Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums

You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members, upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, access other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisements in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!

  1. Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
Dismiss Notice
Have you liked us on Facebook to get our updates? Please do. Click here for our Facebook page.
Dismiss Notice
Do you get the weekly newsletter that Podiatry Arena sends out to update everybody? If not, click here to organise this.

"Tackling the 10 Myths of Barefoot Running"

Discussion in 'Biomechanics, Sports and Foot orthoses' started by Kevin Kirby, Jan 5, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. efuller

    efuller MVP

    Blaise, on question 1, I am not aware of any research that answers that question, or for that matter, supports the premise of the question. Any answer would be speculative. I'm ok discussing theory, if you are ok not requiring evidence.

    On Question 2 I think we have agreed to disagree on the studies of muscle strength with the contention that you don't think 4 weeks is long enough to show a strength difference. What measures of foot strength are you talking about and what do you mean by tolerance to stress? Is a strong foot one who's owner can run barefoot?

    Eric
     
  2. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Hi Eric,

    I'm find with the 'zone of NO evidence' ... very common in medicine.

    There is very flimsy evidence that transferring to minimalist shoes is possibly injurious, especially if introduce to rapidly... but I believe that is the reality. The reason for that is that the tissues become less tolerant to the stress of pressure, shirring, etc... by the use of 'protective devices' like orthotics and maximalist cushioning running shoes. I call this become "weaker"... and it's not just about muscles. It's the reason why the use of of minimalist flexible shoes or barefoot will increase the 'muscle strength' AND the tolerance to the load, pressure, shirring stress (again : just flimsy evidence on that). Therefore I believe that the use of minimal interference is a good way to increase the tolerance of the foot tissues and prevent injuries of the foot on long term.

    knowing that people needs protective device like maximalist shoes to be able to do physical activity it's for me the same thing that the need to have 2 braces for the knee and a belt for the lower back... not sure is the thing I will recommend to my patients...

    On the other hand, all this protective device are very good tools to treat some irritated structures.

    I find funny that we try to defend orthotics and maximalist shoes by saying that is not true that they weaken the foot... if in the same time we use it to protect the foot and treat some pathologies... and we say that minimalism is dangerous......... all of this hiding behind weak evidence.
     
  3. David Wedemeyer

    David Wedemeyer Well-Known Member

    The results of this study support that shod running is associated with the lowest injury rates. On average, a greater percent of the barefoot group was injured than the shod group. Also, transitioning from shod to barefoot presented even greater percentages of injured runners. Thus, it is not ideal to switch to barefoot running solely for the purpose of reducing the amount of injury. Barefoot running was not associated with lower injury rates and the process of transitioning, at least temporarily, increases the risk of injury.

    Blaise the results of the study support the complete opposite of what you’re selling. How on earth you arrive at the uneducated and ridiculous propositions which permeate your interpretations (I would call them misinterpretations) of the literature astounds me. It astounds Craig T and others as well apparently.

    This is the definition of cherry-picking studies, ignoring the important data and selecting out-of-context that which falsely promotes the appearance that it supports your claims. At least to the novice :empathy:

    Did you provide this study, I cannot locate it online Blaise

    (353/469) Whilst it may appear that the effect of orthoses on the measure of gait were minor, it is important to consider that the immediate effect of the orthosis was to improve upon the specific deficit in barefoot gait to a normal level. Without changing the other measures, which were within normal ranges as reported in Chapter Two..

    This actually supports the efficacy of orthotic intervention, thank you! Where is the impression that you quoted in this text? I guess you missed that part?

    This is a manufacturer-funded study and the results were not all that impressive. Nice try!

    This is a baseless, illogical argument. Blaise, just because you derive your living following a belief system and one that you have flimsy at best evidence to support, does not mean that others are wrong if they are not as singulary minded. Have your myopathy checked Blaise, I hope that it is not interfering with your professional judgement, oops; too late!:empathy:
     
  4. David Wedemeyer

    David Wedemeyer Well-Known Member

    Someone will be along shortly with a Hicks vid or reference....I'm totally fine with that ;)
     
  5. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    :bang::confused::craig:

    Juste to clarify : My reference of Leong (even if it's a bad unpublished study) is to say that transferring to minimalism is DANGEROUS...

