Good Bye Glycerin 6

Well, I have a day off today. Only a few weeks left in the season, My legs havent been feeling fresh for a few weeks so I think this day off is needed.

Instead of running, I'm just casually relaxing in my dorm room going over my current Running shoe situation. I'm in a current dilemma due to the discontinuation of the shoe model that I currently wear.
For the last year I've worn the Brooks Glycerin 6. They've worked perfectly so far, along with the orthodics that I was given from Mark Tuller, an Orthopedist. The combination of this neutral running shoe plus the orthodic has alleviated pain that I have had in my shin while running.

I've had this problem since high school, after running a few months of high mileage I usually develop shin splints in the area near my ankle and my lower shin. I've gone through a ton of different running shoes to help git rid of the shin splints. I'm usually recommended shoes with a lot of stability, but I haven't found the right fix for my shin splints since I used the combination of the Brooks Glycerin 6 and my orthodics.

I'll try to explain my basic knowledge of the differences between running shoes before I go on with my current dilemma.
Running shoes are sold on the basis of how much support a runner needs based off of his or her running mechanics, particularly the motion that occurs when a runner lands on his or her heel and what happens before the take off.
(I've worked with Shoes before, so I've had to explain this difference to customers before)

A neutral shoe, is a shoe that is generally recommended to runners who have high to relatively normal arches in their feet.
Most people tend to over pronate when they run. Meaning that when their heel hits the ground, their foot tends to roll inwards towards the big toe. This is a natural occurrence that alleviates some of the shock from the landing.
Those runners with high arches only have a very slight pronation when they land due to the support from their arches. Because of this, a neutral shoe which does not have much added support under the arches, or stability, is recommended.

A shoe with stability is recommended to runners who have somewhat low arches or flat feet. The mechanics of these runners usually involves a lot of over-pronation. Meaning that when the heels of these runners hits the ground, there is a large motion of rolling inwards that occurs that usually generally doesnt occur in runners with high arches. This can be the cause for many injuries, which can be discouraging because it's merely body mechanics... something you are born with.
Naturally, people with high arches have fewer injuries that are due to mechanics. For example: In the Army, I've heard stories of complaints from privates with flat feet who were constantly on their feet during the Korean and Vietnam War.

To get back to shoes, stability shoes have a dual-density midsole. Basically, to tell if a shoe is a stability shoe or if it is neutral you have to take a look at the middle of the shoe where the arch part of your foot would be if your foot was in the shoe. If the area is dark grey and looks like it is solidly filled in then it is a stability running shoe.
Heres a pic for an example:
Asics 2110

See the dark grey in the middle?

Now, here is a picture of a neutral running shoe. Asics Gel Cumulus

If you look at the arch location of the shoe, there is no dual density midsole. Just a small, what looks like plasticy material underneath the shoe. That's actually still a support for an arch and is a hard surface, but it isn't a dual density midsole


Well let me get to my background...
I have a low arch in my foot... So naturally I overpronate when I walk.. BUT somewhat less severely when I run, which is not very common among runners. Because of this, when I go to Marathon Sports and an Employee checks out how I walk they usually tell me I need a shoe with A LOT of stability. When they look at how I run, they might alter their opinion and say I need a shoe with a little less stability.

The problem is, a shoe with a lot of stability is not good for me because it has too much support for my foot, which can cause stress and injuries in other locations in my body.
I can't wear a neutral shoe while running because then there will be no support for my natural overpronation which will lead to natural injuries involving mechanics.

A shoe with moderate to almost no stability should be my ideal pick, however, those shoes such as the Brooks Radius, have not worked for me either. I still get pain in my shins when I start running a lot of mileage per week.
This was the injury that actually kept me injured for most of my freshman indoor season last year.

So, After doing research, and talking to an Orthopedist, I decided to try out orthodics with a neutral pair of running shoes. The neutral pair that I was recommended was the Brooks Glycerin 6.
pic:

I was recommended these shoes in particular because they have a TON of cushioning. A lot more cushioning then most other neutral shoes. The neutrality of the shoe would be canceled out by the orthodics which I was told would act as a layer of stability when I put them into my shoes. So it would slow down the process of overpronation that occurs when my foot hits the ground.

I was incredulous to that idea at first. I don't know how, but it's worked!!!!!!
I've been able to run 70-80 miles per week using this combination and I havent had pain in my shins! It's like I'm cheating my creator for giving me low arches.. but I'm happy that I've found a way around that and have been able to run a lot of miles.

Which brings me to my current dilemma.

The Brooks Glycerin 6 has been discontinued as of January 2009. The Glycerin 7 has been introduced.
My problem with the introduction of another model of the shoe is that shoe developers tend basically create a new shoe, a different shoe from the previous model. They alter the shoes in particular ways when they introduce the new model(I got this knowledge from working with people who have experience in R&D of these products).

The Glycerin 7 might be a completely different shoe. In which case my flawless running combo will be eliminated. Online sources say that the Glycerin 7 is still a neutral and well-cushioned shoe. I'm still a little hesitant to buy them... I'm inclined to order every pair of Glycerin 6 size 10.5 that I can find and store them somewhere so that I have a never ending supply of them!

I'm just nervous since the miles on my now out-of-style Glycerin 6's are coming close to 400 miles. When a shoe approaches 400 miles, I usually go and replace them. I'm naturally comfortable with this brand and style of shoe and I don't want to change it... I want to stick by the Paul Norton mantra of "Go with whatever works"... but I can't now that these shoes aren't being sold anymore.

So.. what to do?

Do I keep looking online for the Glycerin 6 whenever I need a new pair, and continue this cycle until All the Glycerin 6 size 10.5 shoes in the world have been depleted?

or do I...


Dun dun duh...

Try out the Glycerin 7? and risk running in a shoe that has the possibility of not keeping me injury-free like the Glycerin 6 had?

I know I'm over-exaggerating this dilemma as much as possible, but I seriously am apprehensive in trying out the new model. It could turn out to be a completely different shoe and I'm tempted to just find every last pair of Glycerin 6 and round them up into a storage house for my safe-keeping.

Gotta do what I gotta do.