yellow and orange is practically a study in Pop art.  I've named my new shoes Andy.  After, you know, Andy Warhol.  #artgeek
• Slipping them on, I noticed right away that these fit much differently than the Lady Isaac S I tried a while back.  The Gravity 13 has a much snugger fit through the heel, which is a huge must for me, but a far roomier toe box, another must.  I also noticed the total lack of any medial or lateral posting; not a darned thing was pushing my inner or outer arch in any direction.  I took the left shoe off and tried on my painful PureFlow 2... yep, squeezing and pushing on the outer edge of my foot, even without any weight on it.  Interesting.
• I bought these right before my last big race of the season and experience tells me that running in any new shoes right before a race is dicey; one overly stressed muscle can wreck me.  So I had a few weeks to kill before I could really test the Gravity.  In the meantime, I wore them around - to the movies, for a couple days at Disney World, grocery shopping, etc.
  
  HOLY COW!!!  These are the perfect stroll around shoes!  Who'dve thought?  I didn't.  I mean, the deal with Newton is the lugs - 4 (5 on the new models) protruding chunks o' rubber in the forefoot sole that are supposed to support a mid- or forefoot-strike and provide excellent energy return on the run.  I had serious doubts about how comfortable that would be while walking.  And yeah, I was kind of aware of them the first day, but they weren't at all uncomfortable and actually came quite in handy... driving in them was like having a block on the gas and brake pedals, an awfully nice feature for this very petite lady!

They look nice with jeans, no?!

On the run

• With my long distance race season complete, I finally got to running in the Gravity 13 a few weeks ago.  Newton stresses the importance of making a slow transition to their shoes and they're not foolin' around, so I began with a mile in them.  Then 2 a few days later.  3 miles.  4.  5.  I've been running in low-drop shoes for well over a year, and I naturally land on my forefoot, so there were no transitional issues with that.  However, the mechanics of Newtons (more detail below) are, indeed, different than other shoes and I definitely felt it in my feet, ankles, quads and calves after 5 miles.  Not in any bad way; quite the opposite, really - I could feel entire sets of small muscles working that had pretty much never had to work before.  But I'm glad I took it slow and didn't stress anything too much.
• Okay, the mechanics... Newton has a mantra of sorts, and it goes like this: "Land, Lever, Lift."  And that's exactly what the lugs encourage your body to do - land on them, lever your heel down lightly, then lift your foot off the ground, using your quads, not your toes.  As a lifelong dancer, that last part is hard for me; I naturally push off the tips of my toes, as evidenced by the early wear on my shoes.
  
  But the land and lever parts worked beautifully for me from the first running step!  It's amazing how much energy return is loaded into those silly orange lugs.  And, surprisingly, I found them equally propulsive on my walk intervals - the heel was cushioned enough to absorb the small impact it takes on the walking stride, but quickly seems to convert that force into forward momentum.  This is VERY different from the feel of walking in the PureFlows, in which I feel like my heel sinks into cushion and it takes a whole lot of effort to lift it back up.

See the yellow treads at the top?  Yeah, that's where I naturally land and push off. A little far forward... I'm working on it.

• The fit while in motion was every bit as good as while meandering about town.  On the run, the snug heel cup kept any weird movement there to a minimum, while a nice height on the upper stabilized my temperamental Achilles.  Meanwhile, my mid-foot was supported underneath nicely.  The Newton sole is a bit rigid through there, at least compared to the exceedingly flexible PureFlow and Evo Cusoris, and I've found that that's a good thing for my overly flexible feet.  Again, there are absolutely no support features pressing my feet laterally or medially, which meant... NO outer foot pain!  Halle-freaking-jujah.  As for the toe box, it has, perhaps, a tad more room widthwise than I need - but I don't feel like my feet are swimming in them, and I'll likely appreciate the extra space when the long, hot runs of summer come along.
• Feeling really good about my new shoes, I opted to give them a race test.  Typically, it's in race conditions that I discover my "perfect" shoe has flaws.  I have no idea why, but almost every shoe I thought was terrific turned out to be a dud when I raced in it.  So a true test came in the form of a local 5K that included roads, dirt, sand and gravel paths, and a little technical trail.  How'd they do?  Beautifully!  Darned if those lugs didn't dig in and grip like crazy in difficult terrain.  By the end of the race, nothing hurt, my shoes still felt yummy, and I was feeling pretty darned good about my future with the Gravity 13.

