First Taste: New Balance Minimus Zero Trail

As I alluded to last post, I have added yet another pair of shoes to my arsenal. The New Balance MT00, the trail version of the company's Minimus Zero lineup, a zero-dropped version of its predecessor. The MT00s replace my MT101s (a predecessor to the predecessor) and makes my entire running shoe collection minimal and flat.

New Balance MT00, MSRP: $109.99

I've been lazy and haven't taken any more photos, so that'll have to wait until the fullblown review, after I log some serious mileage in the shoes.

Thoughts Out of the Box
These are my lightest shoes, weighing 4.4 ounces, and are quite bendy. New Balance got clever with the soles, providing traction without mass. The mesh is so thin you can see through it, and the rest of the upper is an ultra light space age material.

The shoes are comfortable to wear. The mesh is rough, but felt comfortable enough without socks. However, going sockless on the run will wait until after my race this weekend, as I don't want to risk a blister. The tongue of the shoe is almost a joke it's so thin, and it tends to fold over itself. There is no insole, but a comfortable footbed.

I found the toe box to be sufficiently wide for my feet, but I have read others complain about the shoe being too narrow. On the contrary, I found the shoe to be a bit too long. New Balance could round off the toe a bit to make the shoe a little more ergonomic, a la the Altras or Merrells.

First Run
I wore these shoes for my accidentally too long seven eight-miler last Saturday. I had read that the Minimus Zeros might be too minimal for more technical trails, so I tried them on one of the rougher spots in the area: the Ledges Trail. The terrain is full of rocky outcroppings and snaggly roots to step on.

While the MT00s provided plenty of ground feel, there was plenty of protection. The real test will come when I head out to the Pine Lane section of the Buckeye Trail, where there is a long stretch of latticed roots that are notoriously difficult to traverse.

The light mesh proved to be quite breathable, and the shoe drained well, as there were abundant muddy puddles throughout my run.

Testing Points
My preference is to run sockless, and I'm concerned about the mesh. Even though it felt fine walking around, it could be abrasive on the run. There are plenty more technical trails in the area, and I'll be searching for the limits of this shoe's durability. I'm a bit concerned about the long toebox and the possibility of catching it on uneven terrain.

My first impressions were solid, and I'm happy I went with the New Balance, as I've had good luck with the company's shoes in the past. I bought these shoes with my own dollars from my local store, Second Sole.

Two over 500 and One on the Way

Talking (at great length) to myself about running shoes ...

At the moment, I rotate between four pairs of shoes.

Last night I wore my red and gray New Balance 767s for my four-mile tempo run at (attempted) 10-K race pace. The font that marks my shoe mileage on my running log turned to red, signifying that the shoes had surpassed 500 miles.

My blue and gold 767s crossed into that dangerous red territory last week during my track session.

My Brooks Adrenaline 7s, which I had retired after Cooperstown and then un-retired in February, are 33 miles from reaching the reddened 500 miles.

My Adrenaline 8s first touched pavement during my first run of 2009. Those have 417 miles until that fateful 500 mark.

Five hundred miles. It's the magical number that gurus say is the life span of your running shoes. (Or is it the shoe manufacturers who say that?)

After some field sobriety tests and reading this post by Vanilla and this post by Mike and this article, I'm starting to have my doubts about this 500-mile rule and the role of running shoes in general.

I chose to run in 2006 as an exercise largely because I thought it was cheap. Then I learned that I needed to buy running shoes. Then I needed a running watch. Then I needed running apparel made with technical fiber. We all know how expensive is the gear we "need."

I drew the line at socks. You all know by now that I pretty much stopped wearing socks when I run. I never understood why anyone pays $12-$30 for socks--one pair of socks.

On the occasions that I do wear socks, I wear that dreaded natural fiber, cotton. My only requirement is for my socks to be seamless, because I like to prevent blisters. These socks cost me $11 for a six-pack.

