Running Technique Tips

The Adidas Adizero Ace 4 is probably the easiest shoe that I own to review. It’s a solid light-weight neutral trainer that can easily serve a role as a marathon and road racing shoe for many runners. The Ace is also about the closest thing I’ve managed to find that compares favourably with the original Adidas Adizero Adios marathon racing shoe. Like many runners I’m not quite as in love with the Adidas Adios 2 as the original version, largely because of the additional stiffness added through the forefoot. The Ace on the other hand is probably a touch more flexible than the original Adios, which pushes it slightly more towards being a light-weight trainer rather than a racing shoe. Having said that many runners who prefer a more flexible shoe will enjoy the Ace racing from 10k through to the Marathon on the road.

I’ve now worn three iterations of the Adidas Ace, version 2 of this shoe was almost identical to the original Adios, but a bit more flexible through the forefoot – I liked it a lot – version 4 of the Ace marks a return to this style of shoe. The third version of the Ace (pictured in green below) had a bit more stiffness and cushion through the forefoot. They’re were heavier as a result and didn’t have quite the same feel for the ground.

The Ace 4 seems to be a bit unloved by the Adidas marketing machine – it doesn’t get brought into Australia and I haven’t seen it promoted much on the Internet. I came across it almost by accident on the Wiggle website. The Ace 4 is much more flexible than the new Adios 2 so those that liked the old Adios but prefer a more flexible shoe may want to move over to the Ace – hopefully Adidas keep it going!

Breaking in period

These shoes shouldn’t need a long breaking in period – mine have started feeling good after about 40km of running. The cushioning compound used feels slightly more forgiving than that deployed in the Adios 2. You’ll also note the so called torsion system and plastic strips that extend the full length of the sole in the Adios 2 do not extend into the forefoot on the Ace 4. This is a major contributing factor to the shoe feeling much less stiff and unforgiving.

Uses of the Ace 4

As I indicated I feel this shoe could fulfill a range of purposes depending on the background and intent of the runner. In terms of the structure we generally use to classify and recommend running shoes to clients I’d have these in the tempo running/light-weight trainer category. This means they’re suited to longer tempo runs or tempo pace intervals done at somewhere between your 10km and half-marathon race pace – solid rather than flat-our running. However, given the flexibility inherent in the Adidas Ace 4 they’re also going to be ok for use on steady paced longer runs and potentially as a minimalist running transition stepping on point. They’re obviously not a flat shoe but they’re much lighter and more sparingly cushioned than most everyday trainers. Not a bad place to start you minimal running aspirations if you were so inclined.

If I were to step down to running mile paced shorter repetitions of 200 – 400m or 5km race paced 1,000m intervals I’d probably start to look towards a shoe that has a bit more pop and stiffness available to help out when searching for some extra speed. However, I also see benefit in doing some of these sessions in a flatter, and/or more flexible shoes. In my case I’d probably do some of these types of training paces in the Nike Free 3.0 version 3 or in spikes (faster reps) for variety and race preparation. In the past 12 months I’ve also cautiously done the occasional tempo paced fartlek session barefoot on grass. The Ace could conceivably be used for faster work, but I personally wouldn’t do so.

Profile

I’m not able to provide any measurements around the heel-to-toe drop on this shoe but if feels pretty similar to the old Adios – perhaps even a touch flatter. The good news is it tapers away nicely toward the toe end of the shoe – something that I always enjoy in shoes made to go faster. The foot-bed is pretty flat and unshaped so over time your foot can make its own impression – another reason why this style of shoe responds well to a controlled wearing in period.

Surfaces

I’d be relatively comfortable wearing the Ace on a range of surfaces from road, packed granite sand and trails. Just be aware if you’re heading out to run fast in these shoes on rocky unsealed roads and trails you might get some stones pressing up into the forefoot.

Fit

I wouldn’t describe the Adidas Ace 4 as an extremely generous fitting shoe but it does have a decent amount of room. My slightly wide forefoot and high arch fits in well, so unless you’ve got particularly wide flippers your should be ok in these.

Conclusion

Overall this a a very nice simple shoe. Not much more to say than that, it slides into the background and lets you get on with running.

Words and images by Brian Martin

A little while ago I reviewed the Adidas Adizero Adios and named them my favorite running shoe, well as fickle as this may sound, I’ve changed my mind.

While I still prefer the Adios for road racing and tempo runs, for all around comfort on easy to longish runs and for working on improving running technique, then the Nike Free 3.0 is now the shoe I reach for first out of an ever burgeoning and untidy pile of running footwear.

