Did a search, it only turned up a thread on shin splints and TE's post w/a link to a Men's Health article.

I want to get everyone's input on the effectiveness of the Nike "Free" series shoe. I have used the NB Zip 8505 for quite a while but I am going to cross over to the Free.I have read a few articles on how great it is to run barefoot, so I started running on the golf course early in the morning with no shoes. The results have been great! After the first few runs I was sore in different spots all throughout my legs, especially my calfs and feet.
Obviously I can't always run on the course so I wanted to get a shoe that offers minimal support.
Also, this might get the word to others who are looking for a similar feel in their shoes.

Thoughts on the Free from those who have tried them?

Mason

I got some last summer and have gone through 2 pairs total since then. They are great road running shoes, not so hot for any sort of terrain off road. That is due to the fact that the soles are built to feel like a sock on your foot in that it flexes with your foot, making it easy for them to adjust to your running style. They are super super light, which is nice. I do however own a better pair of shoes, Newtons, that I do my longer runs with. My free's are great for tempo's, intervals, sprints, and any sort of mid-distance training on the road, hills, etc.

They do serve their purpose in strengthening the muscles that matter as far as in your foot, lower leg....i never sustained any injuries. But adjusting to them can be sore at first.

I started with the 5.0 and then just sub'd out the 4.5 in-sole. Anyway, they are worth the money. But for long distance I think you could do better. Check out www.newtonrunning.com. Shoes are expensive but well worth it.

One more thing, the free's held up pretty well for me as far as falling apart goes for running shoes. They are the only nike's I will run in that's for sure.

Hope that helped.

I've been looking at the free also, what is the difference between the 5.0 and 7.0 etc.? I also have the Newtons and they are worth the money.

The way Nike designed the Free was for the runner to start with the 7.0 (ounces) and work his/her way down to the 3.0

The higher the number, the more padding and support the shoe has, hence the more it weighs. The purpose is to strengthen the foot and leg to where its more of a natural feel as opposed to having a ton of support like you get with most running shoes.

While I can't quite post regarding the Nike Frees, I just wanted to add that I do wear the Newton's that TJC mentioned above and wanted to give my input on them since even in the online running community there is great debate regarding this shoe (mainly does its high cost yield its proclaimed results).

First off, my disclaimer: I am not a tri-athlete, marathon runner or anything like that. My running history is I’ve been a distance runner since my high school days of running cross country out in the woods and the rain of the Pacific Northwest; I’ve been a recreational runner since, averaging 16-20 miles a week at an 8:30 minute mile pace and a veteran of running purely in Asics for the past 8 years. It’s only until a few months ago that I’ve decided I wanted to commit myself to train for selection where those numbers have been steadily increasing naturally with a higher determination to push myself with definitive goals in mind, to were I heard about the Newton’s from a friend of mine in the Seattle area who suggested they might be able to help me better reach my goals.

I’ve been running with Newton’s for the past month now and the biggest factor in this shoe is purely are you a forefoot/mid-sole runner or a heel striker. If you’re a heel striker and have no intentions to change, do not get this shoe. If you’re a forefoot/mid-sole runner, or a heel striker that wants to change to forefoot running by far this shoe is for you or an alternative to deeply consider. With that said, the first thing you’ll notice out of the box is how light the shoe is at 10 ounces. In comparison my Asics with a Super Feet insert, they were a brick in comparison to the Newtons. With a thin synthetic style sock on you will barely even know these are on your feet other than the sense of confirmation that they are there due to the unique feeling of the pneumatic actuator beneath the balls of your feet with every foot strike. The best way to describe the unique feel regarding their actuator is if I cut a tennis ball in half and affixed it to your shoe – A little bit of an over exaggeration, but I hope that helps paint a picture, and they really do play into the shoes performance I feel as I’ll explain later on below.

Now going back to my statement of saying why this shoe is great if you’re looking at going from a heel striking stride to a forefoot stride is namely due to the heel to toe ratio of the shoe. Where most shoes focus on thick heel support and cushioning, the Newton is nearly the exact opposite. I found this not necessarily forcing me, but really encouraging me to land more often with greater frequency onto my forefoot, or at least my mid-sole. The one thing that I do agree with that I’ve read time after time again with other Newton runners is that the shoe really does want to make you run faster due to the shoe seeming to feel more natural and accommodating the faster you go; and I know the circular logic in this sounds flawed, but – It oddly makes me feel like I utilize less energy running faster in this shoe than trotting away at my standard 8:30 pace. At times I am now hitting my mile markers in bewilderment going 7:30, 7:45 minute mile; and it was near effortless?