Furthermore, I refuse to bow to your Garmin god.

I don't need all this stuff. I want it. I want to feel more comfortable. I want to fit in with the other runners. I want to look the part.

Running is primal. We don't really need to wear anything to run. And no, I'm not about to start running naked. But I have considered taking one step closer to that, from sockless to shoeless. However, there's that whole problem of puncture wounds that scares me off.

I have seen the "barefoot" shoes, such as the Vibram FiveFingers, showing up at races. While I find these funky toe socks intriguing, the price of $75 a pair seems to defeat my purpose of running cheaper. I might as well stick to shoes.

But do I really need all the stability support of my current shoes?

In my quest to get faster, I have started to consider the weight of shoes. Motion control and stability support typically adds one to three ounces to shoes. What if I started wearing neutral cushion shoes? Or racing flats, for that matter? I'd be running lighter, and therefore faster.

But wouldn't I get hurt?

Our bodies are incredibly adaptable. Most runners notice the changes in their physiology that running causes, the sturdier knees and stronger calves. Our feet adapt as well.

Running has strengthened the structure of my feet. Since I have been running sockless, my soles have gotten tougher. As my shoes get older and continue break down after each run, including the deterioration of the stability support, my feet (and ankles) must adapt to this as well. So how important are the stability elements to my shoes?

This is the chicken-and-egg argument. Do I need stability support because my stride is out of whack? Or is my stride out of whack because I wear shoes with stability support?

In short, I'm not buying shoes until all of my current pairs wear out. When they do, I'm buying neutral cushion shoes. Or racing flats. Or maybe I'll even try those funky toe socks. And I'm buying them from the cheapest place I can.

Got it? Good. Hiccup.

Review: Altra Samsons

After a month of testing, my Altra Samsons are finally ready for a more thorough review. However, these shoes are not through with their trials, as I plan to use the Samsons as my primary road running shoe during my training for (and likely running of) this year's Akron Marathon.

Considering my mileage is not high volume this time of year, the Samsons have only logged more than 20 miles, mostly on roads and sidewalks of varying types of material and varying states of decay.

My 3F criteria form the primary basis for my review, but weight, comfort and aesthetics also play a significant role in my opinion of Altra's latest zero-drop, minimal shoe.

Flat
The first F is how flat the shoe is, and all of Altra's offerings feature a zero-drop platform -- that is, no height differential between heel and toe -- which allows me to maintain a more forefoot landing with my stride.

Flexible
The second F deals with flexibility. As you can see from the requisite fold-up-the-shoe photo, the Samson easily rolls into a ball. However, Altra added a layer of EVA to the sole, which makes it a bit stiffer than the Adams, the Samsons' brother shoe.

Feel
The final F concerns ground feel. Basically, how thin is the shoe? With the aforementioned layer of EVA, the stack height of the shoe is a bit higher than the Adams, which results in less ground feel. Without the insole, there is still a good amount of feedback, but not as much as I enjoyed in the Adams. The reduced ground feel means I have to be more cautious of stomping my feet -- a concern with any shoe. Stack height of the Samsons with the insole is 10 mm and 7 mm without.

Weight
The Altra website says the Samsons weigh in at 6.5 ounces, but the Minimalist Running Shoes blog has them 8.5 ounces. Obviously, the bigger the size, the more it will weigh. Considering my giant 11.5 sized feet, I'm guessing my Samsons are closer to 8.5 ounces, which will make them the heaviest shoes I've worn for the Akron Marathon in a couple years.

Comfort
My only complaint about the Adams was the placement of the cinching strap near the toebox, which resulted in chaffing my pinkie toes. The Samsons eliminate that problem with a traditional lacing system. Voila! Best shoe ever, right? Well, not quite.

I prefer to run sockless most of the time, and the ground response of the Samsons is best without the insole. However, the BareSole footbed is comprised of a rubber-like material that seems to cause hotspots under my big toes. Sockless is fine with the insole, but then I lose ground feel. Basically, I'm stuck with the choice of socks vs. feel.