• Know what's my favorite part of Newton Running shoes?  Instant feedback.  Check out those lugs!  If you look closely, you'll see that the lugs are (were) covered in a fine mesh pattern.  See how that's worn away on the forward, outside parts of the lugs?  That tells me where the bulk of my landing impact is, and confirms what I've long suspected: not only do I not overpronate on the left, I supinate quite a bit.  That would account for the ongoing issues I have with my outer ankle, outer knee, outer hip...  And I'm landing pretty far forward, too.  The beauty of this information is that I can now do something about it!  I've been making a concerted effort to keep that foot straight, to land a bit more centered and on the balls of my feet, not the toes.  And guess what?  I have less pain when I do! 

I'm almost afraid to say it, given my track history, but I honestly think these are long-term keepers.  If there's any negative to the Newton Gravity 13, it's that my feet do get tired after several days running in them.  So I've been changing them up with my Evo Cursoris every other run and everything seems happy with that arrangement.  At some point, though, (and sooner rather than later, judging by how quickly they're wearing) the Evo Cursoris will wear out and need to be replaced.  And, as I said earlier, they've been discontinued.  What's a gal to do???

Try another new shoe.  Look for a review of the Altra Intuition 1.5 soon. :)

Meanwhile, yes, I heartily recommend the Newton brand and I look forward to even more miles in my Gravity shoes!  I'll be sure to update this review when I hit longer distances, too.

Shoe Review: Mizuno Wave Sayonara!

Okay, here’s the deal on this delayed review…

I really didn’t want to like this shoe.  I have more than enough in the running shoe department, and I’m really happy with the Brooks Ravennas I just got.  So I was hoping the Mizuno Wave Sayonara would be a dud and I could return it for a refund.  I’ve worn this pair almost every day, even if I didn’t run, hoping some irritating little thing would pop up to show me they should go back.

No dice.

In fact, every time I put them on, they feel better, as if they’re starting to mold to my feet.

But I’m getting ahead of myself…

My first thought as I pulled the Sayonaras out of the box?  “What kind of idiot buys white running shoes in Florida, where I regularly have to run through mud puddles?!”  Answer: the kind who wants to coordinate her shoes with a race outfit, of course.  I could have gone for a bright fuchsia color instead, but don’t these just scream “Cinderella!”?!

Glass slippers, right?!

 Other thoughts included:

“Hey look – bright green laces again! Must be a trend.”

“These sure feel stiff…”

And, “That’s a nice heel!”

For a shoe that’s hardly what anyone would call “minimalist”, the Sayonara is surprisingly light and fast-looking.  I like the lack of a gigantic heel coupled with a non-pointy toe box.  And, after spending 10 miles constantly fiddling with the laces on my Ravennas, I was happy with the Sayonaras’ bumpy laces.

See that little label on the heel? It says "Wave Sayonara", or "Wave Goodbye!" Fun!

Trying them on, I was initially put off by how snuggly they hold my feet.  But after wearing them around the house for half an hour, I found that the snugness just may be what replaces a medial post for stability; the way the uppers are shaped give my feet lots of support without any sense of pushing them one way or another.  V likey.

Taking them on a short walk on the treadmill, I found that what I’ve read about the Sayonara is true: they offer stability on an as-needed basis.  In other words, my right foot, which requires no assistance to do its job, was allowed to move as it so desires, while my left foot, which tends to roll off my big toe while walking swiftly, received some counterbalance at toe-off, redirecting movement back toward the center of my foot.  I also found that the heel was equal parts cushiony and bouncy, which offered a very fluid transition from heel to toe.  V likey a lot.

