Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Energetics and Biomechanics of Running Footwear with Increased Longitudinal Bending Stiffness: A Narrative Review

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Sports Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the wake of the quest to break the 2-h marathon barrier, carbon-fiber plates have become commonplace in marathon racing shoes. Despite the controversy surrounding this shoe technology, studies on the effects of increased longitudinal bending stiffness on running economy report mixed results. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of the current literature on midsole bending stiffness and carbon-fiber plates in distance running shoes, focusing on how longitudinal bending stiffness affects running energetics and lower limb mechanics. The current literature reports changes in running economy with increased longitudinal bending stiffness ranging from ~ 3% deterioration to ~ 3% improvement. In some studies, larger improvements have been observed, but often those shoes varied in many aspects, not just longitudinal bending stiffness. Biomechanically, increased longitudinal bending stiffness has the largest impact on metatarsal–phalangeal (MTP) and ankle joint mechanics. Plate location [top loaded (an insole), embedded (in between midsole foam), and bottom loaded (along the bottom of the shoe)] and geometry (flat/curved) affect joint moments and angular velocities at the MTP and ankle joint differently, which partly explains the mixed running economy results. Further research investigating how carbon-fiber plates interact with other footwear features (such as foam and midsole geometry), scaling of those with shoe size, body mass, and strike pattern, and comparing various plate placements is needed to better understand how longitudinal bending stiffness affects running economy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Burns GT, Tam N. Is it the shoes? A simple proposal for regulating footwear in road running. Br J Sports Med. 2020;54:439.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Frederick EC. No evidence of a performance advantage attributable to midsole thickness. Footwear Sci. 2020;12:1–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Hoogkamer W. More isn’t always better. Footwear Sci. 2020;12:75–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Joyner MJ, Hunter SK, Lucia A, Jones AM. Physiology and fast marathons. J Appl Physiol. 2020;128:1065–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hoogkamer W, Kipp S, Frank JH, Farina EM, Luo G, Kram R. A comparison of the energetic cost of running in marathon racing shoes. Sports Med. 2018;48:1009–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Longman J. Do Nike’s new shoes give runners an unfair advantage? New York Times. 2017. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/08/sports/nikes-vivid-shoes-and-the-gray-area-of-performance-enhancement.html. Accessed 27 July 2018.