The upper of the Samsons is a thicker mesh than most running shoes. The material none abrasive and seems plenty breathable, but it adds a bit more structure than I'd like. The plastic strip up the side toward the heel seems a bit much. I see no reason to bulk up the shoe in this regard.

Aesthetics 
In the war between form and function, I'm a proponent for the function side. However, I can't deny my superficial response to how the Samsons look. Mrs. Viper has a euphemism for ugly babies; she says they're "going to be smart." These shoes? Yeah, smart. The design is simple, which I applaud. So many shoes these days look like somebody threw a bunch of fabric into a blender with a box of crayons and hoped for the best.

I prefer simple, but there are two aspects of the Samsons that I don't like. First is that plastic strap I mentioned. It's too thick. It would be better if it were slightly transparent and constructed of a lighter material, perhaps a Scotch-Brite fabric instead of plastic. Second is the gray toe decor, which just looks like cheap fabric paint. To me, it throws off the shape of the shoe. These are minor complaints, and they won't stop me from running in these "smart" shoes.

Bottom Dollar
The Samsons are available online at the Altra website for $99.99. These shoes offer a great alternative to the Vibram FiveFingers, Merrell Trail Gloves, New Balance Minimus, and the like. The Samsons have become my primary shoe for road running, and they would be good for trails where traction is not a concern. Despite the socks vs. insole conundrum, these are among the most comfortable shoes I've ever owned. I'm looking forward to packing on the miles in them over the next several months.

[Drunkard's note: Altra provided these shoes for free in return for a review. The opinions stated here are my own.]

Flashback Friday

The flock milled about the infield, chewing the grass. Suddenly, I had the sensation that I've written this sentence before. But that time, I was talking about geese.

This time, the track was overpopulated with some sort of organized activity group consisting of people of, let's say, a certain mental faculty.

Rain threatened, but it did not fall last night as I ran my intervals, weaving in and out of puddles and people who did not understand what it meant when I yelled, "Track!" That is my excuse for failure in the following stats:

• Intervals: 6 x 800 meters
• Goal pace: 7:19-7:39 per mile
• Lap 1: 3:31.62 (7:04 per mile)
  
• Lap 2: 3:45.74 (7:33 per mile)
  
• Lap 3: 3:51.87 (7:45 per mile) FAIL
• Lap 4: 3:54.92 (7:51 per mile) FAIL
  
• Lap 5: 3:45.39 (7:33 per mile)
• Lap 6: 3:50:36 (7:43 per mile) FAIL
• Average pace: 7:35 per mile
  
• Total distance: 6.2 miles

I added three failures last night. Lap 4 was eerily similar to my previous Lap 4, a difference of 0.01 seconds, and the average pace also was the same as my last track session. However, the total distance got me over the 57-mile hump.

That said, April is done. Here is the statistical run-down:

• Total Miles: 59 miles (12 runs)
• Highest Weekly: 20 miles
  
• Average Weekly: 12.1 miles
  
• Average Pace: 9:39 per mile
  
• Longest/Fastest Run: 6 miles, 9:05 pace
  
• The Monthly Dif: +2 miles (57 miles in March)

Tune in next month to see if I can reach 60 miles! I hope the anticipation kills you.

Back Talk
Wherein I chastise my new readers and expect them to willingly return again.

BrianFlash of Team Flash stops by Team BHI to confess his sins: "I love beer and running (although at my age, I'm drinking less and running more)."

Answer: Booze Hounds laboratories have conducted studies that show it actually takes less effort to drink more and run less as we age. Consult your local Pub for proper penance.

Tfh needs a lesson in musical instruments: "You really do march to the beat of a different drummer, don't you. Playing your banjo, clambering over hotel furniture barefoot, running sockless."