Bottom line is, if you’re serious into running as I assume most who troll these forums are and want to try out the latest ‘it’ product, grab this shoe. Newton offers a 20 dollar military discount which makes the $170 dollar price tag more bearable. The customer service with Newton was top notch for what I saw in them. My original purchase was half a size too big; I called them up and they sent me out a new pair that same day with a pre-paid UPS return voucher for my old ones.

The negatives about the shoe is they will burn and eat your calves alive for the first 2 weeks while you break them in, which Newton says is normal; and as TJC said they are really designed for road runs due to I found that the shoe is prone for bits of gravel getting stuck in the tread if you take them out on very rocky or dense gravel trails. Also as trivial as it may seem, I also wish the look of the shoe was a little more masculine. My friend in Seattle that recommended these shoes to me does run in Nike Frees; last we talked, as happy as he was for my recent success with the Newtons, he just had to joke that the Newton’s still look ‘festive’(for the sake of using politically correct terms here on these forums) – but hey, I told him they may look festive in comparison to your Frees, but I will gladly drink your tears the next time we go running and the guy in the festive shoes beat you to the finish line.

Sorry for the novel, but I hope that helped shed some greater light on the Newtons.

Cheers,
FireSeven

My perferred road shoe is the New Balance 1122 which has now been replaced by the M587, I aquired this shoe after advice from the
Podiatrist. I had a history of shin splins and a stress fracture, I've been running on these for the last 2 years with no problems since

I gotta agree with you that New Balance makes a great shoe. I have some 992's because it was all they sold in my size in Qatar when my bags were sent to the wrong place. Now I love them.

I also have the 992's I use them for the everyday stuff, I got them for like $60, thru the Dr. since he was a NB dealer

Just a heads up but Nike might have updated their Frees a little bit. There seems to be two versions floating around now, if you order them from Nike online, where you can customize your shoe they seem to be different than the ones you can buy at stores like Nike Town. The difference between the two that I've seen is that the in-store models have a velcro strap over the toe for a snugger fit. If you order them online, it does not contain that strap. My friend who I mentioned in my above review of the Newtons stated that there was a big difference between the two in comfort, functionality and performance - being the model with the velcro strap preferred. It might just be an 08 thing, but if you're going to get the Frees, make sure you get one with the toe strap. At least that's the recommendation.

Good post FireSeven...I just want to caution guys not to get too hung up on shoes...I know it's a bit cliche' but when I went through, we had the shoes of the day and dealt with it. Even by today's standards...the shoes you wear are not nearly as important as the engine (you). One has to be at nearly the elite level for a shoe to make a true difference.

By all means, find a shoe you like, that is comfortable, and fits your specific foot...but don't get hung up on a couple ounces, or extra stretch, or a certain strap, etc...get out there and run in "your" shoes...that is the absolute best way to get better.

I picked up two pairs of Free's awhile back when they were on clearance out of curiosity. I'm a fan (although I would prefer even less of a heel on them, since I am a mid-fore foot striker). I use the 4.0's for road running, and 7.0's for hard-core trail running (mainly because they feel a little more stable on my feet with the laces, as opposed to just the velcro strap on the 4.0). The farthest I've run so far with them is 16.7 miles continuously. I would continue to run barefoot when you can, though, because I honestly don't believe Free's do a great job of training the body to run that way unless you are intentionally trying to make it feel the same way as when you are barefoot.

http://www.vibramfivefingers.com/

They look gay but are as close to running barefoot as you can get (without being barefoot). These have toughened my feet and lower legs up tremendously.

I use to get shin splints and after going to a running store I learned I overpronated quite a bit, so for guys like me I would say get something with more stability like the Mizuno Alchemy Wave 8s, those were a pair recommended for me by the owner there and he seems very knowledgeable about running.

Ofcourse, the "NEW" theory is that SHOES actually cause the problem of pronation and supination and resulting injuries. The theory is that in nature, you would be running bare foot and would naturally change your strite to land on the toes/fore foot NOT the heel. Wearing a shoe changes your foot strike to the heel, an "unnatural" place for the foot to strike (according to the newest theory) and causing pronation, supination and a host of running injuries. If you subscribe to the new theory, the less shoe, the better. Hence the Nike Free and other shoes bent on being lighter and less supportive.
Also, the new theory suggests running using hte POSE method, which teaches you to run with a forefoot strike.