    Your comment give me a good idea of How you interpreting things... take off you blinkers and try to don't misinterpreted my quote. I start to think you are malicious ... or have just no professional judgement, oops; too late!:empathy:

    With all your unscientific and illogical pseudo answers you never answer my 2 questions... Do you runaway?;)

    1. Why many people have a hard time when they move to barefoot or minimalism from BBS or supportive orthotics... Is it not because the tolerance to the stress is decreased?
    2. Why the integration of minimalism (flatter or more flexible shoes) or barefoot seems to strength the foot (at large… increase tolerance to mechanical stress)?

    (if you want you can tell me that you don't answer because your don't agree with my statements. Maybe you think that people don't have a hard time when they move to barefoot or minimalism from BBS or supportive orthotics...)
     
  6. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Articles:
    8
  7. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Interesting... flimsy but interesting.

    Craig, what's your opinion on my question #1
    1. Why many people have a hard time when they move to barefoot or minimalism from BBS or supportive orthotics... Is it not because the tolerance to the stress is decreased?
     
  8. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Articles:
    8
    Probably for the same reason if they moved from barefoot or minimalism to BBS or supportive orthotics ... the tissues are loaded differently, they need time to adapt. It does not necessarily have to have anything to do with muscle strength.
     
  9. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Agree about the difference of the load.
    * One side you have more rear foot striking (More load on tib anterior, knee TiFe, and higher)
    * The other side you have more forefoot striking (More load on the foot, post of the leg and maybe the knee PaFe)

    With that we can predict
    * Which tissues will be injured if you switch from a technic to another too quickly (voluntary or involuntary by the shoes... if the shoe changes enough your biomechanics)
    * Which tissues will be "weaken" if you use on long term a specific technic and use a specific type of shoes. (and I understand that weakness it's always relative and that just train will reinforce your feet... but not as much in maximalist shoes than in minimalists shoes)

    It's the reason why I think that the MTT bone, the plantar fascia, the MTT fat pad, the Achillis tendon, the tib post, the peroneus, ... will become less tolerant to the stress by the use of the maximalist shoes... because less stressed ... and therefore more prone to injuries when wearing less supportive shoes.

    Is it one of the reasons why many runners, competing in racing flats but training in BBS are so often injured?

    your opinion Craig?
     
  10. David Wedemeyer

    David Wedemeyer Well-Known Member

    Blaise you asserted that foot orthoses and shoes weaken the lower extremity and a number of educated posters provided you better evidence than your assertions that that wasn't true. You then segued into these these two questions without answering any asked of you. It is very difficult to follow you, I'm not sure if its a language barrier or your spotty research and devotion to speculation but you're not winning this discussion "man".


    Blaise as Eric pointed out this is not only a speculative question with no support, you have never defined the terminology that you are using. What is tolerance to stress, the floor is yours?

    Is anyone else here agreeing that runners have difficulty transitioning from shoes and foot orthoses to minimal or barefoot? I have never heard this before, is this your "idea"? I wear my orthoses all day and wear a similar version in my cycling shoes, are my feet weak? How do you measure this Blaise, please enlighten us?

    I don't answer because I do not understand the question Blaise and given the admittedly weak support you base the question on I doubt anyone else will answer or be able to. I also feel that it is high time that you answer our questions before asking speculative ones or admit that everything that you propose is speculation and fad and not science.:bash:
     
  11. efuller

    efuller MVP

    Basically, it hurts. So, yes there is less tolerance to pain in response to the stress. This does not mean that the bones are weaker. There is no evidence that the muscles are weaker. There must be some adaptation, whether behavioral or structural that occurs as people "get used to" going barefoot.

    Perhaps it's the additional endorphins from all the people saying, "wow, he must be tough, he's running without shoes."

    Perhaps, it build up of the plantar fat pad. (Big bulky fat pad.)

    Perhaps it's learning to run to minimize contact forces.


    In college I went barefoot a lot more often than I do now. My tender feet are much more sensitive to those little pebbles now. Call my foot weak, but it hurts. My foot is probably weaker now than when I was in college, because I do a whole lot less running, in shoes, as compared to what I did then.