Answer: Just because a banjo looks like a drum on a stick does not mean I'm a drummer. Note of caution: Sockless intervals may lead to blisters.

That's all for this week, teammates. Have a fine weekend. Good luck to all racers. Run well and drink well.

Boston Billy, Barefoot and Blisters

***DRUNKARD'S SPOILER ALERT: Finally, for those readers who have been waiting to get a glimpse of the Viper, your day has arrived. See the bottom of this post.***

There is some race today. Some magazine is covering it live online.

Some of you have probably read in that very same magazine about the possible return of the that same race's legendary four-time winner, "Boston Billy" Rodgers. At the end of that article, which ran in the most recent issue of that magazine, you were left hanging with the question of whether Rodgers would actually run that race. Well, if you haven't learned elsewhere, he is. He probably won't win.

Robert Cheruiyot is the defending winner. Ryan Hall is the American favorite to save us Yanks from the tyranny of East African marathoners. Kara Goucher plays the same U.S. savior role on the women's side. I'll be rooting for my comrade in facial hair and prophet of sockless running, Brian Sell.

If you got this far and you're feeling like I half-assed this portion of the post (which I did), you can get a proper lead-up to this somewhat notable race at the Science of Sport, which really breaks shit down proper-like with way more numbers and graphics than I'm capable of fabricating.

DRUNKARD'S UPDATE: It's over. Ryan Hall and Kara Goucher each finished third in their respective races. Hall should have worn a wig and entered as a woman. He would have destroyed those girls. Brian Sell finished 14th. Bill Rodgers finished in 4:06:49--my new time to beat.

Hey, Detroit


Go Cavs!

Get Lost
Why is it that the scenery looks different when you're on foot compared to when you are driving in a car? I decided to run a different route through some of the the West Akron neighborhoods and in the process got lost when I missed a turn.

What I hoped would be another mile or so became another two miles or so. No matter. It was 71 degrees and I was enjoying another sockless run. The sun felt good on my skin, and the new terrain was fun to explore, albeit disorienting.

However, I have learned a lesson. My silver and red New Balance 767s don't seem to agree with my bare feet.

And now a new photo of me:


Who wants breakfast?

Developing the List

This Sunday is the Buckeye Half Marathon, and, unless you're new to this blog, you also know that my bachelor party is Saturday. The race is close to home, yet the party will end in a hotel room in Cleveland.

Getting to the starting line will require a logistical ballet of timing, hydration, beverage moderation, refusing forced-upon-me alcoholic drinks, calculated eating choices, and a specified collection of supplies.

If one item is omitted, it could wreck the whole flunking thing. And so, I make a list.

The List (and a few notes about its items):

1. Running shoes: Despite my increased barefooting, I don't feel confident enough to race a half marathon without shoes. My Brooks T6 Racers will be the likely choice, unless the Altra Adams arrive before I leave Saturday. 
2. Socks, probably, too: Funny thing about all my barefooting is that I've lost the callouses from previous years of sockless running. 
3. Technical fiber shirt: There will be sweat to wick. 
4. Technical fiber shorts: There also will be sweat here to wick. 
5. Timing device: So I know I horribly slow I'll be running. 
6. Race bib: I'll need to pick it up Saturday morning before the party. 
7. Safety pin(s): So as I can properly display said race bib on said technical fiber shirt. 
8. Water: I need to maintain hydration throughout Saturday's beer, et al,  ingestion and perhaps may need to carry my handheld bottle during the race. (Note: bring handheld water bottle.)
9. Electrolyte beverage: The bachelor party will likely sap my electrolyte stores. I'll need to replenish before beddy bye time. 
10. Chia fresca ingredients: For the morning of the race, as I drive down from Cleveland. Ingredients are chia seeds, lemon, sugar, and water. 
11. Will power: So as I don't acquire a soul crushing hangover on race day--just a mildly squeezing of the soul, please. 
12. The hotel's complimentary continental breakfast buffet: Please let it be open early enough for me to grab a bagel for the road. 
13. Plan B in case said complimentary continental breakfast isn't open when I have to leave: Maybe there's a Dunkin' Donuts on the way to the race. 
14. Alka-Seltzer: The old standby for hangover prevention. Consume one tablet with water before bedtime, a second the morning after. 
15. Medical tape: For the prevention of nipple devastation. 
16. Skin lubricant: Too much information? No, for the prevention of thighs chafing. 
17. Pre-/post-race clothing: Something to stay warm before the race and something to change into after the race in the case of going to breakfast with the Enthusiast, et al. 
18. Compression socks: My calves were killing me after Tuesday's brutal long run. I suspect them to feel worse after racing. 
19. Self awareness: Drinking alcohol dehydrates the body. Racing while dehydrated can be dangerous if proper precautions are not taken, or if said precaution prove ineffective. Know when to say when if saying when is needed. 
20. And don't forget to call the Enthusiast to ensure attendance of race so she doesn't get up way too early after her bachelorette party to come spectate my possibly hilariously bad performance: Man, she'll be so pissed if she shows up and I don't. So pissed. 