I thought the new stuff was crap but now that I've got tendonitis of my knee from running fast, downhill, in supportive shoes, heel striking the whole way, I'm beginning to wonder.

Just another point of view to think about.

For what it's worth, I've made the switch to POSE(ish, I'm not very good at it yet) running a few months ago, and I can say that it's done almost completely away with the shin pain that I used to get.

I run in an old pair of Puma racing flats.

http://www.posetech.com/library/pp-SIB-0001.html

Fairly old post, but it was on a topic that I have some experience in, and felt I could offer a testimony of some sorts on the side of POSE.

This is exactly what my sprinter coach lived by before ever hearing of POSE. We never trained running on the heel and my natural run form, from what I briefly read about POSE, is a lot like the POSE technique.

I thoroughly agree with the statement of gravity controlling when your legs hit the ground. What we worked on mostly with our sprinting was the turn over which is really generated from the hip flexors. My legs were always and still are very skinny, yet I could keep up with all the guys whith the larger and stronger legs. Why was that? My turn over was just as fast. This is what our fast fire foot drill keyed into. You would slowly jog and randomly alternate which leg you would fire up into a high knee posture. Go 10 steps or so and fire your right leg, 5 steps and fire the left. You can even do 2 or 3 of the same leg in a row.

We were taught to land on the outter edge of your foot rolling along that edge onto the ball of your foot, and to let your foot strike the ground directly under your hips or very slightly infront. Not outstretched infront or behind. Sprinting was effortless(except for the turn over and cardio factor). I never felt impact, infact I always felt like I was flying off the ground. No joke. If you watch the good sprinters and see where their lead foot contacts the ground, you will see that it is under their hips.

I have never once had a knee issue, shin splint, ankle problem (other than when I sprained it in footbal) or hip problem in my entire life of competative atheletics and track. I contribute this greatly to my natural running form, and the improvements I made under my coaches supervision.

What shoe I wore was never an issue. I never wear sole inserts. I wore the same pair of track shoes all through highschool (the cheapest pair of Asics I could get), and the same pair of football cleats. I only used 2 different pairs of flats. Running bare foot on concrete didn't even bother me much.

From what I have read on the POSE technique seems to fall in line with a lot of what I do personally and others that I trained with have done. While I never went through the POSE training, my form is nearly identical so I feel safe in saying that yes, it can work. It may or may not be for you. And it will take intense training to correct years of an old, possibly bad, habbit.

I have tried the heel contact method just to test it and notice instantly a more direct impact on my knees than when I run my natural way. Running down hill does tend to make my heel strike, but I immediately roll along the outside to the ball of my foot again for the breaking action. If you run directly on the balls of your foot only you are still creating direct strain on your knees. As my track coach always told us, running on the toes is a breaking action. Try sprinting and then stopping quickly. You should notice yourself pushing back with your toes.

I am currently running in a pair of Nike Free 5.0. I bought them only because I can slip them on and off quickly, and they fit snuggly around my foot. I couldn't care less about the technology behind it. Before that, I was running in a pair of Nike Jordans that I never tied. No problem there. I do not condone not tying your shoes and running though. Just an unecessary risk that I took when I ran.

I felt it necessary to provide a bit of background info on myself to support why I think this method works.

Good post and link. I am going to give POSE a try because I've hurt myself too much with my old running style. I can't even run 20 miles a week without hurting myslef. Most runners, myself included, pay little attention to improving running form. Heel striking is the most common running style for distance runners but it is the least efficient style and most likely to cause injuries. The only problem for most of us is that heel striking is the style we've already learned and now comes naturally to us. The POSE technique (if it isn't your natural style) takes practice to master. It is best learned with a coach or training partner who has experience with the technique then practiced and refined on your own (or with a coach if you can get one) after that. I've resigned myself to going to a CrossFit Running and Endurance Seminar to learn the basic technique as I am truly hopeless at learning new techniques on my own. I have a hard enough time learning new techniques for olympic lifting and rowing, sports I had no previous experience or bad habits with. I don't think I can unlearn 30 years of bad running habits without serious help. I'll let you guys know how it works out for me. Expect some postings on the subject in late June or July.

Biomechanics of Running by Michael Yessis was very beneficial to me. Applying what that book taught me made me more efficient, faster and I hurt far less.

If anybody knows, would POSE running be good for an over pronator? I've been wanting to make the switch and try it out but I already bought a pair of shoes that gave me bad knee pain and blisters before and I don't want to make things worse.

From what I understand about POSE, I don't think it matters if you pronate or supinate. Seems that it is meant for anyone.