Why do you run barefoot?

It's the question I get asked most!
I have so many reasons I could give, it's better for you than wearing shoes, it minimises the chance of injury, it's more efficient running that way, it encourages proper running form, it strengthens your feet and legs, less likely to fall over when you're old, shoes are like casts etc etc
I've read countless books on the subject and know quite a bit on the science behind it...
However, when someone asks me "Why on earth would you want to run barefoot!!??!?" All can muster is "It's great".
There's so much more I could say but I go blank...

What is your standard response to inevitable question when you get it?..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Robin
I do it because I'm an attention whore. If it weren't for that, I wouldn't be able to put up with the extreme pain and anguish that I suffer with every time my foot rubs raw against the pavement, and there's nothing more satisfying than having people track you to your home because they were able to follow the bloody footprints.
 
It's cheaper.
 
For me, it always boils down to more or less the same as you Darkand (and Hobbit, and Happysongbird): because it's great. Because I like it. Because it feels good or right. Purely subjective reasons. (Many people already know, or have heard, that BFR is healthier etc -- it's the pain and uncomfortableness they are afraid of. So when I say it's not that uncomfortable, they have to deny it could be comfortable for them, or reconsider. I seem to enjoy it immensely, so perhaps...? Like in all advertising, emotional arguments often pervail when rational argumenst fall flat.)
 
Originally it was because I was having lower leg problems, extreme tenderness on the sides of the calves on the inside of the leg, and plantar fasciitis. I was trying to figure out why, and seemed bad form was often cited and lots of references to barefoot being the best natural form. So I said what the heck, was worth a shot. Now that I am used to it its just so much fun! I'm not an attention seeker but its nice to be different sometime, even if its everyone else thats different and your probably the way its suppose to be!
 
It's the question I get asked most!
I have so many reasons I could give, it's better for you than wearing shoes, it minimises the chance of injury, it's more efficient running that way, it encourages proper running form, it strengthens your feet and legs, less likely to fall over when you're old, shoes are like casts etc etc
I've read countless books on the subject and know quite a bit on the science behind it...
However, when someone asks me "Why on earth would you want to run barefoot!!??!?" All can muster is "It's great".
There's so much more I could say but I go blank...

What is your standard response to inevitable question when you get it?..
I tell them it's better for you and your feet.That it enhances your form...they just look at me like :"wtf is he talking about?!":D
 
I usually tell people it's because I studied Physical Anthropology and that humans were designed to walk a lot, run slowly a lot and occasionally sprint very fast. And for most of human history, they did it without shoes. Then people say "Well, they didn't have concrete and asphalt back then". I point out that they had hard-packed dirt, rocks, and thorns. Next, they ask the inevitable "Aren't you worried about glass/nails/hypodermic needles/fungus/dirt/ebola virus (or anything else they imagine lying around on the side of the road)?" And I point out that I actually do watch where I'm going, and most of that stuff is avoidable or not all that common. I tell them that it improves your form because you can't really heel-strike barefooted, and then explain why heel-striking is bad. I haven't gotten to the point in my BFRing where it actually, honestly feels good (it doesn't feel BAD, but I'd be lying at this point if I said the bottoms of my feet felt GOOD), but I do tell them it doesn't feel as bad as you might think.
I have a coworker who runs pretty fast, but mostly does shorter distances. I told him last week that I ran 3.55 miles barefooted and he said "Why would you run barefooted when you can run in shoes???". I didn't bother to answer him. He's an idiot. Seriously... once, we were talking about music and I said I liked Queen and he said "They could have been really big if Freddie Mercury hadn't died". I pointed out that they STILL hold the attendance record for a concert by a single band, and that even though they weren't all that big in the U.S. they were HUGE in the rest of the world. I also pointed out that when Freddie Mercury died, they were sort of easing into their retirement years and had already had an 18 year run. He said "Yeah, but they could have been AEROSMITH big". How do you argue with someone like that????
 
I usually tell people it's because I studied Physical Anthropology and that humans were designed to walk a lot, run slowly a lot and occasionally sprint very fast. And for most of human history, they did it without shoes. Then people say "Well, they didn't have concrete and asphalt back then". I point out that they had hard-packed dirt, rocks, and thorns. Next, they ask the inevitable "Aren't you worried about glass/nails/hypodermic needles/fungus/dirt/ebola virus (or anything else they imagine lying around on the side of the road)?" And I point out that I actually do watch where I'm going, and most of that stuff is avoidable or not all that common. I tell them that it improves your form because you can't really heel-strike barefooted, and then explain why heel-striking is bad. I haven't gotten to the point in my BFRing where it actually, honestly feels good (it doesn't feel BAD, but I'd be lying at this point if I said the bottoms of my feet felt GOOD), but I do tell them it doesn't feel as bad as you might think.
I have a coworker who runs pretty fast, but mostly does shorter distances. I told him last week that I ran 3.55 miles barefooted and he said "Why would you run barefooted when you can run in shoes???". I didn't bother to answer him. He's an idiot. Seriously... once, we were talking about music and I said I liked Queen and he said "They could have been really big if Freddie Mercury hadn't died". I pointed out that they STILL hold the attendance record for a concert by a single band, and that even though they weren't all that big in the U.S. they were HUGE in the rest of the world. I also pointed out that when Freddie Mercury died, they were sort of easing into their retirement years and had already had an 18 year run. He said "Yeah, but they could have been AEROSMITH big". How do you argue with someone like that????
Some people just need a high five...in the face with a chair LOL!:D:p
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bare Lee

Support Your Club

Forum statistics

Threads
19,158
Messages
183,648
Members
8,705
Latest member
Raramuri7

Latest posts