What am I forgetting, dear readers? The race starts at 8 a.m. The weather forecast calls for a high of 72 degrees with 72 percent humidity, partly cloudy skies, and a heat index of "8 very high." 

Matching My Worst

My three-miler last night ensured that I wouldn't mark a new low monthly mileage. At worst, I'll match October's 10 miles. However, the cold weather is making even the shortest runs a challenging feat for my poor feet. 

My street is one of those side roads that the snowplows ignore. My Vibrams conduct the cold quite well. Starting off my run with a long stretch on packed ice slush makes for numb feet. It takes at least a mile before the friction warms them up, but for some reason my left foot takes longer. Throughout last night's run, my left toes were frozen senseless. And as I read somewhere, a numb foot is a dumb foot. 

I'm starting to wonder if it isn't time to add a little more material under my foot and wear my Brooks T6 Racers again. The problem with those is that they smell awful. I need to stick them in the washer to defunktify a year's worth of sockless running. 

When I have bare pavement or asphalt underfoot, my Vibrams are fine for this weather. Running on a blanket of snow, however, isn't a fun experience with nothing but a thin layer of rubber and a silly pair toe socks to protect me from frostbite. 

At any rate, it was good to get out and exercise. I even added some dumbbell curls and sit-ups to my routine to help stave off the holiday chub. I also abstained from the candy dish and cookies for the first day in who knows how long. Will power, I has it! 

Flashback Friday: Compensating for a Small Goal ... you thought I was going to say something else, didn't you?

After taking it in the comments last week from some of you, I have readjusted the pacing goals for my weekly track workouts. I was still training with pacing in mind for the 10-K earlier this month. But now it's time to focus on the marathon and my four-hour goal.

I will now shoot for 1:45 or less per 400 meters instead of 1:40. And when I do 800-meter repeats next week, I will shoot for 3:35 or less instead of 3:25, which would have only meant a 50-percent FAIL had I made this adjustment last Thursday. Let's see how my new pace goals panned out for me.

And now the statistical rundown:

• Intervals: 9 x 400 meters
  
• Goal pace: Sub-1:45 per interval (7:02 per mile)
  
• Lap 1: 1:38.33 (6:34 per mile)
  
• Lap 2: 1:41.18 (6:46 per mile)
• Lap 3: 1:42.14 (6:50 per mile)
• Lap 4: 1:36.35 (6:26 per mile)
• Lap 5: 1:35.94 (6:22 per mile)
• Lap 6: 1:45.77 (7:02 per mile)
• Lap 7: 1:42.28 (6:50 per mile)
• Lap 8: 1:46.33 (7:06 per mile) FAIL
• Lap 9: 1:42.9 (6:50 per mile)
• Average pace: 1:41.25 (6:46 per mile)
  
• Total distance: 6.2 miles

[Drunkard's note: Total distance includes one mile warm up, 400-meter recovery laps and one mile cool down.]

