Bekele Better With a Boost

wow

,Deep Six wrote:

wow

I know, right?

May want to keep Bad Wigins from reading that article, since he might wish to further cry "foul" after reading this:

"The Drop Test

You may have seen the video that adidas released of a metal ball being bounced on a sheet of the boost material. However, I wondered if you would still be able to notice the effect when using something MUCH heavier – such as a leg! So I donned an adios 2 on one foot and an adios boost on the other and sat on a firm chair. Then with legs outstretched and straight, I relaxed them, allowing them to drop with gravity until my feet hit the floor. The result was immediately clear. The foot shod with the adios 2 with its traditional EVA (adidas’ version at the back of the adios 2 is called adiprene) absorbed most of the energy, with a small bounce and very quickly coming coming to rest. The foot wearing the adios boost bounced back up a couple of inches. The result surprised me – my expectation was fully that there would be no perceivable difference between the two shoes. adidas 1 – me 0."

I have a pair of Adidas Spiderlites with Adiprene and a pair of Adidas Supernova Glide 6s with Boost. I thought I'd replicate the experiment of the article writer, who used the Adidas Adios 2 with Adiprene and the Adidas Adizero Adios with Boost. The Spiderlites with Adiprene have just 20 miles on them, and the Supernova Glides with Boost have 73 miles on them. I love both of these shoes and believe that Adidas Adiprene is superior to other traditional EVA shoes I've worn over the past 38 years.

Well, take it for what it's worth, but when I raised my left leg, with the Spiderlite/Adiprene midsole and dropped it to the tile floor, it hit with a thud and bounced hardly at all. I then lifted my right leg, with the Supernova/Boost midsole and dropped it to the tile floor, it bounced back up a couple of inches. This may sound like a dumb experiment, but I swear the author of the article appears to be onto something. And it is my own running experience that the Boost FEELS bouncier than Adiprene or any other EVA shoe I have (I have two other Saucony running shoes, the Cohesion 6 and the Guide 6, and neither feels as good and bouncy as either the Spiderlites or the Supernovas). Again, take it for what it's worth, but I strongly believe that Adidas Boost is state-of-the-art right now for running shoe midsole material.

Any possibility of some psychosomatic intervention going on?

Of course that is a legitimate question. But I let the chips (or in this case shoes) fall where they may. I simply wanted to see if the writer's initially questionable experiment could be replicated. Well, it can. Again, take it for what it's worth.

Now an even more interesting question for me, since I already know that Boost is superior to anything else I've tried, is how would a Boost shoe with, say, 300 miles on it compare in the "bounce test" to an idential Boost shoe with 0 miles on it? Does the Boost material REALLY keep its bounce over the long haul, or does it go hard and flat like regular EVA? According to Adidas, it keeps its bounce longer than EVA, AND it maintains its bounce better in cold weather than other materials.

Even Adiprene is light years ahead of everything else.

PTD wrote:

Even Adiprene is light years ahead of everything else.

I agree. That's why the industry should have seen Boost coming. Adidas took a chance and it has paid off tremendously. Now the other big running shoe companies will fight to catch up. They'll do it, too, because they'll have to.

Worth a read....

Only 2 things in footwear are proven to have an impact on running economy:

1. 100g reduction in shoe weight

2. Boost

Then read this article on RW which discusses the importance of running economy as opposed to V02 Max.

Thanks so much, adidas employee. Great articles, especially the one from Runner's World on creating the sub-2-hour marathoner. I never knew any of this information about Paula Radcliffe. Who would have guessed that a better vertical jump while DECREASING hamstring and lower back flexibility would INCREASE spring and running efficiency despite Radcliffe's uniquely ugly form? As the article states,

"Muscles and tendons act as springs that store energy; stiff springs may store and return more energy with each stride. So elites like Radcliffe tend to be less flexible in places like the hamstrings and lower back; indeed, in one study of elite runners, those who were eight inches less flexible on a sit-and-reach test ran 27 percent more efficiently. Despite Radcliffe’s famously ungainly form, her 15 percent improvement in running economy between 1992 and 2003 corresponded with her ascent to world-beater status." - See more at:

http://rw.runnersworld.com/sub-2/#sthash.W6sWy0q3.dpuf

Combining the best known VO2 Max of ultra-runner Matt Carpenter with the running economy of Zersenay Tadese in a 5'6", 120-lb.frame . . . That leaves out almost all of us and would take choosing your parents well.

As for Boost, if Boost really does give a 1% increase in VO2 Max, as the science shows, that seemingly tiny difference is HUGE in a marathon. Like the writer of the article, I'd love to see a Boost shoe with a thicker, Hoka-like frame. Or at least a bit more Boost in the forefoot because it does indeed really bounce with heel strike, but much less noticeably with forefoot strike. My perfect Boost shoe would be the Supernova Glide or Boston Boost with a tad more Boost material and a bit less heel-toe differential. I hope that's coming soon! And at a palatable price point, say less than $120. Thanks again.