ACA-BIGDATA1 basics - ACA Big Data Certification Updated: 2023

In the past, shoe companies used a “shrink it and pink it” approach to design women’s running shoes: that means they didn’t develop them specifically for women’s feet. Times have changed, however, and you can now shop for hundreds of running shoes for women made with cutting-edge technology. After logging over 200 miles on pavement, tracks and gravel to test 10 pairs of women’s running shoes, my top picks are the Mizuno Wave Rider 26 for daily training, the Puma Deviate Nitro Elite 2 for road racing, the Brooks Ghost 15 for beginners and the Brooks Launch 10 for best value. (You can read our in-depth review of the Mizuno Wave Rider 26 for more details, too.)

The following is a list of all the winners from my testing process:

Most manufacturers now create women’s running shoes built on a women’s last—a form on which a shoe is molded, which factors in a number of measurements. “The ‘shrink it and pink it’ mentality is not accurate,” says Katie Manser, vice president of research operations at Heeluxe, a third-party company that helps shoe manufacturers perfect their product. “Anatomically, men’s feet are different from women’s feet.” Men’s feet, Manser explains, are like a rectangle—long and skinny. Women’s feet resemble a triangle, narrow in the heel and wider in the forefoot. “A woman’s last is made to fit women’s feet,” Manser explains. For that reason, you’ll need a pair of the best running shoes for women to train in comfort.

The Mizuno Wave Rider 26 checks off all the boxes for a daily trainer: not too heavy, thicker heel (which many folks like to withstand higher mileage) and moderate cushion. It’s the most versatile option for a women’s running shoe compared to others I tested. And its reputation precedes it. Every big-name running shoe brand has a tried-and-true shoe that withstands the test of time. Think: Nike Pegasus, Saucony Ride, Brooks Ghost and Mizuno Wave Rider. When I took it on the road, the Wave Rider proved itself as a winning option.

This shoe has a softer feel and a wider toe box compared to some others I tested, which may make it best for daily training. I was surprised that this iteration was as soft as it was; Mizuno is known for being a firmer shoe. Although I was hoping for something a little firmer, my personal preference, my feet settled in comfortably once I got moving. I noticed that the front of my feet slid around a bit in the toe box, but it wasn’t prohibitive, and it did allow my toes to spread out.

The shoe also provided a Goldilocks ride thanks to the brand’s Enerzy foam, which hits the sweet spot between being too soft or too firm. The shoes are also breathable: the meshy upper provides ample ventilation to keep feet comfortable. Although the heel is a bit chunky, the X10 outsole is made with a carbon rubber that can withstand a longer life, making this a go-to trainer for everyday runs.

What sets this trainer apart from some of the competition is its versatility. It’s light and firm enough that, while I wouldn’t recommend it for speed work, you can pick up the pace for a tempo run or hill workout. If you’re looking for one shoe to cover your bases, the Mizuno Wave Rider 26 is it. I should note that this shoe runs small. I am a women’s size 8 in street shoes, an 8.5 in running shoes, and I had to size up to a 9 for the Mizuno Wave Rider 26.

The Puma Deviate Nitro Elite 2 are pro-level shoes, and the brand has signed top runners like Molly Seidel, the third American woman to medal at the Olympic marathon. But these running shoes don’t need a pro endorsement; they speak for themselves.

The moment I slipped these shoes on, I was struck by their lightweight design and firm footbed. I knew they’d rival my favorite carbon-plated Saucony Endorphin Pro+ (launched in 2021 and significantly reworked). Even though they’re svelte, these shoes have ample room in the toe box. I was a little worried heading into my first run because my right baby toe rubbed up against the upper—I have a bunion on my right foot so I prefer shoes that allow my toes to splay out (something our experts recommend, bunion or not). That feeling quickly subsided, and nearly 100 miles later, it hasn’t been an issue.

The Deviate Nitro Elite 2 shoes boast a few features that make them great for racing. What I liked most about this carbon-plated racing shoe is its ability to add some propulsion without feeling like my feet are on rocking chairs; my feet feel secure yet snappy. Underfoot, this shoe performs well on pavement, the track (for longer tempo-style workouts) and a gravel towpath. I raced a 5K in this shoe and I felt right at home.

The Deviate Nitro Elite 2 also has an exceptional ankle collar. Under most circumstances, I wouldn’t think to mention a shoe’s ankle collar—the padding (or not) around the ankle—unless it was notable, in a good or bad way. But on these shoes, it’s pillow-like and hugs the ankle for a standout feel compared to others shoes I tried. Note that you might need to tweak how you lace this pair.On my first run, I had immediate discomfort in my inner right ankle. I laced up the extra holes, which I never do, and immediately the discomfort dissipated.

The Brooks Ghost 15 is the best running shoe for new runners thanks to its support, cushion and ability to comfortably hold a shoe insert. And people who wear inserts, or just want a more cushioned ride, may prefer this shoe too. (It’s also the Forbes Vetted best walking shoe for women). That said, the Ghost isn’t as sleek as the other picks on this list. Keep in mind that it’s a chunkier, heavier shoe with a bigger heel and a steeper heel-to-to drop.

The Ghost is best for those who want a durable trainer and are transitioning into the sport. I was pleasantly surprised by the Ghost 15; I’ll admit I’ve been biased against the traditional Brooks shoes (opting instead for its lightweight racing shoes and its now-discontinued Pure line).

The Ghost 15 is not as plush as I’d anticipated and it gave my feet ample space to spread out. (Some experts point out that Brooks tends to provide a more narrow fit, but I didn’t feel that in this shoe.) You can also shop the shoe in a wide or medium width, depending on your foot shape).

The Brooks Ghost 15 is going to be a worthwhile investment for newer runners who want a shoe that will support their miles and last for a long time. The lightweight shoes of today tend to break down within a couple hundred miles, but the Ghost will undoubtedly last longer than that (depending on the runner’s size and gait).

