The search for the perfect running shoe is over.  I decided to go with the same brand of running shoe I had before.  I tried many different types of shoes, ran in them, did my research and eventually could not find a running shoe that I liked better than my Brooks Adrenaline GTS 8s. I guess if the shoe fits, run in it.  There’s no need to reinvent your “wheels.”

Although I found my perfect pair of running shoes, I still have a problem with the shoe laces being too long.  It seems to be the norm in running shoes these days.  I don’t know why.  So now I have to find the right laces for my perfect running shoes.  Why is it so difficult to make me happy?  Because I demand perfection.  Well, at the very least, I demand being close to spectacular.

I didn’t realize how diverse shoe laces had become until I started doing my research.  You’ve got the flat, the fat, the round, the colored, the infants, the big foot, the waxed, the elastic, even the butterfly and the daisy styles.  These are just some examples, there is a plethora of other shoe laces out there.  It became too much information for me to properly delineate.  Apparently there are 2 Trillion ways to lace up a standard 12-eyelet pair of shoes.  Click here if you want to learn more about general shoe lacing and tying techniques from Ian, a shoelace expert and connoisseur. It’s actually pretty interesting.  Then, go to your parents house and yell at them for not teaching you how to properly tie your shoes when you were 5 years old.  I personally wore Velcro shoes until I was about 10 years old.  Why learn to tie your shoes when you can wear Velcro?  I was so much smarter back then.

So, although I bought the exact same pair of running shoes that I had previously owned, I’m always looking to try new things, but I just don’t understand why running shoe laces have been getting longer and longer as time passes.  Are people’s feet evolving to be wider?  I didn’t realize homosapiens had balance issues.  Maybe my feet are just that skinny and when I tighten my shoes I get all a lot of that extra lace.  And no, it’s not true what they say about the width of one’s feet being directly proportional to other body parts.  Shattering stereotypes is my middle name baby.  Chris Shattering Stereotypes Barber, B.A.  Don’t act like your not impressed.

I don’t think I’m smarter than the shoeientists and shoeginneers at Nike, Brooks, or New Balance; so with my last pair of Brooks Adrenaline 8s I tried using the standard model laces that came with the shoes for the first couple of months.  Upgrades are a rip off anyways.  As my shoes tightened to my feet, the longer my laces  hung out.  I’m all for “hanging out” but it started to become a hazard for me.  I started to trip over the excess string, falling to the ground on multiple occasions.  Even though my falls were typically when I was running with someone of a slower running pace, I needed laces that would be safe for any pace I chose to run.  I finally broke down and bought some standard shorter, thinner shoe laces at the dollar store and put them in my running shoes.  I’m going to do it again for my new running shoes.  I’ll probably get some other things at the dollar store too.  Steak sauce, “orange” cleaning solution, maybe a spatula or an extension cord.  I don’t know.  I don’t know if I’ll have enough time.

I honestly can’t understand why the thicker, round, and longer laces that come on most running shoes today are better.  The thickness and roundness of the laces helps the knot hold better but the length is just plain ridiculous.  Even when you double or triple knot the laces they end up being way too long.  Even Shaq would have excess lace on his running shoes.  Not that Shaq runs.  That’s for Stevey Nash to worry about.

Our American way of thinking that bigger is better doesn’t always ring true.  “Super-sized” food just makes us fatter, SUVs use way too much expensive gas, and big houses come with high mortgages that Americans are struggling to afford right now.  Let’s stop this Manifest Destiny of running shoe laces before it’s too late.  Next thing you know we’ll be buying Alaska or Louisiana!  The horror.

Without a generally accepted unit of measure, quantifying the “extremeness” levels of an activity can be very difficult.  Two ways to measure how extreme your activity is by the level of adrenaline your body produces and the amount of risk involved in your activity.

Adrenaline is a hormone produced by the adrenal glands to stimulate the heart-rate, dilate your blood vessels, and open your air passages.  Your body produces adrenaline in high-stress or physically exhilarating situations.  So when your body produces adrenaline it means you are doing something extreme right?  Well, not necessarily.  Although many extreme activities are designed to promote the release of adrenaline to your body, other activities can produce adrenaline in the same way; such as alcohol, stress, caffeine, or sugar.  None of those things seem very extreme to me.  Maybe sugar and caffeine are what makes Mountain Dew so extreme.  So extreme.

I prefer to measure extremeness by the amount of risk you take.  A friend was trying to tell me last night that the television show “Man vs. Wild” was extreme.  I don’t agree because the host of the show has a safety net, which lowers the risk levels considerably. I will admit, most of the things the host does are risky and difficult (not to mention disgusting), but I assume, based on the presence of the cameraman, that if something horrible were to happen, that they have an a back-up plan.  I’m sure they always have an evacuation route, first-aid kit, and probably weapons to heed off wild animals.  If this is not true, then the cameraman is the real risk taker on the show, not the host.  He does everything the host does but with a camera!  AIG took risks but I wouldn’t consider them extreme.  Anyone can insure 150 billion dollars worth of assets without any collateral to back them up if they have a safety net in the form of a 70 billion dollar government bail out.  Too easy.  Put down the Mountain Dew and stop being a poser AIG man.

Extremeness is best measured by the amount of risk you take, without a safety net, and the severity of the potential outcome.  This is why trail running is extreme.  I admit that the risks of trail running is lower than other activities but the difference is that when you go down on the trail, you’re going down.  You can do very little to alter the outcome as the event is happening.  Not having control of whether or not you get injured is extreme.  Also, the types of injuries that can occur while trail running, broken or twisted joints and bones, can lead to a very detrimental outcome.  Runners often run daily, use it to relieve stress, and often don’t “feel right” when they aren’t able to run on a non-rest day.  Trail running injuries are often ones where the only thing you can do to recover is not run.  Not being able to run can be a very negative outcome to a runner.  Not to mention losing all of the ability gained from logging hundreds upon hundreds of miles in all conditions.  Other running injuries which are often developed over the long-term allow recovery to include not running as many miles or doing alternate cardiovascular training.  Trail running injuries usually require you to go “cold turkey.”  I wish trail running injuries would require you to go “jive turkey” instead.  That would be awesome.

Taking risks without a safety net and a high negative outcome is extreme so get out on the trail and run…or just put a lot of sugar in your coffee this morning.  Extreme!!!