Best running shoes for a fat guy?
 

Today I'm going to go look for some new running shoes. I have ballooned up to 263 lbs. I liked Asics when I ran cross country and track in high school. I was wondering what is the best running shoes for a fat guy? Or should I go to our local running store and have someone do a few tests and pay a little bit more to get some shoes?

Running shoes are always cheaper than knee surgery, so yes, go to a running specialty store so they can analyze your gait and put you in the right shoe. Generally, the best running stores will carry Asics, Brooks, Mizuno, Nike, and Saucony.

And don't listen to the anti-Nike ninnies that are going to respond to this thread. Nike is a fine running shoe.

I recall Fat Albert wore high-top Converse.

You should definitely go to a running store. No question about it. They can analyze your foot shape, running style, etc. and find a shoe that is just right for you.

And whatever you do, DON'T BUY NIKE BRAND!!!!

Agreed.

Don't BUY NIKE, they are from the Devil. Unless you want sore Achilles tendons, shin splits, bad times and sore feet, you'll avoid Nike's like the plague. Only weirdos wear Nikes.

Unless you like Al Gore, you won't buy Nike.

Asics, Saucony and several others make a great shoe.

Addidas suck, Nikes suck.

Last time I went in I couldn't decide between Brooks and Saucony. So I bought them both and I alternate them. Great shoes.

I am now on the anti-Nike bandwagon. After months of nagging little injuries wearing Nike Shox, I switched to the Brooks Trance. Amazing what a difference it makes.

I like the Brooks Trance 7 for short runs, and the Saucony's for the longer stuff.

Death to Nike.

What's short stuff to you?

A 10K is short stuff. Middle stuff is 8 to 12, and long stuff is 13 or longer. If you're running much shorter than a 10K, you'd better be racing or doing intervals. Otherwise, there's not much purpose to it IMHO.

I look at the shox and wonder how anyone can run in those. They look like anything but "shox" absorbant and they also look like high hills.

The high heels look is an illusion. The forefoot is at the same level as the top of the shox.

The key is adequate cushion for the mid-sole. Too much cushion for heel means sometimes too little for front and vice versa.

Nike cares about everybody but runners, which is where they originally made their impact, so Nike's abandonment of the runner is a slap in the face.

Thanks for the input guys. I ended up getting the Brooks Trace. They are really comfortable. Out of the 3 shoes I tried on the Brooks, Asics and Nike's. The Nike's were the worst.

You won't be disappointed.

Did you feel that way when you were trying to mooch free shoes from them?

"Plus, during my application for a free shoe tester for life, they turned me down."

http://cougarguard.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11314

I should have put down, tic, for the humor impaired.

Runnercoug, at what price range do the Nikes become good shoes? Until a week ago, I've always run in Nikes but I've always been in the 50-70 dollar range. With this pair of Brooks I got they were $135 shoes but goose got me a nice discount. I'm guessing at that price range Nike makes a comparable shoe?

OK, sorry. I guess I've just never seen you write anything funny, so I didn't know you were being sarcastic. My bad.

FWIW, I don't really have any desire to defend Nike or their shoes. My gripe is with people who are asked for advice about running and the first thing out of their mouth is how "evil" Nike is. You are aware that Dan Browne ran a 2:11 Twin Cities Marathon wearing Nikes? That Dathan Ritzenhein will be running in the 08 Olympic Marathon wearing Nikes? That Meb Keflezighi runs every marathon he races wearing Nikes? I guess I'm failing to see how Nike has abandoned runners.

I've run in $90 Air Structure Triax for two years now.

But don't misunderstand my point. It's beyond stupid to argue about running shoes, for crying out loud. My point is just this: when someone who is new to running asks for advice from an experienced runner, and all they can say is "don't buy Nike", they've done a big disservice to the person asking for help.

I've run is Asics, and they blistered the holy hell out of my feet. I've got a scar on my right foot the size of a quarter that I got while wearing Asics.

I've run in Saucony's, and to me, they felt like I was running with bricks strapped to my feet.

I've run in Mizuno's, and they were great, except I lost four toenails in one race.

I've run in Brooks, and liked them alot. I just thought they were ugly.