  7. Dyer B. A pragmatic approach to resolving technological unfairness: the case of Nike’s Vaporfly and Alphafly running footwear. Sports Med Open. 2020;6:21.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Barnes KR, Kilding AE. A randomized crossover study investigating the running economy of highly-trained male and female distance runners in marathon racing shoes versus track spikes. Sports Med. 2019;49:331–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hunter I, McLeod A, Valentine D, Low T, Ward J, Hager R. Running economy, mechanics, and marathon racing shoes. J Sports Sci. 2019;37:2367–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hoogkamer W, Kipp S, Kram R. The biomechanics of competitive male runners in three marathon racing shoes: a randomized crossover study. Sports Med. 2019;49:133–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Worobets J, Wannop JW, Tomaras E, Stefanyshyn D. Softer and more resilient running shoe cushioning properties enhance running economy. Footwear Sci. 2014;6:147–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Frederick EC, Daniels JR, Hayes JW. The effect of shoe weight on the aerobic demands of running. In: Bachl N, Prokop L, Suckert R, editors. Curr top sports med proc world congr sports med. Vienna: Urban and Schwarzenberg; 1984. p. 616–25.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Franz JR, Wierzbinski CM, Kram R. Metabolic cost of running barefoot versus shod: is lighter better? Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2012;44:1519–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hoogkamer W, Kipp S, Spiering BA, Kram R. Altered running economy directly translates to altered distance-running performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2016;48:2175–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fuller JT, Bellenger CR, Thewlis D, Tsiros MD, Buckley JD. The effect of footwear on running performance and running economy in distance runners. Sports Med. 2015;45:411–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sun X, Lam W-K, Zhang X, Wang J, Fu W. Systematic review of the role of footwear constructions in running biomechanics: implications for running-related injury and performance. J Sports Sci Med. 2020;19:20–37.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Stefanyshyn DJ, Wannop JW. The influence of forefoot bending stiffness of footwear on athletic injury and performance. Footwear Sci. 2016;8:51–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Roy J-PR, Stefanyshyn DJ. Shoe midsole longitudinal bending stiffness and running economy, joint energy, and EMG. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006;38:562–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Madden R, Sakaguchi M, Tomaras EK, Wannop JW, Stefanyshyn D. Forefoot bending stiffness, running economy and kinematics during overground running. Footwear Sci. 2016;8:91–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Oh K, Park S. The bending stiffness of shoes is beneficial to running energetics if it does not disturb the natural MTP joint flexion. J Biomech. 2017;53:127–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Flores N, Delattre N, Berton E, Rao G. Does an increase in energy return and/or longitudinal bending stiffness shoe features reduce the energetic cost of running? Eur J Appl Physiol. 2019;119:429–39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. McLeod AR, Bruening D, Johnson AW, Ward J, Hunter I. Improving running economy through altered shoe bending stiffness across speeds. Footwear Sci. 2020;12:79–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Beck ON, Golyski PR, Sawicki GS. Adding carbon fiber to shoe soles may not improve running economy: a muscle-level explanation. Sci Rep. 2020;10:17154.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Day E, Hahn M. Optimal footwear longitudinal bending stiffness to improve running economy is speed dependent. Footwear Sci. 2020;12:3–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hoogkamer W, Kram R, Arellano CJ. How biomechanical improvements in running economy could break the 2-hour marathon barrier. Sports Med. 2017;47:1739–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. di Prampero PE, Atchou G, Brückner J-C, Moia C. The energetics of endurance running. Eur J Appl Physiol. 1986;55:259–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kipp S, Kram R, Hoogkamer W. Extrapolating metabolic savings in running: implications for performance predictions. Front Physiol. 2019;10:79.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Atkinson G, Batterham AM. True and false interindividual differences in the physiological response to an intervention. Exp Physiol. 2015;100:577–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Willwacher S, König M, Braunstein B, Goldmann J-P, Brüggemann G-P. The gearing function of running shoe longitudinal bending stiffness. Gait Posture. 2014;40:386–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Cigoja S, Firminger CR, Asmussen MJ, Fletcher JR, Edwards WB, Nigg BM. Does increased midsole bending stiffness of sport shoes redistribute lower limb joint work during running? J Sci Med Sport. 2019;22:1272–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Willwacher S, König M, Potthast W, Brüggemann G-P. Does specific footwear facilitate energy storage and return at the metatarsophalangeal joint in running? J Appl Biomech. 2013;29:583–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Willwacher S, Kurz M, Menne C, Schrödter E, Brüggemann G-P. Biomechanical response to altered footwear longitudinal bending stiffness in the early acceleration phase of sprinting. Footwear Sci. 2016;8:99–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Farina EM, Haight D, Luo G. Creating footwear for performance running. Footwear Sci. 2019;11:S134–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Flores N, Rao G, Berton E, Delattre N. The stiff plate location into the shoe influences the running biomechanics. Sports Biomech. 2019; pp. 1–16.

  35. Roberts TJ, Marsh RL, Weyand PG, Taylor CR. Muscular force in running turkeys: the economy of minimizing work. Science. 1997;275:1113–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Lichtwark GA, Bougoulias K, Wilson AM. Muscle fascicle and series elastic element length changes along the length of the human gastrocnemius during walking and running. J Biomech. 2007;40:157–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Lai AKM, Lichtwark GA, Schache AG, Pandy MG. Differences in in vivo muscle fascicle and tendinous tissue behavior between the ankle plantarflexors during running. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2018;28:1828–36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Fukunaga T, Kawakami Y, Kubo K, Kanehisa H. Muscle and tendon interaction during human movements. Exer Sport Sci Rev. 2002;30:106–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Lichtwark GA, Wilson AM. Optimal muscle fascicle length and tendon stiffness for maximising gastrocnemius efficiency during human walking and running. J Theor Biol. 2008;252:662–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Lai A, Lichtwark GA, Schache AG, Lin Y-C, Brown NAT, Pandy MG. In vivo behavior of the human soleus muscle with increasing walking and running speeds. J Appl Physiol. 2015;118:1266–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Marsh RL, Ellerby DJ, Henry HT, Rubenson J. The energetic costs of trunk and distal-limb loading during walking and running in guinea fowl Numida meleagris. J Exp Biol. 2006;209:2050–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Browning RC, Modica JR, Kram R, Goswami A. The effects of adding mass to the legs on the energetics and biomechanics of walking. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007;39:515–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Holt NC, Roberts TJ, Askew GN. The energetic benefits of tendon springs in running: is the reduction of muscle work important? J Exp Biol. 2014;217:4365–71.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Swinnen W, Hoogkamer W, De Groote F, Vanwanseele B. Habitual foot strike pattern does not affect simulated triceps surae muscle metabolic energy consumption during running. J Exp Biol. 2019; p. jeb212449