Sorry, Nitmos, just one this week. Here's the monumental link again for your viewing pleasure.

Back Talk
Wherein apparently we have to review the material we've already covered this year.

Xenia is just jealous that I have good supporters on my kick-ass training runs: "The only problem with the cyclist support crew is that they won't be there on race day."

Answer: 1) Actually my cyclist supporter will be there on race day, just not following me on a bike, 2) I will also have my usual cheering section(s), 3) I will have about 10,000 fellow runners to keep me company throughout the race, 4) I will have great crowd support as Akron does a great job cheering on the marathoners, and 5) my previous experience at this race should help.

Funnyrunner and Morgan are so unfashionably late to the party in their questioning of my running without socks and having to groom my blisters.

Answer: I've answered this before. I'm not going to go over sockless running again.

Happy Hour is nearly upon us, teammates. Have a finely brewed weekend, and good luck to all you racers. Run well and drink well. Cheers!

Killing It Files: Accidental 9

Yesterday I finished off another 20-mile week. Another sockless long run. Another easy run at a surprisingly fast pace. And surprisingly, another mile more than I had planned.

Sunday's run was meant to be an eight-miler. I was cruising along at nine minutes per mile through one of the Cleveland Metro Parks. It is rare for that pace to feel effortless, but it did.

The parkway is marked every half-mile and I knew my turnaround was approaching. Any minute now, I thought. Can't be too much farther.

The temperature was in the high 50s with sunny skies. Perfect for a long run.

I finally saw a mile marker post approaching. When I saw that it was a half-mile too far, I could only chuckle.

On the way back, I spotted my intended turnaround point. It was a bit obscured by a bush from the other direction. Certainly not invisible.

I wasn't sure if I could hold on to my easily fast pace for an extra mile, but I did so with a negative split of a minute and 20 seconds and an average pace 0f 8:52 per mile.

Another great run for a solid 25-mile week.

Pre-Minimus Principles

Last Christmas, I got a new pair of shoes -- yes, actual shoes -- the New Balance MT101, a trail shoe which was a forerunner to the company's Minimus line. I wanted a tool that would be useful for my increasing interest in trail running and have since run about 110 miles in the shoes.

The bulk of my runs in the MT101s have been on rough trails like the Buckeye Trail, but they have also seen action on pavement, asphalt and crushed limestone, ranging in conditions of dry, wet, snowy and muddy.

What I was looking for: A light-weight, relatively flat shoe that would provide traction on loose dirt and mud. I'll say it, I wanted a minimal trail shoe without waiting for all the hyped products that were due out early this year, but not available at Christmastime 2010.

What the MT101's provide: Weight? 7.8 ounces. Flatness? 7 to 10 mm heel drop, according to Pete Larson at Runblogger. Traction? Well, it varies. I've come to believe that balance is more important in trail running. Let's just say I've never fallen in these shoes (or any other).

What I love: The fit around the heel is slipper-like, and the nearly seamless stitching would be perfect for sockless running if my pinkie toes didn't chafe against the abrasive mesh of the toe box. Otherwise, a very comfortable shoe.

What I hate: The "Rock Stop" plastic plate under the forefoot makes the soles of these shoes too rigid for my preference. The stiffness of the shoe can make it difficult for pivoting around tricky obstacles like roots and rocks.

I was also hoping these shoes might be decent for snow and the occasional road runs. However, they didn't provide much traction in snow and the stiff sole made road running uncomfortable. (I had a tendency to slap my feet on the ground.) The New Balance MT101 are great as a dedicated trail shoe, though I'd prefer to have a more flexible shoe. The slight heel drop is unnoticeable on rough and hilly terrain, but is apparent and flatter ground.

