Nike Blazer Pas Cher

in About Wed May 11, 2016 8:51 am
by yan123 • Bestseller Writer | 82 Posts | 820 Points

The Free 5.0 has traditionally been the Nike Blazer Haute Femmes best selling of the Free shoes (all are very popular) and retains a traditional style upper.The big change comes to the sole where we see a new hexagonal siping pattern instead of the squares that have long characterized the Free line.The 5.0 also has a more rounded heel which I think will be an improvement over the previous version ((I¡¯m not a fan of flared heels). Per Jeff Dengate¡¯s article, the Free 5.0 v2 weighs in at ~8oz and is 8mm drop (similar to previous versions). MSRP for the 5.0 is $100 ¨C given my affinity for the Free shoes, I¡¯ll likely pick up a pair of these for a review when they are available.

5. Flex. The flexibility of the Free shoes due to their deeply grooved outsole (see picture below) is the real deal ¨C these shoes flex as well as almost any other that I have worn, and it was one of the things I noticed immediately the first time that I put them on. I do believe that they work your feet in ways that stiffer traditional shoes cannot, and this is a big plus for the Nike Free line.Nike Free 3.0 Soles Soles of the 1st generation (top) an Nike Flyknit Lunar d 2nd generation (bottom) Nike Free 3.0. Aside from greater wear on the top shoe, the sole looks to be identical.

Another important point that the authors emphasize is that their subjects were very highly trained runners and that as a result they might ¡°already have highly consistent running mechanics and different types of shoes have little influence on their running gait.¡± They indicate that ¡°It is possible that lesser trained runners with less consistent mechanics may be more susceptible to changes in running gait when utilising a minimalist shoe.¡± As always, one must consider the subjects and conditions studied when applying the results of a scientific study, and I¡¯d once again love to take a look at individual variation.

Several interesting studies have come out over the past few weeks that have in one way or another focused on the running foot strike. The first that I¡¯m going to cover is by Jason Bonacci and colleagues and addresses how running mechanics differ between barefoot running and running in a ¡°minimalist¡± shoe (Nike Free 3.0), racing flat (Nike Lunaracer 2), and ¡°regular¡± running shoes (a runner¡¯s typical training shoe, variable by individual). The study is titled ¡°Running in a minimalist and lightweight shoe is not the same as running barefoot: a biomechanical study¡± and was released in Online First form on the British Journal of Sports Medicine website.

Nike has long touted the design of their Free line of running shoes as having been inspired by barefoot running. Indeed, the newest Free shoes have the phrase ¡°Barefoot Ride¡± written right on the insole (see photo at left). Personally, I¡¯m a fan of the Frees since they suit my preference for light, flexible, moderately cushioned shoes. However, despite their more minimal structure, I don¡¯t think they really come even close to simulating the experience of running barefoot (few shoes do).In my recent review of the Nike Free 5.0 I cited a study tha Nike Flyknit Max t compared running biomechanics in the Nike Pegasus and the Nike Free 3.0. This research has been out for awhile, but I never wrote about the paper. Since I¡¯ve been running a bunch in various Nike Free shoes lately, I thought I¡¯d write up a summary.

Slow motion video of treadmill running in Nike Free 3.0 ¨C mild heel strike. Video shot at 300 frames-per-second with a Casio Exilim EX-F1 camera. Courtesy of If the Nike Free 3.0 doesn¡¯t promote a midfoot/forefoot footstrike as happens when I run barefoot or in Vibrams Nike Free 5.0 Pas Cher , then what benefit have I gotten from running in it?

Scroll up

Please sign up :)
0 Members and 18 Guests are online.

We welcome our newest member: Brando Rath
Board Statistics
The forum has 50552 topics and 66131 posts.

Xobor Einfach ein eigenes Xobor Forum erstellen