Can you quantify this. What was there previous PBs, and what was it with the new fast shoes?
I am a D3 coach and I am seeing the same thing. One boy couldn't do 10x400 at 68 seconds. His superspikes arrive the Thursday before a Friday race. He runs 4:21.
A girl on the team could not do 800m repeats faster than 3:00. She gets dragonfly spikes the day before the race and runs 10:40 for 3k (almost 5:40 pace).
Another male athlete couldn't break 9:30 for 3k and then buys the spikes a few days before his race. He comes through 3k of his 5k in 9:22 and holds close to that place for a 15:40.
These are all WITHOUT having done a workout in the spikes or carbon fiber training shoes. A day of strides in the spikes at most.
Classic meaning pre-super shoe. I think around 3:55.7
2 paths to try.
1. have a mile with the top collegians and the all agree to wear old tech. indoor, for weather control, and on one of the fast tracks.
2. are u telling me there is no exercise physiology lab, at a university, with doctoral students, that couldnt set up controlled experiments to determine how many seconds per mile the advantage is ? Or if different paces, different distances, yield different time savings.
it would be great to get a baseline. Someone please take up the challenge
Classic meaning pre-super shoe. I think around 3:55.7
The coinciding of dragonfly’s with Covid makes this a lot more complicated. In 2019-2020, 3:59.98 was the 35th fastest time in the NCAA tfrrs list. Last year, 3:57.29 was the 35th fastest time. But there were also about a quarter more collegiates competing last year than in 2019-20 with COVID eligibility, and that extra quarter are older and have been training at a high level for longer. I would guess that if you had an extra year of eligibility for the 2019-2020 class, 3:59.98 would be more like 45-50 on the performance list and 45-50 last year were all in the 3:58s. Comparing TFRRS lists is obviously just one pretty simple way to take a guess at conversions, but it’s pretty useful data to compare. I would say a 3:59 high today probably compares to about a 3:57 high to 3:58 low pre-dragonfly based on those lists.
But the other thing I think about with the shoes is the mental benefit they give athletes. My first time racing in carbon flats, I had it in my mind that there was a chance I could really take to the shoes and run a massive PR. I went out more aggressive and raced with more confidence because of that. I’d imagine that with collegiate times today, we’re seeing the faster spikes converging with a larger pool of fit and talented athletes who all likely believe that they’re capable of running massive PRs and who are pushing each other to do so. The physiological aid of the spikes may (or may not) be the biggest reason for the faster times, but it’s definitely not the only reason.
Classic meaning pre-super shoe. I think around 3:55.7
The coinciding of dragonfly’s with Covid makes this a lot more complicated. In 2019-2020, 3:59.98 was the 35th fastest time in the NCAA tfrrs list. Last year, 3:57.29 was the 35th fastest time. But there were also about a quarter more collegiates competing last year than in 2019-20 with COVID eligibility, and that extra quarter are older and have been training at a high level for longer. I would guess that if you had an extra year of eligibility for the 2019-2020 class, 3:59.98 would be more like 45-50 on the performance list and 45-50 last year were all in the 3:58s. Comparing TFRRS lists is obviously just one pretty simple way to take a guess at conversions, but it’s pretty useful data to compare. I would say a 3:59 high today probably compares to about a 3:57 high to 3:58 low pre-dragonfly based on those lists.
But the other thing I think about with the shoes is the mental benefit they give athletes. My first time racing in carbon flats, I had it in my mind that there was a chance I could really take to the shoes and run a massive PR. I went out more aggressive and raced with more confidence because of that. I’d imagine that with collegiate times today, we’re seeing the faster spikes converging with a larger pool of fit and talented athletes who all likely believe that they’re capable of running massive PRs and who are pushing each other to do so. The physiological aid of the spikes may (or may not) be the biggest reason for the faster times, but it’s definitely not the only reason.
+1000
Athletes have a completely different mentality to sub-4:00 nowadays. EVERYONE thinks they can break 4:00, and EVERYONE is racing like it. Heck, I ran 3:49 for 1500 years ago at this point and seeing all these sub-4:00 miles has convinced me to start chasing it again. All of these 4:05-4:10 guys are starting to believe, and if even 10% of them get there, that’s a huge number of new sub-4:00 guys. The same thing at the top-end; guys who would’ve settled for a tactical 3:57 to qualify for nats are now going out in 1:54-1:56 with pacers and shooting for 3:50-3:53. We saw it previously with some random crazy fast times, like Izaic Yorks/Sean McGorty running 3:53s at UW. It’s like that race, but it’s happening every single time, because everyone wants it, and everyone believes they can do it. This is also why the top level pros aren’t getting any faster; to get there, they already needed this kind of mentality, so not much has changed for them. This is why we aren’t suddenly seeing a bunch of 3:25-3:26 times.