I’ve been no stranger to the Free 3.0 over a period of more than 12 months, from tentative exploratory and cautious 20 minute jogs, my use of this shoe (and I’m now on a second pair) has grown considerably in volume and variation.

What sort of running can you do in the Nike Free 3.0?

At the top end I’ve run for 90 minutes or close to 20km, I even took them onto the track for a middling 5000m performance (I don’t blame the shoe). At the moment I’ve taken to wearing them for speed work (off the track), in fact I’m wearing them almost all the time!

The only environment where they have struggled was in a 16km long cross country race on uneven grass, I developed a callousister that day – no that’s not your callous sister, it’s a blister that forms under a callous. Keep up with your foot maintenance regime to avoid this happening to you!

As I wrote about recently, the NB MT101 trail shoe has given me a good alternative to protect my feet against stone bruising on very rocky surfaces. However, the Free 3.0 also performs pretty well on rough ground, if you avoid the sharp stuff. There’s no glossing over the fact that they do collect a handful of gravel to throw into your landscaping after each run. I wonder if a future version of the Free could be developed with slightly shallower grooves to help avoid the intrusion and collection of my local government’s road surface?

The Nike Free 3.0 as a tool for working on proper running form

Nike persistently under-market and under-explain the usefulness of the Free as much more than the training tool it’s so often described. It’s a legitimate choice as an everyday running shoe or trainer as well as a superior shoe for getting the feel for improved running technique.

I’ve been recently wearing the Free 3.0 much more over the past few weeks as I’ve continued to fine tuning my foot-strike and maintain my patient journey towards forefoot oriented running. As I’ve written previously in my book and on this blog many runners can be successful maintaining a light heel-toe contact pattern, so this is in no way a call to arms to every runner to get up on your toes.

The reason the Free 3.0 is so useful as a shoe to wear when making improvements to  running form – especially if you’re heading towards a forefoot first contact pattern, is it gives you fantastic feel for the loading cycle that occurs as the forefoot contacts and then flattens under pressure from the glutes and hamstrings. The Achilles and calf stretch to complete this loading and absorb landing shock. If you get it right.

It’s by no means something that you just decide to do, getting it wrong is very easy and can lead to injury inducing mistakes. But having the right shoe to practice with does make things easier, and the Nike Free 3.0 does a good job of this by allowing you to get a better feel for the cycle of load and release.

Pretty much any time I run in more traditional shoes – even something as light as the Adizero Ace or indeed an old pair of Nike Free 5.0 I find I lose the feel for this stretch and load process, the result is usually holding the foot and calf too stiff on contact leading to tight calves. A more flexible and flatter shoe seems to help allow this loading phase to occur more easily.

General strengthening benefit of flexible shoes

I’ve written previously about the benefits of the Free and other flexible running shoes as being good for strengthening the feet as you need to stiffen them as the foot is pushed back and springs off the ground. Traditional shoes, even racing flats, have a degree of stiffness that provides an artificial plantaflexion (toes pushing down) benefit – good for racing when you’re wanting every last piece of assistance, but perhaps not so great for easy running and training where building strength is the main game.

Do you need to be a forefoot striker to wear the Free 3.0?

I don’t think so. I took this footage late 2010 and was doing quite a bit of running in the Free 3.0 at the time despite going heel first. The key is not so much whether you’re a forefoot striker or not, but whether you are a quadriceps driven over-strider. If you over-stride, land dead with no hamstring and glute activation, then don’t wear these shoes for running.

If you activate your hamstrings and glutes early enough, you’ll probably be able to run in these shoes, even if you’re a lightish heel-striker. Just be careful to ease into wearing the Free 3.0 for a few weeks of 10-20 minute jogs before you conclude your body is going to like running in them for long runs or harder training sessions. Monitor how your body reacts and be aware of any unusual tightness or pain.

Is there any need to go barefoot when shoes are this good?

The mid-sole, cushioning and sole is all one and the same for the Nike Free range of shoes and this is part of the reason they work so well. It isn’t cushioning per se but it does provide some protection if you don’t smash into the ground too hard. The benefits of the less is more approach is that you get a very good feel for when your foot first strikes the ground and how it behaves once it’s on terra firma. There’s definitely plenty of benefit available for runners wearing the Free who want the barefoot feel without the risks and discomfort.

How long does the Nike Free 3.0 last?

