asics gel kayano evo

And according to RW it has a 12mm lift [Heel asics dynaflyte (33mm), Forefoot (21mm)]. This appears to be a classic Model-T running shoe with some weight removed. Although its still much heavier than my Kinvaras and Trail Gloves (obviously). I suppose there isn't an Asics shoe to fit the bill. I'll just buy the Kinvara 2's or maybe the Hattori's. Thanks for trying Pete.Just having a little fun. If there are people who do benefit from a shoe like that, by all means keep it on the market, even if it's just a small number.

It's just that you made the statement that Asics has abandoned the concept of motion control shoes, but all it looks like to me is that the name has been changed to "maximum support." Still targeting the same audience from a marketing standpoint as a shoe like the Brooks Beast based on what is said in that asics fuzex video.It sounds like a decent shoe (though the heel seems a little high for a "minimal" offering).I'd definitely beÂ open to giving them an honest shot, but I'm not sure how to get you my info without putting it out there for everyone (not that I don't trust Pete orÂ the readers asics gel contend 3 of his awesome blog).

It would be greatÂ to haveÂ lots ofÂ variety offered byÂ EVERY manufacturer, but I understand that there is a substantial cost and risk involved in such a venture. In my opinion though it is well worth the cost & effort for every shoe company to have innovative shoes that spanÂ the most "minimal" to the utter "maximal" shoe choices. After all, if everyone with their differing biomechanics and personalÂ preferences can find their ownÂ "perfect" shoe offered by their favorite manufacturer (we all have favorites),Â then the shoe industry will make their money while helping runners stay healthy and happy.

Simon- you are very asics gel cumulus right about a study not being out there.Â We who coined the term âZero Drop' (Altra Footwear) feel like more research should be done on this.Â I totally agree with you that this is nearly impossible though.Â Like you said: "Many in these blogs have demanded a study proving conventional fotwear reduces injury rates. Well you sound like a guy with a scientific background, so maybe you can explain to the punters on this blog just how dificult it would be, if not impossible to design a meaningful study to ask that scientific question.

Once again you have put forth a well thought out and supported rebuttal to an extremely biasedÂ comment made by another "the worldÂ is square!" shoe company leader. ItÂ continues to amaze me thatÂ a shoe company would allow an employee of theirs to alienate an entireÂ group of consumers. Wow. By the way Simon, since you're calling for evidence, where is your evidence that the high-heeled, high-cushioned, highly "supportive" shoes you are pushing prevent injury or even help the runner in any way? And the argument that "if it ain't brokeâ¦" doesn't hold any weight since there aren't any studies thatÂ today's platformed heelÂ running shoe prevent injuries in any way.

I'm thinkin asics gel kayano evo g that the only thing those shoes are good for is to help prevent heel fractures when heel-striking. Just one runners opinion. Not that consumer opinion counts, right Simon? Oh, and even if you weren't supposedly speaking for Asics, if you represent yourself as an Asics researcher then, to the minds of the audience,Â you are speaking for Asics. Sorry, but its true.Great post Pete.I can't help but be annoyed at the belligerence of Bartold. Whenever I approach debates like that I always like to look back at history. It provides grea [img]http://www.jeanwyllys.com/images/detail/asics gel kayano evo-532whk.jpg[/img] t insights into how and why we developed our unique physiology.