The coinciding of dragonfly’s with Covid makes this a lot more complicated. In 2019-2020, 3:59.98 was the 35th fastest time in the NCAA tfrrs list. Last year, 3:57.29 was the 35th fastest time. But there were also about a quarter more collegiates competing last year than in 2019-20 with COVID eligibility, and that extra quarter are older and have been training at a high level for longer. I would guess that if you had an extra year of eligibility for the 2019-2020 class, 3:59.98 would be more like 45-50 on the performance list and 45-50 last year were all in the 3:58s. Comparing TFRRS lists is obviously just one pretty simple way to take a guess at conversions, but it’s pretty useful data to compare. I would say a 3:59 high today probably compares to about a 3:57 high to 3:58 low pre-dragonfly based on those lists.
But the other thing I think about with the shoes is the mental benefit they give athletes. My first time racing in carbon flats, I had it in my mind that there was a chance I could really take to the shoes and run a massive PR. I went out more aggressive and raced with more confidence because of that. I’d imagine that with collegiate times today, we’re seeing the faster spikes converging with a larger pool of fit and talented athletes who all likely believe that they’re capable of running massive PRs and who are pushing each other to do so. The physiological aid of the spikes may (or may not) be the biggest reason for the faster times, but it’s definitely not the only reason.
+1000
Athletes have a completely different mentality to sub-4:00 nowadays. EVERYONE thinks they can break 4:00, and EVERYONE is racing like it. Heck, I ran 3:49 for 1500 years ago at this point and seeing all these sub-4:00 miles has convinced me to start chasing it again. All of these 4:05-4:10 guys are starting to believe, and if even 10% of them get there, that’s a huge number of new sub-4:00 guys. The same thing at the top-end; guys who would’ve settled for a tactical 3:57 to qualify for nats are now going out in 1:54-1:56 with pacers and shooting for 3:50-3:53. We saw it previously with some random crazy fast times, like Izaic Yorks/Sean McGorty running 3:53s at UW. It’s like that race, but it’s happening every single time, because everyone wants it, and everyone believes they can do it. This is also why the top level pros aren’t getting any faster; to get there, they already needed this kind of mentality, so not much has changed for them. This is why we aren’t suddenly seeing a bunch of 3:25-3:26 times.
Placebo effect definitely is there but it’s not the reason. The shoe itself is the reason. Why do you think the placebo effect exists? I’ll try and find a link but they did a study a few years ago with test and building muscle. One group working out w/o, a group working out with, a group working out with placebo, and a group not working out but taking test.
The group that gained the most muscle was the working out with (obviously). The next group was the group not working out but with. Yep, the group that wasn’t working out but just taking test gained more muscle than the group just working out. And finally, there was no difference between the working out w/o and the placebo group. Even though the placebo group thought they were on test, the had no more muscle gain than the group that wasn’t on test.
Doesn’t matter how much you believe you’re going to run sub 4, you’re not going to run sub 4 if there isn’t some going on physiologically.
TFFRS - For 10 years prior to the shoes. Average number of sub 4 milers was around 30, top time usually around 3:55.
2020/21 First year of shoes, but only a few had them and season was limited - still produced a collegiate record in the shoes.
21/22 the number of sub 4 doubled and the top time was 3:52 with 8 under 3:55.
This year will probably be around 100 sub 4, top time of 3:50 so far. Old average of 30 sub 4 are now 30 sub 3:55.
The 3K and 5K times are a similar trend. Roughly 5 seconds faster per mile in those events.
Yes, there are other factors like more 5th/6th year runners. If someone has the statistics, it would be helpful to post them.
These are just numbers and cannot account for all factors, but these numbers indicate 3-5 seconds faster in the mile and approximately 5s/mile in longer events since the shoes were introduced. The tracks didn't change. The weather didn't change. There was not a massive turnover of coaches. Top HS times per year don't show a huge shift starting 2018.
There are a lot more runners running faster. I remember back in the 70's reading an article talking about reaching the limits of time. They said that as we get closer to the fastest a human can run more people will be running faster times.
I think maybe we're seeing that.