I remember when Brooks first, ahem, launched the Brooks Launch more than a decade ago. I bought the special edition Lobster design (the Launch 2) ahead of the Boston Marathon, and I was impressed by the lightweight nature of the shoe despite it’s bulky heel.

Late this summer, the company released the Launch 10, which immediately found a place in my rotation of running shoes. It weighs just 7.4 ounces, making it light for a daily trainer, with plenty of heel to withstand longer miles.

But what really sets this shoe apart is its value: At just $110 (up slightly from its glory days of $100) it gives runners the ability to cover all workouts for significantly less than competitors.

The moderate cushion makes it a responsive shoe for speedier workouts, but it’s not so minimal that you’ll have issues with longer runs. The Launch 10 upper is breathable, and the mesh allows for some stretch, which I appreciate because the toe box is more narrow than I generally like.

I was so impressed with the shoe’s versatility and its price point that I bought a pair for my husband who desperately needed new running shoes. He hasn’t had any complaints so far—a testament to the shoe, my judgment or both.

Other Running Shoes For Women I Tested

Over several months my feet worked hard, in ten pairs of shoes. These are shoes I tested that didn’t make the final cut.

Saucony Endorphin Pro 3 ($225): If you're looking for a racing shoe that has a rocker profile, I liked the Saucony Endorphin Pro 3. It provides a firm, peppy ride like the Puma Deviate Elite Nitro 2. Although its rocker profile isn’t as aggressive as other models, I felt like the Puma shoe provided a more natural ride.

Adidas Adizero Boston 11 ($93): For years, I ran in previous iterations of this shoe as my daily trainer. It was lightweight and extremely firm. From the 9 to 10 models, Adidas heavily reworked the shoe, with the most notable change in the stack height: 26 millimeters to 39 millimeters. The 11, which is the most recent version, has a 39.5-millimeter stack height, making it feel like a platform shoe. It’s still firm and provided a peppy ride, but the dealbreaker was the hard plastic around the lacing system and ankle. No matter how I adjusted the shoe, I couldn’t settle in comfortably. And while Adidas has since launched the Adizero Boston 12 ($160), the experience and ride quality closely resembles the 11.

Brooks Glycerin 20 ($120): The Glycerin is the premium version of the Brooks Ghost, with more cushion. The Glycerin 20 and Ghost 15 have the same weight (9.1 ounces), but the Glycerin 20 has a slightly lower drop (10 millimeters) versus the Ghost’s 12 millimeters. The Glycerin is $20 more than the Ghost because of that added cushion, but the rides felt comparable; it’s a good another good option if you prefer a lower drop and don’t mind spending a bit more.

Tracksmith Eliot Runner ($198): At the end of 2022, high-end running apparel company, Tracksmith, launched its first running shoe. Given the quality and innovation in the brand’s apparel and accessories, I was eager to try the Eliot, despite its unisex last. It’s a beautiful shoe, with a firm, high-energy return ride thanks to the shoe’s Pebax foam. But I felt the unisex design. I wore a size 7 men’s, which roughly translates to a women's 8.5. But the shoe ran long and the fit just didn’t feel right with my foot shape. Tracksmith CEO, Matt Taylor, told me that because the Eliot is the company’s first shoe offering, it wanted to come up with a design that would work for the widest range of people, noting even among women’s feet there can be significant variation.

New Balance Fresh Foam X 1080v12 ($110): This New Balance staple comes recommended by seasoned runners and industry experts with a caveat—you’ll hate it if you hate cushion. Although I loved the wide toe box and flexible, feels-like-a-hug upper, it was a very plush ride. For folks who want cushion or a soft recovery shoe, this will do the trick.

Altra Escalante 3 ($88): Steimling and Wells love the Altra brand thanks to its natural foot design, which features a wide toe box to allow the toes to splay out. Wells says Altra, and the Escalante 3 specifically, is an excellent shoe for women because it provides that extra room in the toe box. The catch is Altra shoes have a 0-millimeter drop, which can take some time for runners to get used to. Runners who struggle with Achilles’ injuries or tenderness should avoid zero and lower drop shoes.

How I Tested The Best Running Shoes For Women

There is no shortage of women’s running shoe options. In fact, it can be overwhelming to choose one. In order to cull down an infinitely long list, I used my personal experience, recommendations from experts and trends in the industry (for example, carbon-plated super shoes). I tested shoes in a variety of categories, including a basic trainer, a max-cushioned shoe, shoes with wide toe boxes, racing shoes and new-to-market shoes from apparel companies.

Testing shoes, as you can imagine, is very subjective. Our experts emphasized how important comfort and fit are—what might feel good for one set of feet could be the worst thing for another. Where possible, I looked at purely objective parts of a shoe, including heel-to-toe offset (the shoe’s drop), how much padding is around the ankle collar and the type of upper construction. Inevitably, though, how the shoe fits and how it feels on the run will depend on the wearer. While these picks should work for people with a range of needs, scroll down to the Other Women’s Running Shoes I Tested section for more options.

To test, I took each pair of shoes on a variety of runs, over different terrain and paces, and in a range of weather conditions, logging about 20 miles in each pair. I primarily run on pavement, but I also ran on the track for speed workouts and on a flat, gravel towpath. Unlike many runners, I enjoy a good hill, so I made sure to test these shoes on flat and hilly terrains. Although I can’t control the weather, I don’t skip a run when it’s cold, rainy, hot or snowy. I logged most of these miles during a mild Northeast winter, encountering mostly cold and wet conditions.

Here are some factors I considered when evaluating the best women’s running shoes during testing.