Following another walk or two, I decided to test the Sayonara with a 4-mile run/walk, secretly hoping they’d feel lousy on the run.  Oh.  My.  Heck.  No.  They felt even better on the run!  The forefoot didn’t feel all that exceptional while walking, but running?  It felt like a little springboard under each foot!  As with the Ravennas, I found that the heel didn’t get in my way, despite a higher heel-to-toe drop (10mm) than I’m used to, and I was able to land forefoot first without effort.  I noticed, too, that as I transitioned from walk to run and back again, I wasn’t shifting weight forward or backward in my hips as I’m used to with the lower drop (4mm) Brooks PureFlows I’ve been wearing for the past year or so.  Maybe that’s thanks to the higher heel height?  I don’t know, but… V really likey.

My last run in the Sayonaras consisted of four miles of hill (bridge – we don’t have high hills in coastal Florida!) repeats in fog so thick I couldn’t actually see the bridge.  That meant very wet pavement, too, which the super-grippy treads of the Sayonaras handled beautifully.  One thing I didn’t like was that in the cool air, the soles initially felt very stiff and the thin mesh uppers left my toes feeling quite chilly.  But once warmed-up, I found the shoes to be very responsive on both ascent and descent and could really feel the high level of support in both directions.  V likey a whole bunch!

The other night, I opted to wear a pair of Brooks PureFlows for a short run – a pair with about 150 miles on them.  This was after two weeks of running and walking only in the Ravennas and Sayonaras.  And… I hated the PureFlows in comparison.  They felt much too squishy, like I was sinking down into the pavement with every landing, and after 20 minutes in them I was riddled with weird little pains in my knees, ankles, hips and feet.  All of which were remedied by a switch to the Ravennas for the last 15 minutes. 

I’ve concluded that either the PureFlows wear out for me around 150 miles (since I experienced the same thing with my first pair), or something has changed in my running that doesn’t mesh well with that shoe.  So… despite the fact that I have a pair of PureFlow 2’s with only 60 miles on them, and another brand-new pair in my closet, yes – I’m keeping both the Ravennas and Sayonaras.

The only question left is which pair for which race as I go for the Triple Crown (Princess 5K, 10K and Half-Marathon)?!

Shoe Review! Brooks Ravenna 4

Cindylocks has been at it again.  Yep, I’ve been trying new shoes.  Plural.  Two kinds of shoes.  Want to know how they worked out?  Read on!

Here’s the thing: I really did need a different shoe this time.  Not just a different looking shoe, but a shoe with different mechanics.  See, while I deal with my ITBS-that’s-not-ITBS thing, I’m doing a whole lotta walking in place of running.  If you’ve ever swapped walking for running over long distances, you know that, while the two activities look awfully similar, they are mechanically quite different.  In my case, it’s a huge difference: when I run, I land solidly on my forefoot, nearly toe-ball-heeling my landings, but I walk like a normal person, landing heel first.  Because I’m a forefoot runner, I don’t need the pronation control found in stability shoes and have, in fact, found that even a little of it screws me up.  So I swear by my neutral BrooksPureFlow shoes for running.  But when I walk, my left foot does something screwy in a trickle-down effect from the scoliosis in my back, causing me to overpronate at toe-off.  And that, in turn, messes with my knee.  So a shoe with late-stage pronation control was my goal, but one that wouldn’t make me over-suppinate, either.  Not an easy search, let me tell ya.

Enter trial shoe #1: BrooksRavenna 4.

I chose this model based on several online reviews declaring it to be ideal for late-stage pronation issues without sacrificing flexibility and cushion.  Bonus – it was on clearance at Sports Authority for less than half-price.  Score!

Kinda clunky, but pretty purple and green! Sort of like Barney.

Compared to my PureFlows, the Ravenna is one big, clunky shoe.  Check out that gigantic heel!  I’m used to an undercut heel that doesn’t get in the way of my forefoot landings, so that giant mound of green plastic sacred me.  However, I was surprised by how light the Ravenna felt; it looks much heavier than it actually is (9ish ounces, compared to almost 8 in the PureFlow).  The Ravenna has a roomy toe box, coupled with a narrow, huggy heel cup, which felt perfect for me and my freakishly small heels.  I love that the laces are plenty long, and neon green is just plain fun.  The arch support was good, with just enough in just the right spot.  I bought these in a size 7 (I wear a 6 in street shoes) and they’re roomy enough for my thick SmartWool socks – perfect for winter running, but I’d want to size down a half-size to accommodate my lighter socks in summer.