I switched to Nike, after listening to all the "experienced" runners tell me how bad Nikes are for three years. No more blisters, no more black toenails, and they felt lighter to me. If I hadn't listened to people who were giving me nothing but their personal bias, I could have avoided problems in the first place.

I'm not trying to defend Nike. I would say this about any shoe. If you are asked by someone new to running what the best shoe is, the only response you should give is to send them to a running store and get them fitted for the best shoe for their foot. For some it's Asics, some it's Nike, etc, etc. But don't put into a newbie's mind that Nike shoes (or any respectable shoes) are bad, just because you don't like them. Advise them to go to a running store, explore ALL the brands, and find the best one for them. To do anything else is just hurting someone who came to you for advice.

So a celeb runner uses Nikes through its sponsorship? That's not proof the shoe company is doing anything for the average runner, which most of us are.

I imagine for the celebs, they don't get the off the shelf shoe either but get the special shoe nobody else can buy.

I stand by my claim that Nike has abandoned the average runner. They do not have an adequate mid sole support and lack sufficient heel support.

I like the Sauconys, the Brooks and Asics, but have never liked the Addidas or Nikes.

One should go to the shoe store, but needs to examine what shoes are sold there. If a brand is unavailable there, that will show a bias against a certain maker.

There are only a few off road shoes to wear whatsover, those with kevlar middles.

So what proof do you have that Asics, Saucony or Brooks are doing anything for the average runner that Nike isn't doing?

In fact, a woman who posts on a marathon message board I read was asked by Nike to go to Portland last fall. While there, her and about 20 other people were treated like rock stars by Nike, met with Alberto Salazar, were shown the new gear that Nike is working on, and asked to give their opinions on the best ways that Nike can improve their products. All of this was at Nike's expense. She runs a 4:45 marathon, so I think she more than qualifies as an "average" runner.

And as far as the elites using shoes that none of us can get, I'm sure their racing flats are custom, but I saw a pic of Dathan Ritzenheim in RW last year doing a training run. He was wearing Air Structure Triax 9's, the EXACT same shoe that my average ass had been wearing for a year. (And yes, I really am that big of a dork that I can tell you a shoe model just by looking at it.)

My only proof is my own circle of friends and my experience. When I was using Nikes I blistered like a fat man in the Sahara desert.

Once I switched to Asics Gel Kayanos all that disappeared. Plus the good age groupers I knew felt as if Nike took off a decade or two. Nike has a huge ad budget, but I just don't think they consider the average runner. Most of the distance places I post at, it is a general belief that Nike sucks raw eggs.

Boy, what is this? Hypersensitive week on CG?

Since you seem to be humor-impaired, I should point out that I made my anti-Nike comment purely in response to your warning about anti-Nike posters.

I agree. Any time somebody states, "don't go negative on Nike," it sends off the child in me.

And although people can use whatever they please I do have a few reasons to dislike them.

Again, down with Phil Knight and UO.

So, does your boycott of nike only extend to running shoes? :p
http://cougarguard.com/forum/showthr...ike#post167944

Got me.

I guess I'll be a loyal underarmor admirer for now on.

Yeah, I knew what you were doing.

You're probably right, I overreact when it comes to discussing this stuff, which is a pretty stupid thing to overreact to. But honestly, I take it seriously when people are asking for help in regards to running. Most of the time, they're asking for advice because they are unhealthy, and are trying to do something about it. To automatically dismiss an entire brand of running gear, Nike or otherwise, when it could actually be the one that would serve them best, is irritating to me. It's irresponsible. Just guide them to a knowledgeable and thorough running store, and let them decide for themselves.

I too despise Nike, although not for the reasons mentioned before. I just don't like that they thought we lived on the moon with every shoe they put out. Some hideous stuff for 10-12 years. Also I am partial to Mizuno as they seem to be the best shoe for my foot.

I'm glad I'm not the only one irritated by minutiae.

If we couldn't generalize about groups, what's the fun in that?

Down with Nike shoes!

Maybe you should try brooks running shoes collection, they have different kind of shoes that may be perfect for you, even if your fat. They have great shoes! proven and tested! :)


Happy running!