    Eric
     
  12. David Wedemeyer

    David Wedemeyer Well-Known Member

    Blaise now we're getting somewhere discussing tissue loading but in the Leong study that you provided, the opposite was true when comparing shod to barefoot running (you promote the idea that barefoot is superior to shod for various reasons in your seminars and on your website); transitioning from shod to barefoot increased running injuries :

    The data supported that runners transitioning from shod to barefoot running had the highest prevalence with an average of 32% of its runners in an injured state each week. Shod runners had the lowest prevalence with 21% and barefoot runners (prevalence of 29%) were in the middle. Furthermore, relative risk calculations, which are based on a ratio of prevalence, showed that barefoot runnersare 1.35 times as likely to suffer and injury as shod runners.

    Can we infer then based on Blaises' questions and the evidence that he provided that running barefoot is inherently riskier than shod? Sure reads this way.

    So if injuries are higher is barefoot runners (and I assume these are experienced runners and not weekend warriors, where injury could potentially be manifoldly increased) than shod AND transitioning from shod to barefoot produces higher injury rates, then the conclusion has to be that running barefoot is inherently riskier and produces a higher level of injury.

    This doesn't support your notion that shoes and orthoses "weaken feet" and obviates your questions. It also effectively refutes the assertions of barefoot and minimal advocates that it is superior to shod and produces less injury through "strengthening", "adaptation", "proprioception" etc. Perhaps barefoot is the problem? It certainly isn't a treatment paradigm and based on our discussion and the evidence that you provided it is risky.

    This in mind the question should be why go minimal or barefoot? I guess it makes for a good book and you can wear goofy looking shoes with toes in them and goofy bandanas to look cool, but then no one will mug you in Detroit for wearing either but they will covet your shoes...;)
     
  13. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Hope it's a barrier language because I start to have a headache. If you don't answer that time ... I win! ;)

    The tolerance to the mechanical stress is the capacity of a specific tissues to not be injured by shirring, bending, tension or compression forces.

    "Although a physiological bone reaction is a normal part of adaptation to the mechanical stress associated with physical activity, a rapid increase in the mechanical load may result in a pathological bone process. When the local stress becomes too important great, it exceeds the structural and physiological limit of the bone tissue (Pepper 2006; Warden 2006)"

    I understand that you don't understand all the thing I'm saying. So Eric can maybe ask me what he don't understand.

    That's very nice. :bash:
    So you consider that a runner on maximalist shoes can switch to minimalist shoes with no transition time and don't be injured???? Are you treating runners? are you a runners? I'm both and even with flimsy scientific evidence I can tell you that the transition for 90% of the runners NEED to by gradual. Maybe others can comment on that, I think you are living on another planet...

    Do you know which part of the body of a cyclist is first of all injured when this person start to run? I know.

    You don't answer because what I told you put you in front of some of your incongruities... You have no answer... you ask a question to avoid to answer... so you don't need to answer back if you don't clearly answer my questions. I win "man":empathy:
     
  14. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Hi Eric

    Agree with that. We speak here about the skin.

    I think it's the same for all the tissues less stressed by the high heel and the cushioning. I think your metatarsal bone will becoming less tolerant to the bending stress (that increase in minimalist shoe because the changment of the biomechanics) with a big bulky shoe. I can run just one km barefoot because my skin is painful ... but the pain is not my limiting factor in 5fingers. If I do like some of my patient, I will do too much for the capacity of my MTT bone (and all the other tissues I spoke before) and will develop a MTT stress fracture... or another pathology of the foot, like an Achilles tendinopathy.

    Another point because people love to speak about muscle of the foot. Did you see the foot size of a barefoot runners compare to shod runners? Did you see some runners starting to run barefoot how their foot change after one-two years? I think their intrinsic muscle of the foot (not just there Big bulky fat pad ;)) become definitely bigger in size. My thought without large RCT.
     
  15. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Never assume... especially with an unpublished bad quality study (like I said previously)...
    For that question you need to provide more evidence... recommending a medical intervention must be supported!

    I do it for some (5-10%) of my patients even with no evidences... But I feel you do for 100%?????

    I recommend to run in Maximalist technologic big bulky shoes if
    1. you are use too
    2. you are not injured
    3 you don't want to perform

    OR
    you want protect your foot on short term to treat a pathology

    I find the best for you : Hoka shoes , compression socks, knee brace, sacro-iliac and lower back belt, armour for your truck and an football helmet for your head... I call this "the protection mode"... the best way to decrease your tissues stress (load for you). Also I understand you don't run... maybe to protect your feet... but be carful because bicycle is stressful for your lung and heart. Maybe just listen TV is the best for you... pretty sure you won't be injured... certainly not on short term...
     