The Big Green Heel, in all its glory.

My first try with the Ravennas was an easy 2-mile walk on the treadmill.  How’d they do?  Fan-flipping-tastic!  This is a great walking shoe.  Despite looking enormous, I found that the heel didn’t get in my way at all, and I landed mid-heel as usual with no problem.   No over-suppinating, either; I never felt like my feet were being forced outward, as I have in almost every other stability shoe I’ve tried.  But I immediately felt the late-stage control.  As my weight rolled over my toes, I could feel the shoe engage against my left big toe and metatarsal, redirecting my toe-off toward the center of my foot instead of the far inside of my big toe.  It felt odd at first, like a little bubble under my forefoot, but not in a bad way.  Most amazingly, I had NO initial cramping in my outer left foot – a feat no other athletic shoe has managed while walking since a circa-2001 New Balance model that I adored.

After such a good test, I decided to give the Ravennas a try outdoors and wore them for three miles of trail run/walking with Leo.  They covered a variety of surfaces – asphalt, concrete, crushed shell, gravel, dirt, sand, boardwalk – and performed beautifully!  The treads felt equally responsive and grippy on all surfaces and I found that the energy return on the run was superb.  The one thing I missed was ground feel; it’s a fair amount of shoe and I definitely felt less underfoot than I’m used to in my PureFlows.  Not necessarily a bad thing, but it took some adjustment; instead of my feet naturally reacting to bumps, lumps, rocks and roots underfoot, I had to pay attention with my eyes to avoid rolling an ankle. 

Nice tread!

Okay, after two good short-distance tests, I decided to take a chance and try the Ravennas on a long walk/run.  10 miles, to be exact.  My first double-digit distance effort since being struck down at mile 10 of the WDWHalf-Marathon two weeks prior.  I started with lots and lots of walking; almost all of the first mile and a fair amount of the next few, too.  As expected, the Ravennas felt great!  As I added more running into the mix, I was quite surprised to find that the shoes performed really well there, too.  With a much higher heel-to-toe drop than my PureFlows (10mm and 4mm, respectively), I was worried that they’d be a poor match for my forefoot landing.  Nope.  The Ravenna allowed me to avoid a heel strike, and I could land on my toes if I tried… but I quickly found that they encouraged me to land closer to mid-foot, which is a very good thing!  My forefoot landing can sometimes overwork my bum Achilles over longer distances, so the more midfoot landing felt very nice without requiring any extra thought or effort on my part to maintain it; it just seemed to happen naturally when I stopped paying attention and ran by feel.  I’m also used to my feet feeling rather abused by the end of a 10+ mile run, and they were definitely feeling the effort at the end of this one – but nowhere near as much as I’m used to.  Which is odd, really, because the Ravenna feels more springy than cushiony to me.  But maybe that’s just it; maybe the extra spring results in less pounding on my feet?  I don’t know, but I knew I had another 3.1 miles in me at the end, so… yay!

So, is the Ravenna 4 a keeper?  YES!  It’s not the speediest shoe and I think I’ll still prefer the PureFlow for shorter, faster distances (which is good, since I currently have FOUR pairs of ‘em), and there may come a day when I’m all healed and healthy and don’t want/need the Ravenna’s extra support, but today is not that day.  I fully intend to run in the Ravennas for my next half-marathon.  Conveniently, they do not clash with my planned outfit, so that’s that.

Okay, that was pretty long.  And the next shoe review will likely be just as long.  So I'll cap it here and review the Mizuno Wave Sayonara in a second post. Stay tuned!

Time to Fly! A review of the Hoka One One Kailua Tarmac

Remember how I said I never wanted to run a full marathon?

I take that back.

Maybe.

And it’s because of these beauties…

"Time to Fly! reads the insole's slogan - it's true!

The Hoka One One KailuaTarmac.

