As soon as I started running, I wanted to read about running, talk about running, read about running kit and look at pictures of other people running. Runners World Magazine filled that void very nicely. I became a monthly subscriber.
As a regular Runners World forum user, I also talked with other runners and read their opinions on all things running. One of the comments I used to come across was people saying they’d stopped subscribing/buying Runners World long ago. Which I could never understand. What’s not to like? I particularly enjoyed the race reviews towards the back and some of the articles. However, I did find out.
After you’ve read more than say, 8 issues, it dawns on you that you’ve read that passage somewhere before. There’s a lot of content recycling going on. As you progress through your running career, you realise that there’s not much in there that the experienced runner wants to read about. Runners World magazine is heavily geared towards the beginner runner with endless articles about how to get started or loose that gut in 5 weeks. The client base turn over must be huge.
Which, eventually, brings me to something I read on the Runners World website this morning. On the front page of the website, they have a list of latest reviews. One of the categories was ‘Minimalist shoes’. As that’s the shoe category which I’m in these days, I clicked on it. I saw a pair I’d not looked at before so clicked on them [Under Armour Charge RC]. Then, right under a huge picture of the shoe, there’s the comment:
“Light, neutral midfoot strikers will love doing speed sessions in these.”
You might have guessed that this statement annoys the hell out of me. Because… everyone is a light, neutral midfoot stiker…. with no shoes. [Well, maybe with the exception of Michael Johnson. He has a very different style that seems to work for him. And what a runner.] I’ve talked previously about how form is everything. The truth is, that without the shoes, we’d all have the same form. If you ever compare the form of a barefoot runner with the form of a shod runner? Very different. You can run however you like in well cushioned shoes. But I digress. The point here is that [in my case] when I started out running, Runners World was the mecca. It had all the information I needed. However, the traditional attitudes are plain to see. If you ever watch one of the Runners World shoe reviews online, one of the favourite phrases is:
“…from heel strike…to toe off…”
Another example of a view which immediately pigeon holes every single runners form, coming from the people with, apparently, all the experience. A suggestion: Send all the Runners World employees on a barefoot training course. I will state for the record, that I use the term barefoot, really as a reference to natural running form. I am not a consistant barefoot runner, because I run in sandals most of the time, but I have done it on many occasions. You cannot run in sandals or go barefoot without the correct form.