Pace

Shoes perform differently at different paces. A cushy shoe doesn’t work as well when you’re trying to nail fast paces because your foot may sink in too much, for example. But this style may be great for long runs when you’re spending a lot of time on your feet. During a track interval workout, you’ll want something that’s springy, maybe a little more firm.

I tested each shoe at (relatively) slow, medium and fast paces, as well as hills (which tend to be slower but still require hard running).

Terrain (Or Surface)

The majority of runners (including me) log miles on pavement. So I tested these shoes largely on pavement—roads and sidewalks. But I also hit the track for shoes designed for speed and when we didn’t want any elevation (for example, in shoes with zero drop). I also ran on a gravel tow path, which is looser underfoot than the track or the road, but easier on the joints.

Cushioning

As I’ve noted, how much cushion feels good is an incredibly personal preference. I do not like a lot of cushioning. But as objectively as I could, I assessed how comfortable a shoe felt and noted how plush a ride felt and whether it felt cumbersome. A racing shoe, for example, won’t provide you the pop you need for fast turnover if it’s pillowy soft. But a highly cushioned shoe might feel great for some runners as a daily trainer or during recovery runs.

Drop (Heel-To-Toe Offset)

It’s important to consider a shoe’s drop, or the heel-to-toe offset. This is merely the difference in cushioning from the shoe’s heel to the toe, measured in millimeters, but it can affect how your foot hits the ground. A traditional training shoe tends to have a 10 millimeter drop or more—I tested shoes up to 12 millimeters—and racing shoes err on the lower side, anywhere from 4 millimeters to 8 millimeters. Some shoes have zero drop, which means the shoe is completely flat.

According to the American College of Sports Medicine, shoes with low drops—6 millimeters to 0 millimeters—are the best for allowing the foot to “normally support loading during each gait cycle.” In other words, lower drop shoes let the foot move more naturally. That said, the experts I spoke with said that runners who have Achilles’ tendon soreness or injury might be better off in a higher drop shoe.

How To Pick A Women’s Running Shoe

For this piece, I dove into research and spoke with four experts. Here are the factors you should consider when shopping for the best women’s running shoes.

Fit And Comfort

Every expert I spoke with emphasized the importance of fit and comfort above all else. Getting assessed by running professionals, either via physical therapy or at a run specialty store, is an excellent first step, but if a shoe doesn’t feel good, it’s not the right shoe.

Generally speaking, a women’s running shoe is designed to be narrow in the heel and wider in the toe box, to better match the average woman’s foot. That doesn’t mean a woman can’t find a good shoe in a men’s fit. And because comfort and fit is so subjective, I tested these shoes knowing that while I prefer a lighter, firmer shoe with a more spacious toe box, not everyone does, and I made notes accordingly.

I also paid close attention to objective features of a shoe: Is the upper seamless, to avoid chafing? What’s the padding like around the ankle collar? I looked at the shoe’s “drop,” or the heel-to-toe offset. Traditional trainers tend to have a higher drop, about 10 millimeters to 12 millimeters, while racing shoes tend to be lower, at 4 millimeters to 8 millimeters. Experts told me that runners who struggle with Achilles’ soreness or injury might be better off in a higher offset shoe.

Cushion And Plating

It’s evident that today’s shoes are erring on the side of more cushion. Highly cushioned shoes might provide a more comfortable ride, but they might also lead to greater force on the joints because your feet have a harder time feeling the ground.

According to a 2018 paper published in Nature, higher-cushioned shoes did not prevent injury. In fact, the researchers found that runners experienced higher impact in a max cushioned shoe. They wrote: “We attribute the greater impact loading with the maximalist shoes to stiffer leg during landing compared to that of running with the conventional shoes.”

The preferred amount of cushion is subjective, but I assessed the type of cushion and how much a shoe has. In addition to greater impact load, a highly cushioned shoe often lacks the “pop” that runners look for when trying to nail faster paces, like during a speed workout or an all-out race.

Wedged into that cushioning might be a carbon fiber plate–a buzzword the running community has been chattering about since 2017 when Nike released the VaporFly 4% shoe. (Carbon fiber plates have been around since the 90s.)

“Carbon plates are really good for energy return,” Manser, from Heeluxe, explains. “The body has to work less and they provide propulsion.” She goes on to say that it’s not just a carbon fiber plate that can provide athletes a boost in performance. Other factors include the placement and stiffness of the plate, the profile of the shoe—a rocker-style profile can provide more propulsion. The shoe’s foam also plays an important role in how effective the shoe is.

Carbon-plated shoes—super shoes—are synonymous now with racing. They don’t have a long life, because the foam, while high-energy, isn’t very durable and breaks down quickly. “It’s great for race day but the foam is not very durable,” she says.

Terrain And Mileage

Where you log mileage and how much you’re running play a role in choosing the best type of shoe for you. Considering terrain goes beyond a simple trail versus road dichotomy. For example, if you hit the track once or twice a week, you might want a lighter, more springy shoe for that speed work, and a more cushioned shoe for longer runs on the road or a gravel path.

“If you look at terrain, the harder the surface, the more force is going through your body,” Steimling explains. “Your body is pretty good at attenuating. When I run on gravel, I prefer a shoe with less support and more traction, for example.”

When logging miles on the road, however, you might want more support and don’t need as much traction.

How much you run per week can influence your shoe pick, too. Experts emphasized the importance of rotating shoes, whether it’s the same shoe and you have multiple pairs or different types of shoes, to allow your feet and the shoes to recover. Plus, it can help prolong the life of the shoe.

Cost

In my research, I found that the average cost of a pair of women’s running shoes is $140. You might find a pair for slightly less at big box stores or from online retailers, but they don’t necessarily have the same quality control as if you purchase through a run specialty store or from the manufacturer’s website, Wells says.

