In making a scientific comparison one generally assumes the difference between outcomes is zero. If the difference turns out to be statistically "significant" one would then reject the null hypothesis. Since there is so much room for interpretation in statistics you have a hard time finding a statistician who will say something is significant or non significant. Instead they will either accept or reject the null hypothesis. In my scientific experiment of one (lacking any d.f.) I am accepting the null hypothesis.
All this means is my efforts were fruitless, thus far.
Using my full arsenal, Skil saw, table saw, belt sander, coping saw and dremel tool I removed a half inch of heel out of a perfectly good pair of shoes. I also used a caliper and level to assure I made the changes to both evenly. Amazingly I still have 10 fingers.
I was so looking forward to having a shoe which would allow some longer runs near my home. I live in the flat burbs and have a nice network of asphalt bike baths at my disposal. I have difficulty running more than about 4 miles in the Vibram KSO's and was looking for another option. It is somewhat difficult to get out to dirt trails without it chewing up a lot of time. The performance of the shoe without the radical heel/forefoot buildup was seemingly identical to the unaltered shoe. I experienced thightness in my calf/hamsting and hip within a couple miles. While the discomfort never settled in my glute it was "significant" enough that I think the trial is over.
I think I need to try to make time for more frequent but shorter runs to build up my mileage in the KSO's.
Guess thats what we'll try now.
Best of luck to all those running the SHT next weekend. I considered helping out but can't make it happen. I look forward hearing all about.