Soo many 4% going SLOW

Just my two cents.

But I think runners should really consider their training volume and workouts before making such purchases. If you are not putting a lot into your training, I feel like buying a $300 pair of Vapor Flys isn't a good substitute to make up for your shortcomings as a runner.

Lets be honest here. If you are healthy adult male with no physical handicaps and you are in your mid to late 20's and you are running marathons north of 4:45, you simply aren't working hard enough. A pair of Vapor Fly's isn't suddenly going to knock off a substantial amount of time off your death march.

It's similar to a triathlon. I don't even own a bike, but if I was going to every try an triathlon, rest assured I wouldn't be buying the best bike on the market for my first race. I would assess my ability before diving into something so costly.

These shoes may or may not wotk for the 2:02 - 2:20 people, they certainly do not do the work for the 2:50 guy begging for them (because all the 4:45 guys bought them).

Get real.

See a scam when there is one.

roadhogger wrote:

How do you know they weren't walk jogging 4% more efficiently?

A high-performance shoe does not benefit a walker or really slow runner. The design of the 4% is for 'runners'. In fact, I doubt walkers or really slow runners are part of the test group.

Not trying to be horsey here, but curious as to why people think VF4% wouldn't help slower runners? I thought the benefits of the shoes were that they are superlight, have topflight cushioning, and the carbon plate offered extra spring to your stride. Anecdotally, some runners have also said their legs don't feel as trashed at the end of a race. All those benefits should accrue to slow runners. Admittedly, going from a 5 hour marathon to a 4:48 marathon (a 4% reduction in time) isn't much to write home about, but those 12 minutes could be a PR and would, at a minimum, be an added layer of improvement you could add on top of improved training.

Conversely, telling slow people to just train harder applies to faster runners as well except maybe for the truly world-class elite, who are already training at the highest possible levels and where incremental improvements are hard if not impossible to find. So why shouldn't LRC-tier runners also forego buying them when they, too, should just train harder for that 4% improvement?

I think the consensus is that as you run slower the reduced weight of racing flats provides less benefit and you'd be better opting for more cushioned shoes. If you take that as true, then one of the primary benefits of the VF (light weight but very cushioned) makes less a difference. Arguably, slower runners are paying $250 for the carbon plate because they don't need the reduced weight of the VF. That's at least my off the cuff hypothesis.

Taking it one step farther, the carbon plate is designed with the bio-mechanics of an elite athlete running

...with the biomechanics of an elite runner, running faster than 5:00 min/mile. For slower runners, without those mechanics and not running faster than even 8:00 min pace the carbon plate could be a determinant. At that point the VF is reduced to a $250 shoe that's well cushioned, but whose reduced weight doesn't matter, and has a carbon plate that could do more harm than good. At most these runners should be wearing a pegasus turbo, or well cushioned $80 sketcher sneaker.

Crazy Rich Caucasian wrote:

I'm sorry you don't make enough money to waste $250 on shoes.

5hr marathoner here. I bought 3 pr of the fly knit version. They look good on race day. Enjoy poverty

I'm sorry you're too fat and out of shape to break 5hr so you think buying 300$ shoes will make you go faster and give you something to brag to you online buddies about.

Why have some people started saying $300 shoes? Don't start rounding up. $250 is $250. Eastbay and RunningWarehouse don't tax or charge for shipping.

I run shorter races (10km) in Vaporfly in around 36 minutes (I´m 54 years old) nd when you run at that pace they feel really good, but when you start to run substantially slower than 4 min/km they just feel awkward. You need a certain pace to bend the plate. If you don´t the shoes just feel super soft and wobbly.

this and this wrote:

Its the same reasons you will see fat out of shape slobs show up at an easy 20 mile group bike ride decked out in $10k worth of bicycle and gear.

1) they believe it will help them go faster.

2) they may not have the time/ambition to train more, lose weight, etc. but they have the money to buy the best gear.

3) they believe owning and using the best gear helps project a certain status.

If it bothers you that they do this, run races in old T shirts, cut off cotton sweat pants, and thread bare 20 year old adidas shoes. Dust those people. Then jog back out on the course so they can see what beat them,

4) They like how the bike rides and gear makes them feel *and have the money to buy it at full retail price*.

