Clinton Lake Ultra Over 80% Full

Felt like posting something, but have nothing to say (until Saturday night after the McNaughton Park 30 Miler). The Clinton Lake ultra now has 104 registered runners out of a maximum of 125. That's 83% full. My next update about registration numbers will probably be something like "Race is Full." Don't wait too long if you want to run the first race in the 2010 Illinois Trail Ultra Grand Slam.

You are already viewing the world-famous race blog. Here is the race web site. And the link to currently registered runners. Feel free to skip all that mumbo-jumbo and go to the online registration page directly. I do encourage you to eventually read all the race web site information--lot's of good stuff there and a few warnings and pieces of advice.

Wish me well at McNaughton Park tomorrow morning. It's going to be wet and muddy! How's that different than any other race on that damn course? Good luck to Mike Siltman as the race director of this new fall "McNotAgain" race. Hope it goes well and people enjoy the day. I'm taking it easy. Hope to get in 20 miles of easy walking and running followed by a 10-mile speed loop. I'll report my heart rate splits after the race and compare them to my Farmdale race splits. I am shooting for another negative split (pretty easy to do when your first half is really slow).

New Balance 790 vs 100

New Balance has replaced the old NB790 trail running shoe with the new MT100 trail shoe (new model to left, older model at bottom). They are both meant to be light-weight, racing-flat style trail shoes. I loved the old 790 and was looking forward to the release of the 100. Well, I bought a pair of the MT100s and already sent them back for a refund. They are too narrow in the forefoot and too rigid. The new forefoot rock plate in the 100 certainly does seem to provide greater protection than the 790 had, but it also makes the shoe less flexible. I prefer less protection and more flexibility. The slightly more narrow forefoot also forced me to go back to the wider 790. One last big difference between the 790 and 100 is the heel area--the new 100 has a weird material that covers the top part of the heel counter and achilles. It's like a dense foam rubber. I didn't get a chance to really test this new material on any significant runs, but it could bother some folks...or not. The shoe was designed to accommodate sockless running so I would think this new heel material would have been tested thoroughly with many sockless runners during development. Maybe it's better than the traditional heel covering.

I already ordered another pair of the 790s on sale. They are a GREAT trail racing flat. One feature that did seem like a great improvement in the newer shoe was the tread. The 100 has much better traction/tread than the older 790. If New Balance made that one change to the 790 it would be a "perfect" shoe!

Both shoes are lightweight, low-to-the-ground, and have minimal cushioning & support. They are also very breathable and allow water to drain out quickly. Anyone looking for a "minimalist" trail shoe should give the new MT100 a try...or maybe go with the original 790 available at closeout sales across the internet. You can always buy the new model when it eventually goes on sale.

NOTE: I had a size 13 in both models. Maybe a size 14 (there is no 13.5) in the new MT100 would have helped in terms of foot narrowness. Not sure. Still, I would have had the issue of rigidity to deal with in the new shoe. Buy the new 100 from a local shoe store where you can try it on before purchasing...or from an online vendor that allows free returns.

Running Barefoot Means No Shoes

Here is a good piece (copied fully below) from Barefoot Ken Bob (Saxton) dated October 15, 2009 (from the awesome web site "Running Barefoot"). Cool logo to the left is also from the web site--and they have some neat merchandise that uses the logo. I agree with virtually everything this guy says...and I agree with this post too (I run a little barefoot, a lot in Vibram FiveFingers, and the rest in minimalist racing flats). I try not to confuse barefoot with "minimalist" shoe running. His post is a good reminder that they are distinctly different...

Running in footwear is NOT Running “Barefoot”

by Ken Bob Saxton

I don’t mind people running in whatever kind of footwear they like, but it is deceptively misleading – to call running in minimalist shoes, “Barefoot” - it is, sadly, leading many people to injury.

I suppose some of you are getting tired of hearing me talk about how running in minimalist footwear is NOT running “Bare” foot! But, I’ve been sick and tired of hearing people call running in minimalist footwear, running “Bare” foot!

First of all, running with footwear is NOT running “bare” foot. Secondly, it is deceptivly misleading. And sadly, this deception is leading people to seriously hurt themselves!

So, you should be thankful that I don’t post articles like this EVERY time I find a blog (like the barefoot running post at TentLife.net), or advertisement, claiming that running in minimalist footwear IS “BARE” foot running!

If you really want to learn how to run “Barefoot”, take off the footwear!

The problem is, with these “crutches”, people are not getting one of the most important benefits of running barefoot – the feedback from the multitude of nerve endings in our bare soles. yes, I know it hurts to go barefoot at first – that IS the point! It is these very pains that teach us to stand, walk, and run, differently than we learned in foot-numbing footwear, in ways that don’t create the pain in the first place.

Yes, running barefoot will strengthen the feet, in time. But, it isn’t just about strengthening the feet to endure running badly. It is about being able to feel when we are running badly, so we can learn to run better, more gracefully, without causing pain. Then our feet will grow tough enough, to run gently. More toughness than that is not necessary.

Without the feedback from our senstive bare soles, people are, running longer, and landing harder, than their feet, body, and minds are ready for, on their begining barefoot outings (and they don’t have the support of their old stiff running shoes to protect their feet from this abuse).

A friend of mine, and a running coach, recently called me, and said he has been seeing this same phenomenon for a couple of years, about the time Vibram started marketing their Five Finger shoes (yes, they are shoes!) as a “Barefoot” running shoe… and people are getting hurt, without the benefit of their sensitive bare soles, they still don’t feel how badly they are running, or when they have run too much.

I know I’m repeating myself, even within this post - but I will continue to repeat myself as long as people are getting hurt, from wearing footwear, which is deceiving them into believing they have learned to run just fine.

I can understand the desire to start out, running barefoot, gradually, carefully, with baby steps. And you certainly should start out gradually, carefully, with baby steps - but no infant I have ever met, was born with tough feet, or shoes!

In bare soles, we are like infants, with the benefit of sensitive feet, that, like an infant’s bare soles, have rarely touched the earth, TEACHING us HOW to interact with the earth, naturally, gently, effieciently, and gracefully.

First, learn to run, with the full benefit of precise feedback from your BARE soles, and allow them to teach you HOW to run gently.

Second, if you want to run on extreme surfaces, wear the minimalist footwear. But, if you have truely mastered running barefoot, you’ll find that protection is completely unnecessary, and actually gets in the way of your actually running barefoot.