  45. Biewener AA, Roberts TJ. Muscle and tendon contributions to force, work, and elastic energy savings: a comparative perspective. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2000;28:99–107.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Sawicki GS, Lewis CL, Ferris DP. It pays to have a spring in your step. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2009;37:130–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Sanno M, Willwacher S, Epro G, Brüggemann GP. Positive work contribution shifts from distal to proximal joints during a prolonged run. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2018;50:2507–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Cigoja S, Fletcher JR, Nigg BM. Can increased midsole bending stiffness of sport shoes delay the onset of lower limb joint work redistribution during a prolonged run? ISBS Proc Arch. 2020;38:216–9.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Kyröläinen H, Pullinen T, Candau R, Avela J, Huttunen P, Komi PV. Effects of marathon running on running economy and kinematics. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2000;82:297–304.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Lacour JR, Bourdin M. Factors affecting the energy cost of level running at submaximal speed. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2015;115:651–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Carrier DR, Heglund NC, Earls KD. Variable gearing during locomotion in the human musculoskeletal system. Science. 1994;265:651–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Wannop JW, Killick A, Madden R, Stefanyshyn DJ. The influence of gearing footwear on running biomechanics. Footwear Sci. 2017;9:111–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Hill AV. The heat of shortening and the dynamic constants of muscle. Proc R Soc Lond. 1938;126:136–95.

    Google Scholar 

  54. van der Zee TJ, Lemaire KK, van Soest AJ. The metabolic cost of in vivo constant muscle force production at zero net mechanical work. J Exp Biol. 2019; p. 222.

  55. Takahashi KZ, Gross MT, van Werkhoven H, Piazza SJ, Sawicki GS. Adding stiffness to the foot modulates soleus force-velocity behaviour during human walking. Sci Rep. 2016;6:29870.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Ray SF, Takahashi KZ. Gearing up the human ankle-foot system to reduce energy cost of fast walking. Sci Rep. 2020;10:8793.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Swinnen W, Hoogkamer W, Delabastita T, Aeles J, De Groote F, Vanwanseele B. Effect of habitual foot-strike pattern on the gastrocnemius medialis muscle–tendon interaction and muscle force production during running. J Appl Physiol. 2019;126:708–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Firminger C, Cigoja S, Asmussen MJ, Fletcher JR, Nigg B, Edwards B. Effect of longitudinal bending stiffness and running speed on a probabilistic achilles tendinopathy model. Footwear Sci. 2019;11:S66–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Joshua Weaver, Jonaz Moreno and Montgomery Bertschy for their help with the tables, and Shalaya Kipp and Damion Perry for feedback on earlier versions of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Integrative Locomotion Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, 01003-9258, USA

    Justin A. Ortega, Laura A. Healey & Wouter Hoogkamer

  2. Human Movement Biomechanics Research Group, Department of Movement Sciences, KU Leuven, 3001, Leuven, Belgium

    Wannes Swinnen

Authors
  1. Justin A. Ortega
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laura A. Healey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wannes Swinnen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Wouter Hoogkamer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wouter Hoogkamer.

Ethics declarations

Funding

Wannes Swinnen is supported by a PhD fellowship from the Research Foundation-Flanders (Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek #11E3919N). No other sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this article.

Conflicts of interest/Competing interests

Wouter Hoogkamer has received research grants from Puma North America. Justin Ortega, Laura Healey and Wannes Swinnen declare that they have no potential conflicts of interest relevant to the content of this review.

Data availability

All the data discussed in this manuscript are provided in the tables.

Author contributions

Conceptualization: WH; Literature search: JAO, LH, WS; Writing—original draft preparation: JAO, LH, WS, WH; Writing—review and editing: JAO, LH, WS, WH.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file3 (PDF 2788 KB)

Supplementary file3 (XLSX 27 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ortega, J.A., Healey, L.A., Swinnen, W. et al. Energetics and Biomechanics of Running Footwear with Increased Longitudinal Bending Stiffness: A Narrative Review. Sports Med 51, 873–894 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-020-01406-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-020-01406-5

Search

Navigation