  16. CraigT

    CraigT Well-Known Member

    Blaise
    Firstly I will provide an answer your questions so you don't complain again...

    I think the Craig Payne answered this quite well- there is a change of load.
    It is not really a revolutionary idea that removing devices that are designed to protect the foot from certain loads will increase the load again... Have you ever changed your workout at the gym? Did you feel pain after? Does that mean that your previous workout was making you weaker???

    What do you mean by integration?
    If by this you are suggesting that it is possible that doing some specific training with barefoot/ minimalist shoes can make the foot stronger- then I would say sure... can't argue with that.
    The study by Brueggemann (which is only published as proceeding at the ISB congress) demonstrates this. But you must remember that this was doing warm up exercises in Nike Free v regular training shoes.
    Doing warm ups barefoot is pretty common in athletics.... not really revolutionary.
    These were also athletes- do you believe that you can extrapolate this to all recreational runners???
    If, by integration, you mean gradually introducing barefoot/minimalism to all types of training... then I think you can easily be doing harm. Sure- some people will be able to handle the change in load, but there are many that will not.

    You are a physio- correct? Do you advise people with poor core stability to go and randomly do back exercises??? Or do you think that technique and posture are important?? Do you not see the parallels?

    I think the fundamental problem with your ideas is that you view shoes and orthoses as some type of splint. There is no evidence to suggest that this is the case, and certainly it is not my clinical experience- if an orthosis feels this way, then I would suggest it is not functioning correctly for that person...

    I think there are some solid ideas around with respect to running technique training- and I am sure you have some of them. However I do think you are doing the running world a great disservice to suggest that running shoes and foot orthoses are the cause of a lot of problems.

    Running for exercise is incredibly popular- now more than ever- I am sure there are many people out there that would not be able to run at all if it was not for running shoe companies trying to build better and better shoes. Do they always get it right? Of course not. Is the industry dominated by marketing and hype? Sure is. It is, however, the role of individuals like the contributors on this forum (including yourself)to look through this... not be guilty of doing exactly the same thing!
     
  17. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    " it is high time that you answer our questions before asking speculative ones or admit that everything that you propose is speculation and fad and not science."

    David.. you will never receive an adequate answer because this is a very lucrative business our friend has going here and he has multiple vested interests to perpetuate the myths he proposes.

    You are dealing with a guy who has made the following statements publicly:

    “we also know that big shoes weaken foot tissues”
    “Many studies on the subject prove that athletic shoes cause deformities like hallux valgus (bunions)”
    “I recommend minimalist to the beginner, to the overweight”.
    “are you a heel striker? The cause is the shoe”.
    “the absorption and antipronation systems in shoes do not lower injury and do not improve comfort”.
    “the promotion and prescription of technology shoes is currently done by ignorance by health professionals”.
    “shock absorbing shoes do not lower the stress put on the skeleton, I talk here about knees, hip and back”.
    “80% will change their biomechanics and run this way (correctly) after only a few steps (in a minimalist shoe”
    'running barefoot is the gold standard"

    He has provided zero evidence to support any of these speculative statements that continue to suck gullible people to his workshops where he charges them $650 to hear this nonsense.
    He has not provided a definition of minimalism.
    He has not provided a definition of perfect form
    He has still not answered any of the 8 questions I have put to him seven times over a period of 7 months. I will not post these questions any more because I know he has no answers.

    He does not understand modern athletic footwear and the processes involved concepting, researching and designing them.

    He only understands how to pull the wool over the eyes of those he promotes deceptive and rapidly discredited concepts to for a fee. And a large one.

    He endows those who attend his 'clinics' with the term "sports specialist" on his website.. with go-to info on how to reach them...if you need a laugh, check it out. If you need an even bigger belly laugh check out his special mates who get to be a "super specialist", like Craig Richards, who has published one paper in his career, and nobody knows because he never attends any of the mainstream academic sports medicine meetings ( and no Biase.. your courses do not qualify as academic sports medicine courses..), has to my knowledge never attended a high profile sports team, never attended an Olympics as a doctor and is not an accredited Sports Physician. I mean.. what the hell and why are we listening to this guy??