~SWOON!~

The Hoka One One running shoe concept is one created by and for ultra-marathoners.  Far from minimalist, Hoka has somehow managed to combine a distinct lack of fancy foot movement management tricks with a great, big sole and low heel-to-toe drop to create shoes that allows one to “run more relaxed.”  Hoka says its shoes are designed to be lightweight, while offering midsoles that are “30 percent softer than the material used in traditional running shoes.”  With a fairly large outsole, the seemingly bulky shoes promise to grip and stabilize in both trail and road models.  Many ultra-marathoners swear by the Hoka brand to take them comfortably through challenging 100-mile races.

In my search for the Perfect Shoe, I tried the HokaBondi-B model some time ago.  It wasn’t right for me.  The technology of it was great – I could absolutely see how the gigantic sole would cushion well – but I had the same issue with the Bondi-B I have with 95% of the running shoes on the market: the heel was too roomy.  Thanks to freakishly narrow heels and a bum Achilles, I need a LOT of support around my heel and lower ankle.  And the Bondi-B fell short of my needs.  Bummer.

Now, I did find the Perfect Shoe late last year – the BrooksPureFlow.  It’s really been a fantastic shoe for me – minimal stability, lots of cushion, a little arch support, low heel-to-toe drop, and the best heel hug I’ve found yet in a running shoe.  The PureFlow took me through IT Band recovery and saw me through my first half-marathon.  It’s been so good to me, I bought two more pairs when they were on sale, so I have back-ups.  And that was a good call – because my original PureFlows wore out after a measly 225 miles.

But.  (Yes, there’s a “but”.)  I’ve been finding my body craving a slightly different shoe for recovery runs.  Something a bit more substantial.  With a little more support and cushion.  But not too much.   

Enter the Hoka Kailua.

I stumbled upon the Kailua while shopping RunningWarehouse online.  It’s a new shoe and, I’ve read, the first Hoka built specifically for women.  Running Warehouse’s awesome Shoefitter gadget showed that the Kailua should fit me very similarly to my PureFlows.  Read: a much smaller, tighter heel cup than the Bondi-B.  Armed with a discount code, I ordered a pair and crossed my fingers.

First Impressions – out of the box

Taking the Kailuas out of the box, I was first struck by how light they felt.  It’s a bit odd, really, because my eyes were telling me this was a bulky, heavy shoe, but holding them felt no different than the weight of my PureFlows.  Pink was the only color available and it’s okay; I’m kind of over the whole pink thing, but it’s a soft pink and not too awful.  The Kailua’s laces have a cord-like feel to them, unlike any other running shoe laces I’ve experienced, and I wasn’t sure how well they’d feel in motion.

First Impressions – on the treadmill

Lacing up, I found that the shoes are, indeed, far more huggy in the heels and have a nice, high back that gives me terrific support at the base of my Achilles.  The cord-like laces turn out to be great for cinching things up nice and tight where needed, and keeping other spots looser without slipping out of place.  The arch support is just right for my medium but very flexible arches; no sense of running with a hard-boiled egg beneath my arches (I'm talking to you, Asics.)  The toe box is roomy enough that my foot isn’t forced into any unnatural position, but snug enough that I’m not sliding around in there, either.

In case they wound up not working, I first took my Kailuas on a short walk on the treadmill.  And I was immediately impressed.  These may be made for ultras, but they are positively dreamy for a brisk walk!  That’s the one thing I don’t love about my PureFlows; they’re not ideal for a walking motion.  The Kailuas ARE, by golly.  The heel is cushiony enough to absorb impact nicely and the roll to forefoot felt seamless.  I found myself taking slightly longer strides than with my PureFlows, but with no additional stress in my feet, ankles, knees or hips.  Moving into a jog, I was blown away… the energy return in the Kailua is incredible!  I’m a mid- to forefoot striker (I aim for mid-foot, but naturally seem to land toe-ball-heel if I stop paying attention – I totally blame years in the ballet for that) and it’s been tough to find shoes that give enough cushion and spring in the forefoot… the Kailua does, in spades.  It felt a bit like landing on a very small springboard with each step – I felt the cushioned midsole absorb impact as I landed, and then felt that energy power me back up on toe-off.  Pretty nifty stuff!