I wish the toe box were wider so I didn't have to wear socks, as these shoes have a thicker mesh, making them less breathable than traditional running shoes. With socks, they're a bit stifling, and I'm just not used to wearing socks in warm weather.

[Drunkard's note: The New Balance MT101 were a gift from family. The manufacturer has absolutely no sway in my opinion.]

Haiku No. 2: Sockless Solipsism

Pound feet bare inside
Twinge right knee behind
Untapped barrels of knowledge

Looking for the Turning Point

The funk has swamped me these past couple months. From what I've read around the bloggerwebs, many of you have felt the same way. Since the middle of January, I've been rutted in a pattern of a decent running week followed by a deplorable running week.

So as:

• Week of Jan. 19: 18 miles (five runs)
• Week of Jan. 26: 11 miles (two runs)
• Week of Feb. 2: 16 miles (two runs, one race)
• Week of Feb. 9: three miles (one run)
• Week of Feb. 16: 20 miles (four runs)
• Week of Feb. 22: nine miles (two runs)
• Week of March 2: 21 miles (two runs, one race)
• Week of March 9: seven miles (two runs)
• Last week: 22 miles (four runs)

Even those so-called decent weeks didn't feel all that decent. I was knocking off rust, dealing with various twinges, or just plain not enjoying myself. I have yet to break the pattern. But last week felt different.

Instead of terrible running, there was Terrible beer. My pacing was faster and I tallied my highest mileage of the year. I experimented with sockless running to moderate success. I planned four runs and by golly I ran four times.

The major hiccup has been my weekend running. For various reasons, I didn't run on the Saturday or Sunday of most of those low weeks. This weekend, I ran on both days.

Saturday was track time:

• Intervals: 4 x 800 meters
• Goal pace: 7:19-7:39 per mile
• Lap 1: 3:41.3 (7:25 per mile)
  
• Lap 2: 3:48.08 (7:39 per mile)
  
• Lap 3: 3:42.76 (7:27 per mile)
  
• Lap 4: 3:46.03 (7:35 per mile)
  
• Average pace: 7:31 per mile
  
• Total distance: 4.4 miles
  

Sunday was a 10-mile long run. I ran it at 10:02 per mile with a 51:04/49:11 negative split (10:13/9:50 per mile, respectively).

It's too early to say I've turned a corner, but it's never too early to brag.

Enter Sock Season

So much for the unseasonably nice weather. December ended Ohio's snowless streak at 251 days, the second longest snow drought in state history. To me, snow is way better to run in than rain, but snow also means it's time for me to put on some socks.

I stopped wearing socks regularly about two years ago. I'm sort of an inside-out convert to minimalist and barefoot running: first the socks, then the shoes. But every winter, I'm forced to protect myself from frostbite with an extra layer beneath the breathable mesh of my running footwear.

I've been running in my Vibram FiveFingers KSOs exclusively, though infrequently (truly minimalist running), since I got them last month. I quickly learned that I would eventually need some insulation from the cold, which led to an experiment with some scissors and a pair of tube socks. The modified socks kept my feet warm, but were lacking in the comfort department.

Today, I bit the bullet. While shopping for some holiday gifts online, I threw in a pair of ridiculous toe socks for myself to increase the cost of my order to the amount needed to qualify for free shipping. Never mind that paying for shipping would have been cheaper than adding a pair of $10 socks. 'Tis the season, right?

Goodbye, nice weather. Goodbye, sockless running. Goodbye, November. Here is last month's statistical rundown:

• Total Miles: 33 miles (nine runs)
• Highest Weekly: 10 miles
• Average Weekly: 8.25 miles
• Average Pace: N/A (no watch used)
• Longest/Fastest Run: ~6 miles @ ~11:00 pace
• The Monthly Dif: +23 miles (10 miles in October)

I've been enjoying my freedom from the watch, but it's time to get more consistent mileage.