Shoe costs skyrocket once you enter the super shoe category, which includes high-tech, pro-level shoes ranging from $200 to as high as $285. And, as Manser said, super shoes don’t last as long as a traditional trainer—maybe 100 miles compared to 300.

If you have your eye on a Boston Marathon qualifying time or another ambitious time goal, investing in an expensive racing shoe might be worthwhile. A study conducted by The New York Times did find significant improvement in performance when runners wore Nike super shoes.

When it comes to cheaper shoes, say under $100, the fit might not be as advanced as more expensive shoes, Manser says.

At lower price points, “Money wise it doesn’t make sense to make a women’s [specific] shoe. They’ll make a unisex shoe,” she says. There are some mainstream brands that make unisex shoes (I even tested one, and it’s not less than $100), so it doesn’t mean a worse shoe, but the fit may not be as fine-tuned.

My Expertise

Although I hated running when I first joined the high school track team more than 20 years ago, I’ve never stopped doing it. Over the decades, I’ve learned to love it and get better at it. I’m the former food and nutrition editor at Runner’s World, and I’ve been testing running gear—personally and professionally—for two decades.

In addition to my own expertise, I consulted with four experts who know their way around a running shoe. I spoke with Sheena Wells and Jon Notary, managers at Aardvark Sports Shop, a run specialty store; Michael Steimling, P.T., D.P.T., a physical therapist and assistant professor at Moravian University; and Katie Manser of Heeluxe, a company that works with shoe manufacturers to test and tweak shoe prototypes.

When Should I Retire My Running Shoes?

Shoes start to break down even before you wear them—first the foam and rubber as they age, and then the upper, according to experts from Fleet Feet. It’s recommended that you start wearing your shoes within six months to a year of purchasing them.

Once a shoe starts to break down, it won’t feel as cushioned or provide as much support. Although the industry recommendation is to retire shoes after 400 to 500 miles, that’s often well past a shoe’s prime, and runners might experience an increased risk of injury once their shoes hit 200 to 300 miles.

Manser, of Heeluxe, looks at three parts of the shoe to assess breakdown:

1. Upper: Shoes often have a knit upper, which stretches over time, making it a looser fit, Manser says. “That means it’s less stable and your foot will move around more. In the heel, that can cause blisters.”
2. Insole/Midsole Cushion: The cushioning is the shoe’s foam, often EVA in running shoes. Manser says her team uses an impact machine to measure loss of cushion—15% loss is when it’s time to replace your shoes. For people who don’t have an impact machine at home, Manser recommends turning the shoe upside down and pushing both thumbs into the ball of the shoe. If there’s a noticeable difference in the cushion, compared to a new shoe, it’s time for new shoes.
3. Outsole: The bottom of the shoe is where you’ll get traction from lugs—smaller in road shoes than trail shoes. Over time, those will wear down, which deceases traction and performance, Manser says.

In today’s lighter-weight shoes, the foam, in particular, can break down more quickly. The size of a runner can also speed up the breakdown process. According to the American College of Sports Medicine, a good way to prolong a running shoe is to wear it just for running. And our experts recommend keeping a few pairs in your rotation to let the shoes rest in between workouts, which will also delay breakdown.

A good way to assess when it’s time to retire your shoes, beyond just looking at your mileage, is to assess the wear patterns on the soles of the shoe and taking note of how your body feels. Once the sole starts to peel and show the layers underneath, it’s time to shop for a new pair of running shoes. And if you start to feel achy and show signs of injury, that could be indicative of needing new shoes. Local running stores often have a shoe recycling program for well-worn shoes. For gently used shoes, you can donate them either on your own or through a local running store.

Should I Stock Up On My Favorite Running Shoes?

Runners know the signs: Their favorite shoe is heavily marked down in price and the size availability is dwindling. It means just one thing: The shoe is about to be discontinued for the shinier upgrade. But before you stockpile your favorite shoes, here’s what to consider.

Even if you’re not wearing your running shoes, they can still break down and become less responsive, Manser explains. Most running shoes use an EVA foam, and over time—about two years—the foam degrades, making it more firm and less responsive. She advises keeping your stockpile in the shoe boxes away from the elements, like sun, extreme heat and humidity. She also told me it doesn’t matter if you leave the tissue paper inside the shoe, debunking my assumption that it would stretch the upper over time.

What Is The Best-Rated Running Shoe Brand For Women?

When it comes to choosing the best women’s running shoe, there are a lot of factors to consider: comfort, fit, mileage, terrain and budget. There are dozens and dozens of top-rated brands for women’s running shoes, but at the end of the day, it comes down to the shoe that fits you best.

When I chose our top picks for best women’s running shoes, I tested top-rated brands, including Brooks, Mizuno, New Balance, Adidas, Saucony, Altra and Puma. I found that the top-rated running shoe for daily training was the Mizuno Wave Rider 26, the top-rated running shoe for racing was the Puma Deviate Nitro Elite 2, the top-rated running shoe for beginners was the Brooks Ghost 15 and the top-rated value running shoe was the Brooks Launch 10.

Other Shoe Stories To Shop

Super shoes—models with curved carbon-fiber plates embedded in tall stacks of lightweight, hyper-responsive foams—are now ubiquitous in the road racing scene. And with their performance benefits well established, more and more recreational racers are giving them a try—not just in racing, but in training.

There’s just one problem: the shoes have only been around for a few years, and while there is no doubt that they can make people faster in racing, there is little information on how to use them properly in training. 

Two-time Olympian turned podcaster and NBC commentator Kara Goucher says it’s a course she’s discussed with many people she knows. “How often do we use them? How often do we not?” are common questions Goucher says she hears. “We need to be careful, but we also do need to use them in practice because we want to get [the] advantages—but we don’t want to get hurt…It’s so complicated.”

Finding answers begins by understanding how the shoes actually work. 