In terms of longevity my Free 3.0s have been amazingly durable, the first thing that goes is the firmness in the mid-sole, but if you’re running roads or non rocky dirt tracks this isn’t really an issue – you didn’t buy these shoe for cushioning right? They do get a bit spongy after about 400 kilometers, but I kinda like the familiar, comforting feel of a well worn in pair of frees.

I have run upwards of 800km in this old pair and have already put a couple of hundred kilometers onto the most recent incarnation of the Free 3.0 (Version 3).

Is there going to be a Free 0.0 or 1.0?

I believe Nike will release a Free 0.0 or 1.0 in the near future to cover off on the requirements of zero drop runners. It’s debatable whether a flatter free is needed, but with the Free range being expanded to include the Free Run 5.0, a new intermediate model; the Free 4.0, the existing Free 3.0, a Free 1.0 or 0.0 will complete an excellent minimalist transition shoe pathway. Whichever way Nike go, a slightly flatter Free does seem to be inevitable and needed to complete the range.

Written by Brian Martin

If you want to read more about the benefits of transitioning to minimal shoe running, and how to do it safely, then this series of articles is worth a look:

The Adidas Adizero Adios would have to take the prize as the most versatile, and over a period of about two years, my favorite pair of running shoes. It’s also probably the best marathon racing shoe on the market. The Adios was one of my first purchases when I initially started wearing lighter, neutral and less cushioned minimalist running shoes. Hardcore minimalist and zero-drop shoes fans wouldn’t probably agree that the Adios is a minimal shoe, but as I’ve written before, it depends on where you are coming from.

My favorite running shoe

As a self-confessed running shoe addict I’ve worn quite a few different shoe makes and models over the past few years, but I keep coming back to the Adios as the shoe consistently provides comfort, speed and protection for many types of training and racing. The Adidas Adios has also been the shoe on the feet of numerous super fast, record breaking marathon performers (men and women), including Haile Gebrselassie’s for whom the shoe was in-part designed.

Versatility

But the real strength of this shoe is its versatility to be able to suit a range of runners with varying abilities and foot-striking patterns. Not every runner would be able to wear this shoe in the full marathon, but those who don’t land too hard and are intending to run sub 3.30 could probably give it a shot if they feel good in some longer training runs. The reason for the versatility is the fact that the Adios does have a drop of something approaching 10mm from heel to toe, so if you do habitually heel-strike or begin heel-striking as you tire, then there is still some level of forgiveness available to protect you late in the race.

Forefoot gradient

There is also a bit of gradient in the forefoot itself, which is not a feature in every shoe, but is, for reasons I don’t fully understand, comfortable for me when I find it. The Nike Free 3.0 has a similar type of forefoot taper which I enjoy. I suspect it helps counteract weakness through the full length of my foot, but the jury is still out on that theory. If that is true, I’d suspect a wider variety of flatter shoes will feel more comfortable for me as my feet continue to strengthen over time. For now that gradient is no bad thing as it does feel like it helps stimulate some drive through the forefoot.

A racing flat for regular runners

However, the Adios is not just good for the marathon, runners who are not super fast and are looking for a regular runner’s racing flat should consider the Adios for road racing and cross country events (provided the course is not too rough or slippery). I even used the Adios on the track in the last two seasons where its firm springy performance worked well when racing 1500m to 5000m.

I’m hoping this coming track season to make the transition into spikes for the first time since I was 15, but if that goes awry I’ll know my Adios are there as a solid back-up plan. There’s also plenty of elite runners who still wear the Adios for shorter road racing too because they’re such a comfortable, light and fast shoe.

In this photo you can see the author in a pair of blue trusty Adios about to run a 6.2km road relay. My team-mate Tyson (a talented runner) who is wearing a true racing flat, gave me the unusual experience of leading a race, well for about a minute before I was chased down by speedier competitors!

Photo courtesy of Athletics Victoria.

Minimalist shoe transition stepping-on point

In terms of a transition plan from wearing traditional running shoes the Adios is a good next step down if you’ve been wearing a neutral shoe. I introduced the Adios first with some easy jogging of no more than 20 minutes. It’s always a good idea to test new shoes with some easy runs before you wear them in a race, hard training session or really long run. One of the reasons the Adios is a good stepping stone to minimalist shoe wearing is it’s more or less just a lighter, less cushioned version of the shoe you’ve been wearing, so it doesn’t feel too far removed from what you may have been used to.