5) They full well know they're never going to race the tour de france but are a fan of the sport and it's fun as hell to ride the same bike as your super-heroes *and have the money to buy it at full retail price*.

Thank god for super-fans with money to burn on equipment, I say.

Crazy Rich Caucasian wrote:

[quote]Takinadump wrote:

[quote]4% more cushion wrote:

I'm sorry you don't make enough money to waste $250 on shoes.

5hr marathoner here. I bought 3 pr of the fly knit version. They look good on race day. Enjoy poverty

Haha! Love it! Exactly what this person said. Wear whatever the heck you want and enjoy it! I'll be rootin' for you and your 5hr marathon times and your "I don't give a f&@K what you think I should run in" attitude!!

It is a bit odd that if you try to convince a slower runner to wear racing flats they'll come up with a dozen reasons not to and yet the same people will buy the 4% because it doesn't look like a racing flat.

I just ran a half in 1:16:15 in Vaporfly 4%, also ran a 5K in 17:05 and 10K in 34:52 in Vaporfly 4%'s. Going to try out the Vaporfly Flyknit for a MP long run this weekend I just got to see if I will use the Flyknit or the original Vaporfly 4% for NYC Marathon. The shoe works for me even though I am not that fast. Maybe I should try using the Streak LT4 for my next road 5K race though.

runn wrote:

At least they were smart enough to show up early for a race.

Right on.

You guys are just mean!!! But hey, it's Letsrun, so I understand;)

First, if somebody wants them and has money to pay for them, let them have it. It's their money.

Second, if you run in them slower and feel wobbly, it isn't the shoes, it's your "crappy" skinny wobbly ankles, or your screwed up running biomechanics. Fix it first and then complain;)

Third, even for freaking hobby joggers, the Zoom X foam is a life saver when it comes to recovery post marathon. It's a difference for somebody who only runs 30-40 miles a week in training, between hobbling for 3-4 days, or walking normally and jogging in a day, or two, after the marathon.

Having said that, something like Turbos might be even better for slower runners: same foam, no carbon spring.

Nailed it brother wrote:

runn wrote:

At least they were smart enough to show up early for a race.

Right on.

My race was not impacted negatively by arriving later then I wanted to. After helping my wife with my 4 kids in the morning, I was pushing it closer then I had planned. But, anyone who has kids knows that things don't go as planned like they used to.

I was still surprised to see so many 4% at the back of the race. Maybe they were late and catching up like me. Don't know.

Anyone can wear what they want, just seems like over kill having a Ferrari body with a VW Beetle engine.

Wowwwdude wrote:

Got to my race (marathon) after the starting gun had gone off, so I was just about the last person to start by the time I got up to the start line. Had to weave my way through the slower runners, which could be a separate thread all together (they have pace groups for 5:45 hr?!... and people were already walking at mile 2!). Anyways, I couldn't believe the number of people "running" in 4% and pegs turbos who really weren't ever going to see any kind of benefit at the pace they were going. Nike marketing must be brainwashing people if they are paying $200 to shuffle through a race.

I'm sorry you are poor, but that is probably because you never show up to work on time and have been fired from every job you've ever had.

I, on the other hand, am one of the 0.1%. I have my assistant buy a new pair of those shoes every day. It's glorious.

LTE wrote:

Not trying to be horsey here, but curious as to why people think VF4% wouldn't help slower runners? I thought the benefits of the shoes were that they are superlight, have topflight cushioning, and the carbon plate offered extra spring to your stride. Anecdotally, some runners have also said their legs don't feel as trashed at the end of a race. All those benefits should accrue to slow runners.

Sorry, but this is all wrong.

Plate: There's a constant amount of tension in the plate...this requires running at a certain speed to activate it. Not activating it, by not running fast enough, could actually have a negative effective, since the shoes can be so stiff otherwise. Slow runners will not benefit from the technology of the shoe and will probably be slowed by it.

Cushion: Heel-striking (or not getting much turnover) in a shoe that is not meant for heel striking and that begs for a quick turnover will result in a ridiculous squishy ride with all kinds of wasted energy. Slower.

Light weight: This benefit likely doesn't apply as much or at all to runners who are slow and/or heavy. Shoe weight is not a limiting factor in these runners.

Humblebrag much, you and your "not that fast" 17:05?

Please.

Be proud of your times.

One day you too will become old and slow.