How Your Body Reacts to Training in Super Shoes

For reasons that are not fully understood by biomechanics researchers, super shoes have a combination of foam and plate that make them function as springs, says Jay Dicharry, a Bend, Oregon, physical therapist, running gait expert, and author of Running Rewired. “You’re basically making a trampoline.”

This has a number of effects. One is that your brain automatically reacts to the softer impact by reducing the amount of knee flexion upon landing, says Simon Bartold, a sports podiatrist and biomechanist in Adelaide, South Australia. The leg becomes stiffer because the shoe is absorbing the impact. It’s part of why they are less tiring to run in. 

Another big change, says Dicharry, is that the thick, cushiony foam increases the amount of time you spend in contact with the ground, as the foam contracts, then rebounds. That changes not only impact forces, but also cadence, the location of foot plant for the next stride, and a host of other factors. “Everything’s different,” he says.

These changes make the shoes fast, but they don’t come without side effects, especially when the shoes are used in training. When the shoes first came out, Dicharry says he was working with elite-level athletes who were trying to figure out how to use them in training, “and every single one got hurt.”

More recently, a paper by a group of physicians in Sports Medicine reported a possible association between training in super shoes and navicular (mid-foot) stress fractures. Bartold’s podiatrist and runner friend says he’s been seeing an uptick in hip and lower back injuries since people started training in super shoes. The reason, Bartold suspects, is that the stiffer landing on impact allows what shock isn’t absorbed by the shoe to travel up the leg, affecting you anywhere from the knee to the lower back. All told, Bartold says it’s important to remember that these shoes weren’t designed as trainers. “They were designed as a racing shoe,” he says. 

Principles for Training in Super Shoes

Given the benefits of super shoes, many athletes are going to wear them, even with their associated risks. “The results from using super shoes are undeniable,” says Greg McMillan, exercise physiologist and founder and head coach of McMillan Running. “Has any record not been broken since the shoes came out? All performance-oriented runners should try them.”

The question, then, is how best to use them. “The shoes are a tool, like anything else,” says Dathan Ritzenhein, head coach of On Athletics Club in Boulder, Colorado. 

While a lot of this is being invented in real time by coaches working mostly by trial and error, a few basic principles do seem to be emerging.

1. Allow your body to adapt to the new mechanics.

If you are new to super shoes, the first step is simple. You need to allow some time to get used to them, before you wear them in a race. “It’s important to try them in practice to make sure there are no problems,” Ritzenhein says. 

That doesn’t mean taking them out for a 20-mile training run right out of the box. Use them for part of a run, then take the time to stop and change shoes. How much of the run you use them for is an open question, but if you’re using them in a speed workout, Dicharry suggests you might want to start with as little as five minutes. “Do slow, progressive changes,” he says. “You need to be careful, because it’s very, very different.” And, he adds, don’t even start the process if you have an ongoing acute problem, like a knee or Achilles tendon injury.

2. Most people shouldn’t run in them everyday.

“I ask my athletes to wear them only in more important and pivotal workouts,” says Paul Greer, coach of the San Diego Track Club. For him, that mostly includes time trials or marathon pace runs, when you want to wear the shoes you plan to race in. 

Mike Caldwell, coach of Greenville Track Club-Elite does something similar. “Our athletes use super shoes for both faster training sessions and competition,” he says, noting that these usually add up to 12–15 miles of running per week for elites doing 85–90 miles total—roughly 15 percent of their training. 

McMillan, on the other hand, knows some runners enjoy using super shoes for every run, and thinks that’s fine for those who can afford it, have built up their super shoe mileage slowly, and haven’t experienced any problems. However, the people who seem to be able to get away with this, he says, are the ones whose muscles and mechanics are unusually strong to begin with.

3. When you’re not using super shoes, run in more flexible shoes.

“Easy running in a less cushioned and more flexible shoe is a good counter to long training sessions in super shoes,” Ritzenhein says. Greer adds that if, like his group, you only use super shoes for key workouts and races, you need to accept that your pace will be slower and possibly more tiring when using more conventional shoes. Don’t let that get in your head, and don’t try to fight it by turning workouts into races. That’s a formula for overtraining.

4. Don’t use super shoes to cram in more hard workouts into your calendar.

Yes, there are indications that some pros may be taking advantage of the faster recovery you get from the shoes to do just this, but for most people—and many elites—it’s simply not worth the risk. “We don’t try to increase the frequency of workouts,” Ritzenhein says. “I feel the same principles apply to when the body is inflamed after workouts, so we try to not make the training week too dense and instead focus on the next quality session at the right time for recovery.”

5. Use super shoes to do more intense workouts.

Greer does this by having athletes run time trials and marathon-pace runs in their shoes. Ritzenhein takes advantage of the lower impact of super shoes to increase volume in key workouts, such as long threshold runs. In both cases, it’s increased intensity, but not increased frequency.

6. Avoid the temptation to add excess volume to your overall week.

“Because you do have so much foam on your foot, people feel as if they can go longer and harder,” Bartold says. “Then you’ve got an increase in training volume which is potentially an issue for overuse injury.” Yes, Kelvin Kiptum, current world record holder in the marathon, runs up to 300 kilometers a week (186 miles). But even his coach is afraid he might burn out if he keeps that up. 

7. Be aware that not everybody will get the same benefit from any given shoe.

“Experimentation is the only way to know,” McMillan says. In general, he says, runners who are “pushers”—meaning they are forward-balanced runners often with midfoot strikes and strong hip extension behind their torsos—get more benefit than “pullers”—the more shuffler, heel-striking type of runner. “This is why one runner may love super shoes and the training partner doesn’t.” It may also be necessary, he says, to take the time (and expense) of experimenting with different brands of shoes, because each super shoe is tuned differently, and what works for one person may not for another. 