First Impressions – on the road

Simply put, the Kailuas felt goooood.  At the end of that week, I had a six-miler planned – with lots of walking and some running, as I was still babying my earlier injury.  Since I wasn’t planning on running too much, and the Kailuas had felt so nice walking, I decided to use them.  Six miles.  Practically right out of the box.  How was it?  Magical.  I only ran one out of every five minutes for the first three miles and felt fantastic at the halfway mark.  My heels were stable, my toes weren’t cramped, my calves weren't tightening, and my crabby knee wasn’t crabbing.  So I took it up a notch: 1:00walk/1:00run intervals.  I felt like I flew through the next two miles!  The run felt so springy, wingy, super-good, it was very hard to make myself slow to a walk.  So, for the last mile, I didn’t.  Walk.  Okay, a couple times as I had to wait for a street light or car turning into a driveway, but mostly, I ran.  I can’t fathom how a pair of shoes can magically make me overcome the exercise-induced asthma that requires regular walk breaks so that I may breathe, but I simply did not seem to need them in my Kailuas.  What’s more, my feet usually let me know by around mile five or six that they are about as impressed with my desire to run long as McKayla was with her silver medal. 

Not. Impressed.

But in the Kailuas?  My feet were perfectly happy after six miles.  And the thought flew through my mind too fast to block it: “I could totally finish a marathon in these.”

Say WHAT?!?!

So, now what?

I’ve taken a few more short runs in the Kailuas and I fall more in love with them every time.  I bought them as a recovery shoe, not a distance shoe.  I have an 11 to 12-mile training run this weekend, and a 12 to 13-miler two weeks after that.  And then the Tower of Terror10-Miler two weeks later, followed by the Halloween Halfathon three weeks after that.  My knee still isn’t 100% and I’m terrified of developing IT Band Syndrome again.  I’m quite tempted to take the Kailuas out for some true distance this weekend, but a nagging voice keeps saying “nothing new this close to your races!”

I just don’t know.  Is a six-mile test enough to predict how I’ll hold up in my Hokas in double digit mileage?  Or should I wait until these races are done before putting in more mileage in them?

Stay tuned…

UPDATE:  Sadly, I had to return the Hokas.  It wasn't easy - I had to think long and hard on the decision.  They really are amazing shoes!  But the heel was just too loose and continued getting looser over time.  Cinching the laces tighter wasn't an option, as that dug into the front of my ankle, causing bruising.  It's such a shame, because they were fantastic in every other way!

Wordless Wednesday... A Preview

ITBS Stands for…

Frankly, I think ITBS (Iliotibial Band Syndrome) is aptly acronym’d:  dealing with the IT is total BS.  But, I am happy – though cautiously hesitant – to report that I seem to FINALLY be kicking my stupid bout with IT BS in the butt!

Here’s what’s gone into what I think of as “reprogramming” my IT Band…

~ Dumping the orthopedist in favor of a chiropractor.  The ortho just wasn’t that into my injury, if you will; he pretty much told me to keep up with the physical therapy exercises I’d been doing, ice it when it hurt, and maybe just accept that my body can’t do long distances.  I’d never before seen a chiro, but a good friend has seen a total reversal in her major neck problems form chiropractic care and I was running out of other options, so I looked up chiros covered by my insurance, picked one and hoped for the best.  I got very lucky – my pick happens to be a runner, is married to a triathlete, and treats a number of runners and dancers.  SCORE!  From the first visit, Dr. Miracle showed great understanding of the problem, my time-frame for recovery, and how important it is to me to beat this.  Over the past month, she’s seen me weekly and has used targeted massage, electro-therapy, spinal and hip adjustments and active resistance maneuvers to speed healing, reduce inflammation and get things back in alignment.  I was enormously skeptical, but I can’t express how pleased I am with what she’s accomplished!

