>>2526064>Ankle support Is sort of a catch 22. It's the stiff sole and elevated heel that fuck up your natural mobility and stability, so you need ankle support to compensate when walking in rough terrain, because you're on an elevated stiff platform and heel striking, which is the actual problem. You land on the heel, your calves are not engaged to support propert and you twist your ankle before you have time to react. >A stiff sole is pretty much only needed for climbing, mountaineering and using crampons.Holy shit, another anon who actually gets it. A few months back I was ranting in one of these footwear threads about how the Aztec pochteca walked barefoot to trade their goods, the Native Americans wore moccasins, and the Roman legions wore sandals (tall, heavy, hobnailed sandals, but sandals nonetheless).
"I bet they'd have worn boots if they'd had them," was the brainlet response.
No, they'd have gone on being shod with flexible soles, because unless you have the squishy feet of an obese air conditioning-sitting office faggot, flexible soles are superior by far for rocky, uneven terrain.
But no doubt we will continue to hear about how you have to wear boots for ankle support, even though the stiff planks that pass for soles on those things contribute much more to injury than ankle support ameliorates.
There's a time and place for boots: When you absolutely need them. I have five pairs: knee-high muck boots, mukluks, duck boots, work boots, wading boots. But I wear wimpy, light, flexy things whenever I can get away with it.
Picrel, literal Inuits each with far superior survival skills to anyone on this board, not actually wearing boots but rather sealskin moccasins. Get fucked, fat retards.