8. Don’t ignore the need for supplemental training.

“Feet can get weaker if you use [the shoes] a lot,” Ritzenhein says. “Spending time on foot and lower leg strengthening is important.” Exactly what such training you do is up to you. It could include something as simple as taking your shoes off once a day to free your feet, or more complex exercises like doing “alphabets” in which you attempt to write the alphabet in the air with your big toe. It might be doing barefoot strides on the turf after track workouts. Other options are calf raises, single-leg balancing exercises, or knee-strengthening exercises like wall squats, hamstring curls on a ball, or single-leg hamstring bridges. The bottom line is to be inventive and pay attention to your body. “If you want to run in super shoes, you need to put in the work to show up with stable parts,” Dicharry says.

9. Listen closely to your body when recovering from races wearing super shoes.

Prior to super shoes, a rule of thumb was that recovering from races took about one day per mile of race. Runners varied, but a 5K might take three days, a 10K might take a week, a marathon the better part of a month. 

Today, these rules no longer apply. People racing in super shoes seem to bounce off half-marathons like they were 10Ks and marathons like they were half-marathons. Why this is the case is a bit unclear. It is likely that by absorbing some of the vertical forces created by each foot strike, the shoes relieve our leg muscles of having to do the same. 

“If I told you to jump 100 times on the ground, you might feel a bit sore,” Dicharry says. “If I said jump 100 times on a trampoline, the trampoline does all the work. It’s the same thing with the super shoes.”

Another potentially important cause of faster recovery might be the shoe’s effect on reducing what Bartold calls vibration, which is the shockwave generated each time your foot hits the ground. It’s not a good thing if it gets all the way up to your brain, so in normal shoes, your leg muscles contract to stop it. “If Nike [and later super shoe manufacturers] happened to stumble on a shoe that [in addition to its intended purposes] significantly reduced vibration, that means you don’t have to contract your muscles so much, and if you don’t have to contract your muscles so much, you don’t get the fatigue,” Bartold says.

That said, the best advice is probably still the oldest: listen to your body, though it may require a more refined “ear” than before. That’s because prior to super shoes, recovery was largely dictated by muscle fatigue. Now, there may be less of that more obvious fatigue, even though the race may still have produced deeper, less obvious effects. “If you pushed yourself to the max in a race, internally the same damage is done regardless of what shoes you wear,” Ritzenhein says. 

Dicharry agrees. “[There is] a central aspect to it,” he says. “If you put in a hard race effort, your body’s centrally tired. Just be honest with yourself and see how you feel. If you’re in that gray zone, don’t push it.”

With Indonesia’s 2024 presidential election on the horizon, the three pairs of presidential and vice presidential candidates have become increasingly active in promoting their visions for Indonesia’s development, including in the defense sector. In general, all candidates share the same view that the government should significantly modernize the Indonesian National Armed Forces (TNI), strengthen border and cyber defense, advance the domestic defense industry, and Excellerate soldiers’ welfare.

At the same time, they acknowledge the rising geopolitical tension in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, the South China Sea, and East Asia, and the impacts that these may have on Indonesia. Nevertheless, each candidate has brought some unique perspectives and emphasized different aspects to make the country more secure.

In their election manifestos, Anies Baswedan and his running mate, Muhaiman “Cak Imin” Iskandar, specifically underlined the importance of Indonesia having a blue water navy and an “automated air force.” In parallel, they want to increase women’s representation in the TNI. Moreover, when he recently elaborated on his foreign policy and national defense visions, Anies said that he wants the country’s arms procurement policy to place more emphasis on the quality of the system or platform, rather than just its quantity.

Additionally, the former Jakarta governor said that he wants to standardize TNI’s weapon system to simplify maintenance. Interestingly, Anies said that he does not want Indonesia to join minilateral security groupings such as the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, better known as the Quad, as non-alignment is one of the cornerstones of the country’s foreign policy and doing so might drastically alter it. All three candidates have pledged to maintain Indonesia’s non-aligned foreign policy, including by not joining geopolitical/military alliances.

Meanwhile, the Ganjar Pranowo-Mahfud MD pairing has adopted the “5.0 Defense System” concept, which emphasizes an anti-access and area denial (A2/AD) strategy, strategic power projection capabilities, and improvement in the country’s cyber defense aspect, including the formation of a Cyber Force as TNI’s new fourth service. In addition, Ganjar has promised to significantly increase the maritime defense budget, citing Indonesia’s vast maritime territory and archipelagic nature, and the fact that other countries in Asia have substantially increased their own defense budgets.

Defense Minister Prabowo Subianto and his vice presidential candidate, Gibran Rakabuming Raka, have pledged to gradually increase the overall defense budget and strengthen the military reserve component. They also introduced the “optimum essential force” concept, which is likely to be the continuation of TNI’s current Minimum Essential Force modernization program, which will end in 2024.

Considering his track record during the last four years as the minister of defense, it is difficult to envision Prabowo abandoning his realist stance and tendency to aim for advanced major weapon systems when it comes to arms procurement policy. For the record, Prabowo often quotes Thucydides’ saying that “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must” and the classic Latin proverb si vis pacem, para bellum – “If you want peace, prepare for war”.

The big question is how the candidates will put all of the above ideas into action once they are elected. One thing is certain, the annual defense budget, which typically only accounts for 0.6-0.8 percent of Indonesia’s GDP – rather than the minimum 1.5 percent target flagged in Indonesia’s National Medium-Term Development Plan and other government documents – must be significantly increased. The lack of funds hinders the TNI’s modernization, weapon systems’ readiness level, and soldiers’ well-being, and is also one of the primary factors impeding the advancement of Indonesia’s defense industry and its goal of achieving economies of scale, given the monopsonic nature of the defense market.