~ Switching shoes.  That’s right – Cindylocks STILL had it wrong.  As I thought long and hard about possible triggers for ITBS, it occurred to me that it wasn’t getting any better in high-drop stability shoes… whereas I’d seen some improvement pre-Tower of Terror 10-Miler in more minimalist, low-drop neutral shoes.  So I tried the Brooks PureFlow again, this time a half-size smaller, and feel like they’re a much better fit for my mid-foot running style.

~ Not making stretching into a competitive sport.  If it hurts, it’s too much,  ‘Nuff said.

~ Changing my status to “in a relationship”… with my foam roller.  With apologies to Peter, Paul & Mary - If I had a foam roller I'd foam roll in the morning, I'd foam roll in the evening, all over this land…  I foam roll my IT Band area.  I foam roll my glutes.  I foam roll my quads.  I don’t foam roll my calves – I use a wooden rolling pin for that.  I foam roll in the morning, after a hot shower.  I foam roll before running.  I foam roll after running.  My foam roller’s gotten more action in two months than I’ve seen in 10 years.  Is it helping?  Who knows.  It’s not hurting, and things are improving, so I’ll keep rolling with it. 

I returned to running once all pain and inflammation had gone away.  Thanksgiving morning, at Walt Disney World, Leo and I went for a good long walk, taking the nature path from the Wilderness Lodge to Fort Wilderness, circling around the Fort, then returning to the Lodge – a total of 2.33 miles.  I mostly walked, but ran a little… with no pain for the first time since August.  From there, I’ve slowly but steadily built up my mileage to a 5-mile long run last weekend.  I’m aiming for 6 miles tomorrow.  I’m doing two short runs and one short walk mid-week with a long run on Saturdays.  I’m still walking a lot more of each “run” than I’d like, but I’m being very careful not to push for too much too soon.  I may not be able to run nearly as much of the Princess Half-Marathon as I’d once thought I would, but I’m starting to feel like I can, indeed, finish.

Go me!

Cindylocks and the Three Running Shoes: A Cautionary Tale

Once upon a time, in a suburban sprawl not so far away, there lived a middle-aged lady named Cindylocks.  In a second-floor condo made of stucco, Cindylocks toiled away her evenings, running near and far in shoes that never quite seemed “just right.”

One day, Cindylocks ran virtually away from home (possibly motivated by a hormonal and cantankerous 10-year-old child).  She traveled across the country via Internet, searching the land for a shoe that would make her run fast, go far, and eliminate every ache and pain in her over-40-year-old body.

First, Cindylocks found a cotton-candy-pink shoe that cradled her feet in plush comfort and made her feel every inch the Princess she dreamed of someday being.  She ran 10 miles in them one damp, warm night and proclaimed them to be “too soft.”

Brooks PureCadence

Next, Cindylocks came across a shoe that gleamed like an un-ripened lime in the noonday sun.  They were firm and stable, keeping Cindylocks’ delicate feet in militaristic formation.  She ran one mile in them and declared them to be “too hard.”

Nike Lunarglide +4

Discouraged, Cindylocks considered never running again.  Her knee hurt; her feet were grumpy; and she hadn’t slept-in on a “long run” Saturday in six months.  But as she returned the previously purchased shoes, another pair caught her eye.  Mint green with silver and tomato accents, they promised to match not a single item in her wardrobe, but something about them called to Cindylocks and she found herself unable to resist the pull.  She slipped first one, then the other, shoe upon her outstretched feet, adorned in manageable, every-day socks that were far thinner than her special running socks.

Mizuno Wave Inspire 8

Cindylocks took a step, then another.  She walked around her dining table thrice.  She strode across the ragged, shoud’ve-been-replaced-5-years-ago-belt of her treadmill for one mile.  She took the third pair of shoes on the open road and found her step to be lighter, swifter, more joyful than she could ever have imagined!

Upon returning home, Cindylocks proclaimed the mint green shoes with silver and tomato accents to be “just right!”

And her not-evil-but-occasionally-aggravating mother replied, “Aren’t those the same kind of shoes you’d been running in before, only in purple and white?”

Indeed, they were.  But  a half-size smaller.  And mint green with silver and tomato accents.

Just. Right.