Photo: Abebe Bikila at the finish line of the 1964 Olympic marathon.
Barefoot running is becoming more popular, there is no doubt about it. But the exact reasons why any one person may choose to take up this style of running is highly variable. Some people gravitate to barefoot or minimalist running as a way to prevent or heal running injuries.
That was the case for me personally. Unfortunately, there isn’t any conclusive evidence (yet) that this will be the case. All we have are personal testimonials and the anthropological data suggesting that humans were built to run without conventional shoes.
Other people choose to run barefoot because they feel lighter, and faster doing so. Fortunately, there is actually a good deal of research which indicates that is actually what occurs. A significant amount of research over the last 20 years has revealed that barefoot running can increase running efficiency (compared to shod runners) from between 3-5%.
From the 2001 Sport Science journal [1]:
Burkett et al. (1985) found that oxygen consumption during running increased as the amount of mass they added to the foot increased; shoes and orthotics representing 1% of body mass increased oxygen consumption by 3.1%. Flaherty (1994) found that oxygen consumption during running at 12 km/h was 4.7% higher in shoes of mass ~700 g per pair than in bare feet. An increase in oxygen consumption of ~4% is of little importance to the recreational runner, but the competitive athlete would notice a major effect on running speed.
Indeed, spread out over several hours like during a marathon 4% of energy saved adds up to quite a bit of avoided exertion. Most professional runners are happy to have increased their marathon time by just a few minutes, so a little bit of advantage is a good thing. For instance, if your marathon personal record was 2:30, reducing your time by 3% would shave off 5 minutes from your time.
Could running barefoot help you reduce your marathon time? Potentially, but why? Well, it seems that there is a combination of factors that cause shoes to make distance running less efficient. One being the additional mass added to the end of your legs [2], and the other being the reduced capability of your lower extremities to conserve mechanical energy. An indication of these effects in laboratory studies is the increase of VO2, heart rate, and perceived exertion by shod runners over those who are running barefoot. [3]
The increase in oxygen consumption with running shoes could have several causes. An obvious possibility is the energy cost of continually accelerating and decelerating the mass of the shoe with each stride. Another possibility is the external work done in compressing and flexing the sole and in rotating the sole against the ground–up to 13% of the work done in walking, according to Webb et al. (1988). Frederick (1986) reported that oxygen consumption increased substantially with thicker shoe inserts during treadmill running.
Not surprisingly, materials used for cushioning in shoes absorb energy, and stiff midsoles should produce a 2% saving of energy compared with standard midsoles (Stefanyshyn and Nigg, 2000). Finally, shoes probably compromise the ability of the lower limb to act like a spring. With bare feet, the limb returns ~70% of the energy stored in it, but with running shoes the return is considerably less (Yessis, 2000, p.123).
If you’re looking for a good guide to help you reap some of these benefits, the book Barefoot Running provides step-by-step directions to overcome injuries, run faster than ever, and rediscover the pure joy of running.
***
It seems to me that the prevailing thought on shoe design during the last few decades lead to larger and more rigid shoes. The recent shake up in the shoe industry and the increase in availability for minimalist footwear options can only be a good thing.
Advanced production methods will likely make it possible for shoe companies to continue developing footwear that provides protection but still allows maximum freedom with minimum weight. Can you imagine a shoe of the future which is paper thin and near weightless, but has the strength of kevlar? That would be pretty awesome.
Until that day comes though, if you wear shoes you will have to balance the benefits of protection with the downsides to mobility and efficiency. While there are undoubtedly dangers to be encountered by barefoot runners, I have a hunch that in the long run more people will choose efficiency over safety. We just like to be fast.
If you enjoyed this article, get email updates (it's free).
12 Responses to Barefoot Running is More Efficient. But Why?
Want to Learn More?
If you are unfamiliar with some of the topics that I’m discussing, you should enroll in my free five part email tutorial.
You’ll receive a series of emails answering the main questions you probably have about natural diet and fitness.
David Recommends...
Although not running barefoot yet, I am doing all my walks barefoot. I am hoping that by walking barefoot (about two miles a day) I will be “preparing” my feet for when I try some barefoot running. What do you think?
Chris
PS – My running right now is all done in the Minimus line from NB.
Chris´s last [type] ..On the Road Again
It will help somewhat, but the demands placed on the structure of the foot (on the outside and inside) are magnified greatly when running. When you go for your first run, go for a short distance at a slow speed.
Good advice from Kevin. The impact loading from running versus walking is definitely much greater. Still, the more barefoot you are before running can’t hurt.
good stuff man. also i’ve recently fallen in love with an oldy that’s been around a long longer than the ‘minimal’ athletic shoes coming to market. if anyone is interested in an inexpensive minimal althernative capezio makes a great split soled leather gymnastic slipper, I got mine for about 15 dollars. caveat is they’re primarily indoor shoes but great for lifting, xfit, tumbling, vaulting, etc. also good are ballet flats, not the fashion flats but real ones (mens model), and kung fu shoes ala Bruce lee style, all provide some ding of protection and minimal support and allow for natural movement, the gymnastics and ballet shoes being the most flexible with the split dual sole design.
great post man. thanks.
Those sound a lot like ZEMGear’s split toe Ninja’s – I’d probably like those too.
Interesting stuff Dave. I read recently that over longer distances, the drawback of barefoot running is that you reach a point of muscular fatigue. Over the distance of, say, a marathon, your injury risk can actually outweigh than of less efficient form in shoes. I think it’s a balancing act of finding just the right amount of shoe for your own personal form, the distance being run, and of course, intensity.
Jason Fitzgerald´s last [type] ..Pool Running- Why You’re Doing it Wrong and How to Pool Run to Get Faster
Yeah, hopefully more people will be willing to experiment with barefoot marathons so we can get more anecdotal data.
Minimal shoe warning http://runwitharthurlydiard.blogspot.com/2011/06/age-group-win-in-5-mile-race-injury-and.html
Rick´s last [type] ..The Rubbish 5K Series Returns 15th June
I just started following your blog, and I have enjoyed it. My husband and I have only recently started to run with Vibram’s Five Fingers after reading Born to Run. The book that probably influences a lot of us to try it in the first place.
Further anecdotal evidence: We were out of town on business, and wrapped up the trip by spontaneously signing up for a 12K trail race that would happen the next morning. I was nervous because I only brought my Five Fingers, and I had only walked, sprinted, and lifted weights in them. I’ve never run a long distance in them, let alone on a trail. But I did it anyway. Why not? I PRed the distance which was dotted with snow burms, patches of rocks, and tree roots. I ran 8 minutes faster. I know running on dirt is a lot easier on the knees and hips, but hey, I was able to concentrate on the obstacles and not how heavy my legs felt when I wear running shoes. Well, I’m beyond hooked on minimalist running now, especially running on trails.
[...] This article was originally published on: Naturally Engineered http://naturallyengineered.com/blog [...]
[...] is 4%? Well according to an blog post on Naturally Engineered.com that is how much energy one can save when running barefoot. I am not referring to electricity or [...]
[...] From the 2001 Sport Science journal: Burkett et al. (1985) found that oxygen consumption during running increased as the amount of mass they added to the foot increased; shoes and orthotics representing 1% of body mass increased oxygen consumption by 3.1%. Flaherty (1994) found that oxygen consumption during running at 12 km/h was 4.7% higher in shoes of mass ~700 g per pair than in bare feet. An increase in oxygen consumption of ~4% is of little importance to the recreational runner, but the competitive athlete would notice a major effect on running speed. Read the full article: Barefoot Running is More Efficient | Naturally Engineered [...]