Don't ask me to cite the article because there was no internet. It was in a magazine that no longer exists.
More "runners running faster" AND the super shoe effect are not mutually exclusive. My friends still coaching (D1, D2, D3) have the same impression as the D3 coach posted. Athletes instantly running significantly faster. One close friend didn't buy the hype until his athletes got their first super shoes. He's now in the "4-5 seconds per mile" camp.
This year will probably be around 100 sub 4, top time of 3:50 so far. Old average of 30 sub 4 are now 30 sub 3:55.
Last year there were 8 sub 3:55, 2 of which came after the weekend of the Valentine's meet. This year there have been 8 sub 3:55. I'd guess there may be a couple more at last chance meets (or maybe a conference championship), but there won't be 22 more.
The superspikes don't make more than a second or two of difference in the mile. It's likely that training in carbon plated shoes has additional benefit on top of that, but there's no way it adds up anywhere close to five whole seconds.
Sounds familiar. Where have I heard that before?
Oh yeah - PEDs don't make you faster they just aid in recovery
Over the next 5 years I see breaking 4 becoming as celebrated as breaking 14:00 for 5k. It’s a cool accomplishment but not really going to grab much attention. That said, it will always take many years of dedication and effort to put oneself in sub 4 shape regardless of footwear.
This year will probably be around 100 sub 4, top time of 3:50 so far. Old average of 30 sub 4 are now 30 sub 3:55.
Last year there were 8 sub 3:55, 2 of which came after the weekend of the Valentine's meet. This year there have been 8 sub 3:55. I'd guess there may be a couple more at last chance meets (or maybe a conference championship), but there won't be 22 more.
Fair enough. Right now there are 89 sub 4, 30 sub 3:57. This still supports a 3s faster time in the mile at the 4:00 range than pre shoes. We can update numbers after March 11 NCAA meet.
Can you quantify this. What was there previous PBs, and what was it with the new fast shoes?
I am a D3 coach and I am seeing the same thing. One boy couldn't do 10x400 at 68 seconds. His superspikes arrive the Thursday before a Friday race. He runs 4:21.
A girl on the team could not do 800m repeats faster than 3:00. She gets dragonfly spikes the day before the race and runs 10:40 for 3k (almost 5:40 pace).
Another male athlete couldn't break 9:30 for 3k and then buys the spikes a few days before his race. He comes through 3k of his 5k in 9:22 and holds close to that place for a 15:40.
These are all WITHOUT having done a workout in the spikes or carbon fiber training shoes. A day of strides in the spikes at most.
Thanks for that same experience, more of these observations help answer the question.
I have seen a local 18 year old sprinter also make big improvements. But when I tried to get some info from him, he did not seem keen on discussing any benefit from the shoes.
As mentioned in the thread about all the sub 4’s at BU over the weekend, while I don’t have evidence of this, I strongly suspect that there is a synergistic effect between the super spikes and bouncy banked tracks. I’d thus speculate that for a normal outdoor track or a flat indoor track it might be about 3:58, whereas on a track like BU it might be quite a bit faster.
From 2010 to 2020 the 100th NCAA D1 indoor mile time was: 4:06.16, 4:05.85, 4:04.54, 4:05.03, 4:04.66, 4:03.x, 4:04.x, 4:04.81, 4:04.93, 4:04.71, 4:04.28.
2021 was slower at 4:06.39 (Fewer athletes running because of COVID canceled seasons perhaps?)
2022 100th indoor D1 time was 4:00.34
2023 thus far is 4:00.66
So how do we account for the 100th time improving around 4 seconds over this 2-year time frame? It looks like around a 4.5 second improvement which aligns with the 3:55.3 suggested before.
I attempted to look at data from the early 2000s, like when Dempsey was built to account for tracks, but TFRRS did not exist and the Track and Field News lists don't go deep enough so it was too difficult to find.
Personally I think around a 4+ second advantage at certain ability levels with some outliers that are well beyond (and below) that.
My conversations with peers and coaches have suggested what StillCompeting is saying. Those with poorer form see the most improvement wearing the spikes. It seems to make sense to me.
If your form is energy inefficient, the spikes are going to alter your form in slight ways that will give you better energy return. When you ask people how the super spikes feel, people commonly say that it forces them to run on their toes. If you're a heel striker or you strike in front of your center of gravity, the spikes are going to encourage you to change this.
If your form is already energy efficient in this way, you are going to see fewer improvements. Not to say that you won't see any difference--I've heard the foam is helpful too.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.