Fast, slow, tempo runs, whatever

While the Adios is a forgiving shoe and feels comfortable for slower running (I use them on long runs too), the faster you run, the better they feel and if you’re transitioning away from heel-striking to a more neutral foot-strike you’ll notice they feel quite zippy as more of your weight moves forward over your foot. This is another reason why they are a good transition training shoe as you can run easy in them, but switching to speed is rewarding. Probably the best example of this is during an occasional fartlek training session I do where harder efforts of 1,2,3 and 4 minutes and then back down are split up with 1 minute jogs. The Adios is the perfect partner for this type of training.

In terms of fit, they would not suit someone with a very wide forefoot, I just sneak into them, but the design of the shoe does allow for a bit of stretch if you need it. If in doubt try them on and have a jog prior to purchasing. Longevity wise I’m still going on the blue Adios model, probably about two years old, so they do last the distance, however I rotate my shoes frequently. They get a bit spongy as they age and become less appropriate for taking onto rocky ground as stones tend to poke through the cushioning once it softens. However, I don’t mind rolling out an older pair for the odd easy run on a flat surface.

A Haile Gebrselassie collector’s item?

Adidas made a commemorative version of the Adios that features many of his world record marks over various distances. Haile’s shoe might now be more of a collector’s item especially as he approached the end of his running days and now that his world record mark has been eclipsed.

So what do you think? Are the Adios your all time favorite shoes or do you run in another shoe that provides similar versatility?

Written by Brian Martin

More articles about transitioning to running shoe minimalism

Adidas has delivered a new shoe, the Adizero Feather, into the Adizero range of performance oriented running shoes, which fits snugly into the marathon racing shoe category. There’s plenty of great shoes on the market for runners at the moment, and as someone who favors shoes that are a little less bulky that a traditional trainer, I’m currently being spoilt for choice. The Adidas Feather is another tempting addition to the marathon racing and minimalist shoe range.

The category of shoes I spend much of my time running in are what I term marathon racing shoes. You could equally put these shoes in the minimalist running shoe category, although hardcore minimalist runners wouldn’t because these marathon racers carry a modest heel-toe drop. However, compared to regular trainers marathon racing shoes feature greater flexibility, feel for the road and a relatively flatter heel-toe profile. This makes them relatively minimal for someone who has always run in bulky trainers.

Why marathon racing shoes are a good choice for regular runners

Marathon racers are a good option for regular runners to use as their racing flats, which is exactly what I have been doing. They can be used for racing on the roads, think 3km upwards to the half-marathon for many runners, and for the full marathon, say if you’re looking to break three hours and 30 minutes and pretty light on your feet. Marathon racing shoes are also responsive enough to run 800m to 10,000m on the track, if you’re not used to wearing spikes or true racing flats. In fact, I’ve done most of my track running in the last two years in the Adidas Adios.

Many runners want to transition rapidly to the minimalist running ethos and jump straight from wearing a bulky cushioned trainer into dead-flat (zero drop) and un-cushioned running shoes. However, this ignores a potentially very useful and approachable category of running shoes (marathon racers) that offer many of the benefits of going minimal with less risk of injury. As I’ve written about in a previous article, you don’t need to be the hare when it comes to transitioning to minimalist running shoes. A gradual transition carries much less risk of injury.

So while this style of shoe is one elite runners use to race a marathon, because it does have some support and a modest heel-toe drop (10mm), it does not mean you should wear it to run a marathon (although many runners could).  If you’re a regular runner or jogger, doing some training in a shoe with this profile can be very beneficial. Think about using a lighter shoe for your speed work, intervals and even some tempo running. The Adidas Adios and Feather are good choices for this sort of approach. So even if you don’t race your marathon in a marathon racers, they could still be a useful shoe to have in your collection for training and shorter races.

Adidas Feather features and review

The Adizero Feather (6.7oz/190grams), so named for its light-weight properties, is in fact lighter than the Adidas Adios (7.4oz/210grams). The Feather features a few cut away sections from the cushioning in the sole which help bring the weight down. It also has a light weight plastic mesh in the upper, which feels a bit less resilient than regular material, although only time will tell on their longevity. So if you’re someone who pokes holes in the upper of your shoes, perhaps think again before adding the Feather to your arsenal.

In terms of profile, the Adidas Feather feels slightly flatter than the Adios, but it is not a true racing flat. The addition of the stiff sprint frame feels like it makes the shoe quite responsive and fast and I believe it could be good for runners who don’t wear spikes to use racing on the track. The design of the sole and cushioning precludes this shoe from being taken off-road and onto trails. It is a road or track shoe only.