    He also said.. again... "Hope you will, one day, answer to my questions, like Simon finally did when he said "yes, the traditional shoe promote and sale by ASICS prevent running injuries"

    So boring as it is.. i will .. again say.. I never said that.. i said.. In my OPINION.. a world of difference but we can't expect Bias to understand that.

    His is a very rigid model that refuses to accept the beauty of individual human and athletic variability and the absolute folly of applying one rule to all as he preaches. His is a model that takes small snippets from studies to support his theories, and then if he gets caught out, he changes his mind.. per the above exchanges with Eric, yourself and Craig.. really, truly extraordinary.
    He talks with enormous arrogance of this Arena and what a joke it is.. how we all support each other without having the courage and courtesy to understand he is dealing with the finest minds in the business (and I am NOT including myself here) who have forgotten more than he will ever know.. people who have no vested interest, nothing to sell. Oh.. and the the discussions are frequently combative and often we do not all agree on the topics we discuss.. quite rightly.
    he speaks in unscientific terms of "shock absorption".. please explain shock absorption to me Biase.. and "shirring load' whatever the hell that is. The knowledge of biomechanics and physics is very poor.
    Biase has broken every rule of courtesy and effective arguing within a scientific framework. He has consistently complained and made accusations without ever answering the valid questions put to him.
    He could be making a very meaningful contribution to this forum by educating us all on his undoubted expertise in terms of training techniques, strength and stability. he could bring a valuable physiotherapy perspective to the Arena. He has not, and i suspect the only way we would ever learn from him is if we pay. Such a shame, and as Craig T points out "you are doing the running world a great disservice to suggest that running shoes and foot orthoses are the cause of a lot of problems. "
    like I said.. time the tribe spoke..i really do not understand why anyone is affording him the courtesy of a response when he has demonstrated such a breathtaking lack of respect and courtesy. He is wasting far too much valuable time when we could be discussing more important things
     
  18. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    On another note.. anyone going to biomechanics Summer Scholl in Manchester in a couple of weeks time.

    Kevin.. should I bring my guitar?:cool:
     
  19. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    Make that Biomechanics Summer School.. a Freudian slip if ever there was one...
     
  20. CraigT

    CraigT Well-Known Member

    Simon,
    Just for the record, I personally DO think that traditional running shoes can prevent injuries as well as help treat them....
    My opinion, but I see innumerable cases here where people are exercising in shoes which have virtually no structure and very little cushioning... they have bought them for about 20 dollars at the local supermarket. In fact except for the price they would be good examples of 'minimalist shoes'. Often my treatment is for them is for them to get a decent quality sports shoe...
    Oh- and what other footwear do they use? Sandals or flip flops... NOT 'foot coffins', and certainly not what you would define as habitually shod.
     
  21. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    Yeah.. I agree Craig.. and I am willing to bet there are times you also recommend a more minimalist approach or even barefoot when the case by case scenario calls for it.
    And THAT is why you are always going to be a better clinician than Biase
     
  22. BEN-HUR

    BEN-HUR Well-Known Member

    I always laugh (literally) whenever I see the phrase "foot coffins"... it's a classic phrase. If we gain nothing else from this barefoot debate (which I'm sure we all have), we have gained the phrase "foot coffins"... don't ask me where you could use the phrase as it is rather ridiculous... that's why I'm not sure whether to congratulate or chastise the inventor of it (anybody know who?).

    Anyway, there is apparently a shoe coffin (aka... BBC - Big Bulky Coffin) believe it or not. Excuse my warped sense of humour for a moment... but it would be rather funny (well sort of - in a fictional context of course :D) if someone here was inadvertently placed in one at their time of rest... & standing in its presence whilst the eulogy (outlining their contribution) was read out...

    [​IMG]

    I take it it's a coffin designed for those die-hard runners (whoops, sorry :eek:).

    Note to self - update will on funeral details.
     
  23. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Hi Craig,
    I will answer you other email when I have more time. I like your answer and agree with some point.

    Hi Salmon,
    the good thing with you is that I know what you think and what you preach very clearly like 'asics shoes prevent injuries' that you claim many time without the words 'my opinion is' ... you need to be careful...
    The good think with me is that you know what I think
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9pU1hMLP-E
    also, how is your Lamborghini?

