For someone who has flexed her interest in running towards occasional work selling trainers, I am perhaps surprisingly novice about the finer details of such things. Much of the technical lingo washes right over my head quite frankly, and whilst I can just about identify the difference between the laces and the ‘toe box’, I’m really not sure how to work out the ‘drop’, nor even why you’d want to. I am, if truth be told, a little sceptical of the apparent obsession with analysing gait (if your running style is causing you injury, better to work on physiological strengthening or correction than utilising a mechanical prop, right?) and really don’t feel qualified to wade with any authority into the debate on minimalist versus maximalist shoes. Far from delivering the specific prescription that most people would probably prefer, I honestly feel the best advice I ever gave about buying new shoes was ‘from what you’ve told me, probably this one, but really I think you need to experiment a bit and find out what works for you.’
 | Vague, perhaps, but based on experience that I know what works for me. Personally, I have always preferred running in light trainers with as little cushioning as possible. It may be entirely psychological but my reasoning that ‘less is more’ and that the least weight or material interfering with my foot strike the better, has never caused me any noticeable issues. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Having said that, experimentation doesn’t have to stop there and so when Colin at My Race Kit suggested I tried the Hoka One One Challenger as a ‘door to trail’ shoe, I decided to trust his superiorly experienced judgement and give it a go, despite a little voice popping up in the back of my head ‘but isn’t that a bit maximalist?’ |
I guess I approach buying trainers a bit like I approach choosing wine; when reading the product description I’m quite adept at nodding sagely with a slight but knowing frown whilst muttering unintelligible syllables in apparent agreement, randomly stabbing my finger decisively at one option in a barely veiled instinctive thrust before crossing said fingers against the possibility that I’ve just made an expensive mistake. As such, to me, the specification overview of the Challenger on the HOKA website read something like:
“The light-weight, smooth-riding characteristics (blah, blah, blah, techno, techno, techno) provide stability on uneven terrain for the runner who values versatility in their running shoe.”
Now, I’ve no idea what ‘Early-Stage Meta-Rocker geometry’ is, nor am I too sure about the purpose of ‘independent rubber pods’ but if it ‘provides a fluid, efficient ride’ and an ‘all-terrain shoe for varied surfaces’ as promised, then that’s about right for me. As competitor.com’s Trail Shoe of the Year for 2015, I figured it was a fairly safe bet anyway.
So that’s the caveat and preface out of the way. On to the run.
“The light-weight, smooth-riding characteristics (blah, blah, blah, techno, techno, techno) provide stability on uneven terrain for the runner who values versatility in their running shoe.”
Now, I’ve no idea what ‘Early-Stage Meta-Rocker geometry’ is, nor am I too sure about the purpose of ‘independent rubber pods’ but if it ‘provides a fluid, efficient ride’ and an ‘all-terrain shoe for varied surfaces’ as promised, then that’s about right for me. As competitor.com’s Trail Shoe of the Year for 2015, I figured it was a fairly safe bet anyway.
So that’s the caveat and preface out of the way. On to the run.
| It might seem trivial but the first thing I enjoyed about these was discovering significantly longer laces than my existing road/trail combo shoes. Having to stop and fiddle about with suddenly flapping, wet, muddy laces whilst trying not to tie glove fingers into the knot has never been a highlight of a run for me and that these allowed plenty of slack for confident double knotting without cutting off the circulation was a definite bonus from the off. As I prowled about the flat locating and adorning myself with various items of running gear, I was already enjoying the sensation that my feet were being encouraged forward before I’d even started, the shape of the sole giving me a gentle push toward the door. Ah-ha. Maybe that’ll be the meta-rocker geometry doing its thing!? |  |
They were, as predicted, comfy from the off and I surprised myself with the discovery that I had, with no apparent additional effort bounced a full minute off my first mile compared to the run of the previous day. Whilst I’m the first to recognise other factors that may have influenced this (I think the wind was more in my favour and I was particularly keen to try the new shoes) and am in no way suggesting the Challenger ATR will equip you to churn out effortless PBs, it can’t exactly be a bad sign either.
Off the road and into the local woodland, I barely noticed a difference in the transition from pavement to gritty path. I experienced pretty much the same degree of lift from the cushioning and could feel a good degree of traction as I drove up inclines and sprung about dodging tree roots. When I finally got over the initial reluctance to obscure the Challenger’s 80’s disco colour palette with muddy splashes, I found I was able to happily plod through sticky, churned up bridle path mud without any particular difficulty and didn’t need to dodge these areas as much as I might have chosen to do in standard road shoes. This was not so much the case however when I got to much wetter areas nearer coastal marshland and in this environment I found I had to be quite cautious as there was noticeably less efficiency in the grip.
Despite that observation, perhaps the best indication of quality is that whilst trying to maintain awareness that I was experimenting with a new shoe, I soon forgot I was wearing them and simply concentrated on a genuinely enjoyable run. I’ve now worn them out a few times and am pleased to report that I’ve not experienced anything other than a good run in them yet. Far from initial thoughts that I might find them a bit clunky (you only need to hold the box to know they’re not as heavy as they might appear) I found myself pleasantly nimble and able to be as fleet-footed as I ever am. Score one for the Hoka One One Challenger ATR… I may be a convert to maximalist yet!
Off the road and into the local woodland, I barely noticed a difference in the transition from pavement to gritty path. I experienced pretty much the same degree of lift from the cushioning and could feel a good degree of traction as I drove up inclines and sprung about dodging tree roots. When I finally got over the initial reluctance to obscure the Challenger’s 80’s disco colour palette with muddy splashes, I found I was able to happily plod through sticky, churned up bridle path mud without any particular difficulty and didn’t need to dodge these areas as much as I might have chosen to do in standard road shoes. This was not so much the case however when I got to much wetter areas nearer coastal marshland and in this environment I found I had to be quite cautious as there was noticeably less efficiency in the grip.
Despite that observation, perhaps the best indication of quality is that whilst trying to maintain awareness that I was experimenting with a new shoe, I soon forgot I was wearing them and simply concentrated on a genuinely enjoyable run. I’ve now worn them out a few times and am pleased to report that I’ve not experienced anything other than a good run in them yet. Far from initial thoughts that I might find them a bit clunky (you only need to hold the box to know they’re not as heavy as they might appear) I found myself pleasantly nimble and able to be as fleet-footed as I ever am. Score one for the Hoka One One Challenger ATR… I may be a convert to maximalist yet!