The difficulty for the winning candidate is not only the state’s financial situation but also how to assure the public that a spike in defense spending is necessary. Ensuring greater efficacy and transparency in the defense sector would definitely help. The elected president will face extra hurdles in securing the necessary funding if he leads the country without a pro-government majority in the House of Representatives.

The new president must also evaluate existing defense-related bureaucracy and regulations. For instance, in May, TNI spokesperson, RADM Julius Widjojono, revealed the organization’s desire to be more independent in selecting the weapon systems that it will operate because the existing bureaucracy tends to subject military procurement programs to many “political decisions” that ignore the operational requirements and technical specifications requested by the armed forces. Thus, TNI wants the authority to submit its budget requests directly to the Ministry of Finance instead of having to go through the Ministry of Defense. While some may doubt the urgency of such drastic bureaucratic changes, it is still valuable to keep the general idea of streamlining the procurement process on the table.

Another task the next president must focus on is how to Excellerate defense-related strategic partnerships with other countries. Indonesia’s strict and long-standing non-aligned foreign policy doctrine is frequently perceived as one of the obstacles for both TNI and local defense companies in accessing cutting-edge technologies. In relation to the objective of building power projection capabilities, developing cooperation with other countries to allow Indonesian military task forces to use their ports and airbases would be essential.

Likewise, it is imperative to maintain a trusting relationship with foreign original equipment manufacturers (OEMs). Besides the previously mentioned lack of guaranteed economies of scale, Jakarta’s history of flip-flopping arms procurement policy, especially when there are transfers of power, could discourage foreign arms manufacturers from putting forward their best proposals. This is crucial to address because, taking into account the presidential candidates’ promises to advance the domestic defense industry, Indonesia will need to secure more technology transfer, offset, local production, and marketing collaborations from foreign arms manufacturers.

Foreign governments and OEMs will carefully look at whether the new administration will fulfill the commitments made by the previous government. For example, Indonesia’s inability to pay its cost share obligation in the KF-21 Boramae jet fighter joint development with South Korea gave rise to the idea among some South Korean politicians that the government should kick Indonesia out of the project. A memorandum of understanding signed in 2022 with France on the local production of two Scorpene-class submarines in Surabaya, East Java, has yet to materialize even though Paris recently updated its proposal to better suit the Indonesian Navy’s operational needs.

Apart from the two aforementioned strategic projects, there are F-15EX fighters, A330 MRTT, Blackhawk helicopters, FREMM frigates, and other foreign-made platforms that Jakarta has promised to buy, but all of these procurements have progressed slowly or even come to a complete halt.

Ironically, this has occurred at a time when there is a pressing need for Jakarta to expedite its military modernization agenda, with the security environment deteriorating and the global arms production backlog worsening. If not taken seriously, TNI personnel will have to wait longer for the much-needed advanced systems that they require.

Furthermore, the next administration must continue to uphold the initiative set by President Joko Widodo to turn defense spending into defense investment by prioritizing arms imports that come with profitable and real technology transfers, or even involve local production. This is the best way to raise the level of independence of the domestic defense industry. Simultaneously, placing greater emphasis on dual-use technologies during technology transfer negotiations with foreign parties is important because, if properly utilized, such technologies will expand the long-term economic benefits of an arms deal, which will ultimately help the new administration justify increased defense spending.

All things considered, if they are sincere about their campaign pledges, “business as usual” in the defense sector is not an option for whoever emerges victorious on February 14. Ideally, in the coming weeks, we will see all three presidential and vice presidential pairs explain their respective policies in more detail. Yet, their elaboration may not meet the detailed expectations of those working within the sector, as historically national defense is not the most concerning issue for Indonesian voters.

The views expressed in this article are personal.

KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysia will be the first Asian country, outside China, to initiate the Alibaba Netpreneur Training Programme from March 23, 2019 to April 3, 2019, which will complement the ongoing Electronic World Trade Platform (eWTP) initiatives in Malaysia.

Alibaba group vice-president Brian Wong said the 10-day programme would be hosted at Alibaba’s Headquarters in Hangzhou, China, and the second training programme would kick off from April 13, 2019 to April 24, 2019.

The programme was aimed at enabling Malaysian entrepreneurs and those who operate businesses within the Malaysian market to embrace digital innovations to transform their businesses and the country’s economy, he told Bernama recently.

Under the eWTP agreement with Malaysia, Wong said the Alibaba Group was committed to facilitate the development of eTrade infrastructure and the adoption of best practices.

“The Alibaba Netpreneur Training Programme, jointly organised by Alibaba Business School, Malaysian Digital Economy Corporation, Malaysia External Trade Development Corporation and SME Corporation Malaysia, is programmed to cater to the different needs of different businesses in Malaysia, when it comes to adapting to the digital ecosystem,” said Wong.

Wong said a maximum of 50 entrepreneurs would participate in each of the training programme.

Asked if the training programmes would continue after these two batches, Wong said: “We are committed to working with the Malaysian government and businesses to share the know-how and best practices to enable small and medium enterprises (SMEs) to fully benefit from globalisation.

“We will continue providing training initiatives and conduct these programmes for Malaysian businesses.

“As part of our ongoing initiative under the eWTP programme, aimed at addressing various challenges facing Malaysia’s entrepreneurs, we will help both traditional businesses and digital ventures to convert challenges into opportunities to propel their business further,“ added Wong.

The Alibaba Netpreneur Training Programme, aimed at enabling Malaysian entrepreneurs and those who operate businesses locally to embrace digital innovations, was launched by the Alibaba Business School.

“We hope participants will then share the knowledge acquired and their experiences with the wider business community in Malaysia and inspire positive transformation of the country’s economy,” he said.

On the enrolment and selection criteria to participate in the training programme, a participant must be a founder/co-founder or business owner of an officially registered venture that has been in operation for at least two years.

Other requirements, among others, include one referral in their application (referrals from a partner/organiser are preferred).