    The cool thing is that we can think what we want. I personally DO think that minimalist running shoes can prevent injuries and that maximalist running shoes can cause injuries (even if shoes have a minimal effect on running injuries compare to training load). More than 10 years of prescription for 100% of their training. So our experience works for each of us.

    The question hear is : Is there evidence that this intervention work to treat or prevent injuries? Is there another reasons to prescribe this intervention? Without evidence I would be very careful to prescribe something that have potentially side effect... And it's the same thing for ALL intervention... more the intervention is potentially injurious, more we need to be careful.
     
  24. Definitely!
     
  25. David Wedemeyer

    David Wedemeyer Well-Known Member

    Blasé you are truly a legend in your own mind.

    I understand perfectly, straw-man and puerile. This sort of rancour makes me wonder if your parents are blood relatives.

    Nah Blasé, its your planet, we just share it with sentient beings such as yourself.:eek:

    Of course you do Blasé, you're omniscience is other wordly!:bang: Let me guess; the feet? How about the low back, knees hips....? Is it the same for everyone? Are they shod, minimal or barefoot, overweight, have a history of ____ ? You place everything in one tidy clinical box don't you?


    I don't answer? I have answered you just refuse to accept a dissenting opinion because you're so financially invested in your one-trick-pony paradigm.

    Well you got me there Blasé, I wear protective gear for a couple of my activities. Suggesting that I watch TV; you're an arrogant and naive individual. You should learn a little more about me before you attack my understanding of the human body and sports.

    I have earned a Bachelor's degree in science and a Doctorate in Chiropractic, I'm hardly a novice. I have practiced the martial arts for more than 25 years and when we spar we do wear protective gear for obvious reasons. When I cycle I do wear a helmet and it possibly saved my life last year. Would you suggest that I pedal my bike shoeless as well, without a helmet? I don't run because it just doesn't interest me personally, I enjoy other pursuits but that doesn't render me ignorant as I treat patients from a lot of different sports. My heart is fine, as are my lungs, thank you for your sincere concern; or is there yet another nasty intent hidden in that comment?

    I'll leave you to the better minds on here Blasé, I wish I could say that I learned anything from you, "the self-proclaimed expert". Instead I'm leaving this discussion with the knowledge that you have nothing important to offer and are the second most abrasive, combative and arrogant individual I have ever encountered here. You also don't have a shred of evidence for what you've been "selling" for the last ten years:bang:

    Blasé provided the unpublished study that shows results which run counter his speculative direction (and then chided me for addressing the inconsistency?). If it is true (and I'd like to be pointed in the direction of quality studies regardless of the outcome) and I say again; If barefoot increases the level of injury vs shod and increases the level of injury transitioning from shod to barefoot, then why is barefoot even being considered as a treatment or "better"? Why does tissue "adaptation", "muscle weakening", "tissue loading" etc even matter? Why do it (or recommend it, especially if you're a professional)?
     
  26. David Wedemeyer

    David Wedemeyer Well-Known Member

    Simon B, well said sir. I'm done with Blasé as well. He's a supreme waste of time waiting for even one answer because he has no answers, it is all speculation and anecdote and most of all marketing.
     
  27. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    2 things..

    what do I need to be careful about?

    and.. I no longer care what you think!:craig:
     
  28. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    yeah I think that is a good move David..unfortunately he brings nothing to the table but spruiking his own version of the "truth". Hey really sorry I missed you in Irvine recently, it became completely insane and I ended up doing the 'ol 28 states in 28 days thingo. I will be back again for 3 months in the second half of the year, so we will definitely hook up for that beer.
    Just as a random aside, my grandmothers maiden name was Amy Wright, and Wilbur and Orville were her first cousins..!
     
  29. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Hope your group of big bulky shoes and orthotics will have fun with the guitars of Siman. Speculation and anecdote : that the story of the big bulky shoes...
    Marketing : ask to Salmon...
    Answer : you never answer to my question ;)

    No hard feelings.
    Blaise
     
  30. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    none taken .. this is irrelevant as are you
     
  31. admin

    admin Administrator Staff Member

    ...and on that note, this thread has run its course. Closed.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page