One interesting piece of research I happened upon when researching my book Running Technique was a study that found sprinters increased their performance with the addition of a carbon fiber plates in their spikes. The sprint frame in this shoe could act in a similar way, this kind of technology is a bit like the design of many spikes which offer runners landing on the forefoot a spring-loaded performance aid. As the foot flattens from forefoot to heel, the springy spike is pushed down and then as the runner’s foot starts leaving the ground, the shoe springs back and helps the runner leave the ground with a bit more purpose.

The obvious design feature in this shoe is the sprint frame, which is essentially a thin piece of firm plastic that runs in between the cushioning material and the inner of the shoe. And while it might have performance enhancing properties, it combined with the cut-away cushioning is a slightly annoying rock-catching combination. As a runner that often gets off road, these days you really have to choose your shoes wisely, as so many models don’t consider what will happen when you step into a rocky environment.

When you initially pick up the Feather you look at that frame and worry that is could make the shoe overly stiff and hard.  I have to admit though, that it didn’t feel that way once I started running in them. However, these shoes are stiffer than the Adios and many other shoes. Therefore, a wearing-in phase of jogging in the Feather would be a good idea so you can get the feel for them and break them in a little. This is a step I’ve recently been skipping with many shoes as they often feel so good straight out of the box these days.

What the Adidas Feather is good for

• Runners with a relatively neutral foot strike – runners with a moderate heel toe pattern will be ok, but if you’re an exaggerated heel-striker, the Feather could get slappy and uncomfortable.
• Runners looking for a performance shoe for short road races 3k to 10k.
• As an alternative to spikes for racing on the track.
• Collecting rocks.

Written by Brian Martin

Related articles:

I don’t know how many times someone has said these words to me: “running is bad for your knees” or “isn’t running hard on your body?” Up to about 18 months ago I would probably have begrudgingly agreed with them.  With my stop-start injury plagued running career all the evidence needed to support their running nay-saying.  Having been through the process of rebuilding my running technique I can happily take on these running pessimists before they get on a roll.  The stock answer now becomes “running badly is bad for your body”, what I’ve learned is that running with proper technique and a sensible training approach is no more damaging than any other form of exercise.

People have been conditioned overtime into believing the natural human movement of running is somehow dangerous to your health.  Tell that to an African child who runs five miles to school and back everyday – sorry kid, “running is bad for you.”  I find it hard to imagine the response; you’re now denied your primary mode of transportation.  And don’t forget the child is likely running barefoot, something that until recently was considered about as dangerous as smoking cigarettes.  But having said that don’t compost your old running shoes just yet, jumping straight into running natural when you’re used to wearing inch-thick running shoes does carry some risks.

So who is to blame?  Sports physicians or running shoe companies perhaps?  There’s certainly a big emphasis on talking about shock adsorption, the now famous evil of pronation and choosing running shoes on the basis of the shape of your foot.  All of which completely ignores how you actually run.  If we put heavily cushioned shoes on a runner that already hits the ground hard.  What does this achieve?  Not much, we’re treating the symptom of poor running technique not the cause.  In a way we’re conditioning ourselves to run with worse technique by using technology that encourages poor running form.   I’ll be digging into more detail around the merits of running shoe design, matching shoes to foot-type and barefoot running in the coming months.  I’ll leave you with one thought to consider when you’re next asked to walk over or stand on a pressure plate before a shoe salesperson relieves you of $200 – what relationship does this bear to the way I run?

I used to be the kind if runner that avoided hard surfaces – the guy who runs on the grass between the road and the footpath.  Concrete and asphalt were my enemies and I cloaked my body in protective armour before going into battle with them.  My checklist of protection included $260 motion controlled cushioned shoes, padded inserts, heavily cushioned socks and even then a short burst on the road had my shins aching.  None of this technology prevented me getting injured and there’s some good arguments emerging that over-prescription of heavy motion controlled shoes may in-fact cause injury.

So what do I run in now?  Generally as little as possible, shoes and socks that this.  I’m not a fully fledged barefoot devotee ; thirty plus years of wearing shoes, training in a rocky environment and my imperfect biomechanics make this impractical.  I run in shoes that are considered marathon racers, the Adios by Adidas – they don’t have any motion control features, but do have enough cushioning and a little heel to make them a reasonable shoe for someone running moderate mileage to use as a daily trainer.  I run about half my miles in these shoes and the other half in Nike Frees the 5.0 and 3.0 models.  I’ll be reviewing these shoe models in future posts to give you some more information about how to use them safely and why they make a good intermediate position between heavily cushioned shoes and running without shoes at all.  Running with good technique is definitely not bad for you and the war with concrete and asphalt is a winnable one if you know how.

Written by Brian Martin