“The participant must also produce their official business licence when requested during the application process,” he said, adding that female entrepreneurs and local entrepreneurs, as well as, budding young, founders, co-founders or business owners were encouraged to apply.

Participants would learn and receive fundamental understanding of how new technology and the capabilities of a digital economy would enable national development.

Besides, Wong said participants would obtain key insights into the evolution of Alibaba’s ecosystem within a country-wide context, including failures, mistakes and best practices through sharing’s from Alibaba’s founders and business leaders.

“They will also garner key learnings from traditional businesses from a wide range of industries who recently went through the digital transformation in China and have the opportunity to go on field trips and interact with leading businesses within the Alibaba ecosystem.

“This will help them gain  first-hand insight into current innovations and a foundation of strategic thinking that will enable them to make improvements in their own businesses, industries, and ecosystem,“ added Wong. - Bernama

As the Navy seeks to Excellerate the self-sufficiency of its littoral combat ships, the service is moving to have sailors conduct nearly all the maintenance for the vessels in the near future, according to Navy officials.

The LCS fleet was originally envisioned as having a small crew, and the Navy would partner with contractors to fulfill nearly all of the ships’ maintenance needs.

But like much with the LCS fleet — from survivability to cost and mission modules that never materialized — that maintenance system encountered challenges.

Flying contractors around the world to perform routine maintenance on the ships left crews without the knowhow to fix even basic issues on their own, a 2021 Government Accountability Office report found.

And because the original manufacturers were the only ones who knew how to fix certain ship systems, a lack of available fixers also risked imperiling LCS maintenance schedules, the government watchdog found.

Cannibalized parts, systems that sailors can’t fix: LCS maintenance woes could get worse, watchdog warns

But now, the Navy is seeking to put more of this maintenance work in the hands of sailors by standing up so-called “Maintenance Execution Teams” and tweaking how such vessels are manned, officials told reporters this week.

Sailors assigned to the maintenance teams work for regional maintenance centers and deploy to assist LCS crews with routine maintenance and preventative maintenance availabilities. They also receive training from the original equipment manufacturers to conduct some of this work.

Before the reforms, contractors were conducting approximately 95 percent of maintenance on the Independence-variant LCS as of 2020.

Today, the Navy’s maintenance teams are completing more than 60 percent of such work, according to Capt. Marc Crawford, commodore of Littoral Combat Ship Squadron 1 based out of San Diego.

These teams, which Crawford described as a “game changer,” are slated to take on even more maintenance responsibility in the future.

“In the next year to come, our goal is to get them to where the sailors are executing 95 percent of the maintenance and the contractors are going to only execute 5 percent,” Crawford told reporters Tuesday. “It’s all about building the self-sufficiency into the capability and capacity of the sailors on board, and then leveraging the reach-back capability with the [maintenance teams].”

LCS Charleston returns from 26-month deployment

Crawford noted that this new maintenance system contributed to the Independence-class LCS Charleston’s recent 26-month deployment — the longest LCS deployment to date. The ship, which returned to San Diego in June, conducted patrols in the South and East China seas, and also became the first LCS to conduct mine countermeasures training internationally.

“We can’t deploy ships like we did with Charleston for 26 months without the enabling capability that the expeditionary maintenance execution teams provide,” Crawford said.

Similar maintenance trends are at play within the Freedom-class variant. Currently, 75 percent of maintenance for these vessels is conducted by the ship’s own crew, according to Capt. Mark Haney, commodore of Littoral Combat Ship Squadron 2 based out of Mayport, Florida.

One key aspect facilitating the self-sufficiency of the Freedom-variant ships has been shifting to a single crew concept, according to Haney. This is a departure from the dual crew, “blue-gold” model where crews rotate on and off the ships every four or five months.

The single crew has allowed Haney’s team to follow more traditional Navy deployment schedules, while also bolstering manpower to the deckplates, he said. Today, more than 90 sailors are manning the Freedom-variant ships — up from approximately 40.

“I’m moving forward with providing them tools and the training that we would provide a traditional warship to be able to operate and have the same repair capacity on board, the same maintenance on board as we see on our traditional combatants,” Haney told reporters Tuesday. “This is definitely an initiative that we’re working towards strongly.”

Haney noted that the Milwaukee, Detroit and Little Rock — all recently decommissioned — were single-crewed in the last year and operated at the maximum operability limits for the LCS. As a result, Haney said those three ships saw enhanced reliability and self-sufficiency.

Most of Crawford’s Independence-class ships are still operating on the dual crew structure, and that will remain for a few more years. Plans are still in development to transition the Independence-variant to a single crew, he said.

Despite the fact that the ships are expected to serve for 25 years, multiple Freedom-variant vessels were decommissioned early this year — including the Milwaukee with less than a decade of service and the Sioux City with less than five years under its belt.

Can the US Navy save money by accepting the LCS as a sunk cost?

The Navy announced in 2022 that it wanted to cut these ships to fund other priorities, as the Freedom-variant class of ships suffered a class-wide defect that would require replacing aspects of the combining gear transmission. On top of the cost, service officials and Congress have echoed concerns that the ships would not bring much to a naval battle against another nation, such as China.

Navy Times’ sister publication, Defense News, reported in October that decommissioning the ships ahead of schedule amounts to a nearly $7 billion loss, based on data from the Congressional Budget Office.

Haney said Tuesday that of the four Freedom-variant ships decommissioned in 2023, three of them were operating essentially until the moment they were mothballed. For example, the Detroit and Little Rock each completed deployments to the 4th Fleet in 2023, where they conducted counter-drug interdiction and other missions.

“The Navy and the nation and the fleet commanders needed those assets for as long as we could keep them operational,” Haney said. “So for the remainder of the ships that the Navy decides to keep, there’s certainly a mission for them.”