26/03/2025
Very insteresting viewpoint on the new trend up stacked running shoes.
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1ADqKEDk4E/?mibextid=wwXIfr
Recently, I have been pondering the direction running footwear is going.. and that direction is undoubtedly.. UP!
We now routinely see massive amounts of foam, often made of a bewildering variety of materials. Lord help you if you are a runner and not up to date with your material science knowledge!
It is now common to see shoes that are well outside the World Athletics rearfoot stack legal limit of 40mm, and so not able to be worn during competition.
And the claims that are being made are making me very nervous, because I just do not think they are true.
Recently I have seen blogs claiming that a shoe with a 47 mm stack in the rearfoot, and 41 in the forefoot (for a 6mm drop) will “protect your muscles and joints”.
I beg to differ your honour.
There might… MIGHT be some truth to this for some runners, especially a hyperfit, low body mass individual, but there potentially will be no benefit, and possibly a deficit for other runners.
Even if the runner is hyperfit, if they are of significant body mass, they will simply compress this very high thickness, low density foam, negating any perceived benefit, and most likely then be performing off an extremely unstable platform.
So moving the thought experiment on, maybe we should be talking more about the foam densities not the actual quantity of foam.
I believe we are entering what is potentially a dangerous new phase here for runners because the emphasis on low density foams, and a lot of it, is not being told correctly. Take a look at the new Glycerin Max I have attached
Photo credit: https://runrepeat.com/brooks-glycerin-max
This is a huge stack of foam, and the shoe is quite heavy at 309 gms (10.9 oz). It is being marketed as a “neutral” running shoe (whatever that means) and
“Ideal for both long-distance running and daily training, this shoe offers the ultimate in running performance”
So I am not in any way being critical of this shoe. Brooks is a great brand and they make great shoes, BUT, I am worried that the stories being told to the consumer for the Glycerin Max and other shoes from every brand are not being correctly told.
This is NOT a shoe for everyone. I believe runners of higher body mass will not perform well in this shoe and it may even be problematic for them.
So, are we wandering back into the bad old days of footwear segmentation? Do we have to display shoes on slat walls that really demonstrate true purpose and suitability?
I really hope not.
Or should we be asking the really hard questions?
Are we building shoes without really knowing why we are doing it? Building shoes with no foundation in purpose and function, but by the very nature of mass-produced running footwear, marketing to and making available for all?
I do not know the answer, and would love to hear your thoughts, but I must admit I am a little worried by the trend.. it reminds me of 2011 and the suggestion that less was more…
Vimazi | Running | Shoes | Injury Vimazi Run
