Well if a graph says it, it must be true. I can't argue with that.
I can tell you what my experience was with the shoe though - and it wasn't good. Maybe others have a different foot shape, strike and mechanics, and so they will perform differently in the shoe.
Too bad they only used hobby joggers and the protocol was extremely far from the reality of a marathon.
“He and his colleagues brought in 15 volunteers, all of whom had run under 21 minutes for 5K (for women) or 19 minutes (for men). To test their running economy, he had them run on a treadmill for five minutes at a time while measuring their oxygen consumption.“
Too bad they only used hobby joggers and the protocol was extremely far from the reality of a marathon.
“He and his colleagues brought in 15 volunteers, all of whom had run under 21 minutes for 5K (for women) or 19 minutes (for men). To test their running economy, he had them run on a treadmill for five minutes at a time while measuring their oxygen consumption.“
Hobby joggers like us, great. I'm not sub-elite and the volunteers were not sub-elite. So all the more likely the results are applicable to us.
I'm planning on posting some pictures to this board tomorrow since I've been training in the shoes since early March. I'm not allowed to do that until tomorrow, but I think I can share some in-shoe feedback. For reference, my marathon PR is 2:16:01 and I have run in every version of the Vaporfly including the OG. I've run in the Adios Pro 2 and 3, the Metaspeed Sky +, and the Alphafly 1, 2, and 3. I applied to the Project3 program in February and when I was accepted, I reached out to my coach to confirm the Puma shoes were good before I hit accept. My coach, Geoff Burns, one of the world's foremost running shoe experts, works at the Olympic Training Center and is one of the authors on the paper recommending a limit to the stack height of shoes. He told me he's tested the Deviate Nitro Elite 3 to basically be dead even in testing with the Vaporfly 3, so at the very least I wouldn't be wearing a shoe any "worse" than I have been as long as they didn't mess up this new one. I even asked if they could send me the Deviate Nitro Elite 3 to race in just in case I didn't like the new shoe. I take my running very seriously, I'm not one to drink Kool-Aid and run in a pair of inferior shoes just for some free stuff. I have multiple super shoes and years of free gear. I was in the same presentation where Wouter gave us this data, and even I was skeptical.. All that is to say I had reservations but was open to trying something new and wearing the Deviate or going back to my Metaspeeds or VF if they sucked. That won't be necessary. They are by FAR the best supershoes I have ever worn. I have two other friends in the program who are sub 2:20 marathoners and we texted each other saying our first workout in them felt just like the first time we stepped into super shoes years ago. We hadn't felt that feeling since. These are legit. I'm not being paid anything to say this, my free shoes cuts off after marathon Monday and I will be buying these when my fresh pair wears out!
I'm planning on posting some pictures to this board tomorrow since I've been training in the shoes since early March. I'm not allowed to do that until tomorrow, but I think I can share some in-shoe feedback. For reference, my marathon PR is 2:16:01 and I have run in every version of the Vaporfly including the OG. I've run in the Adios Pro 2 and 3, the Metaspeed Sky +, and the Alphafly 1, 2, and 3. I applied to the Project3 program in February and when I was accepted, I reached out to my coach to confirm the Puma shoes were good before I hit accept. My coach, Geoff Burns, one of the world's foremost running shoe experts, works at the Olympic Training Center and is one of the authors on the paper recommending a limit to the stack height of shoes. He told me he's tested the Deviate Nitro Elite 3 to basically be dead even in testing with the Vaporfly 3, so at the very least I wouldn't be wearing a shoe any "worse" than I have been as long as they didn't mess up this new one. I even asked if they could send me the Deviate Nitro Elite 3 to race in just in case I didn't like the new shoe. I take my running very seriously, I'm not one to drink Kool-Aid and run in a pair of inferior shoes just for some free stuff. I have multiple super shoes and years of free gear. I was in the same presentation where Wouter gave us this data, and even I was skeptical.. All that is to say I had reservations but was open to trying something new and wearing the Deviate or going back to my Metaspeeds or VF if they sucked. That won't be necessary. They are by FAR the best supershoes I have ever worn. I have two other friends in the program who are sub 2:20 marathoners and we texted each other saying our first workout in them felt just like the first time we stepped into super shoes years ago. We hadn't felt that feeling since. These are legit. I'm not being paid anything to say this, my free shoes cuts off after marathon Monday and I will be buying these when my fresh pair wears out!
A post from a 2:16 guy on reddit
I don’t doubt Zach’s impression specifically, but I also look forward to takes from people not in the Puma Sub-3 program. I know a few folks personally in it, and it’s not different from influencers singing the praises of a shoe when they’re on a paid trip - Puma sent them several pairs of shoes and sets of gear, is offering cash prizes, and is giving them all sorts of hospitality before Boston/London. Not saying the shoes aren’t good, I’d just encourage waiting for less “influenced” reviews.
Does anyone else feel like the quality of Alex Hutchinson’s stuff has dipped lately? I used to love his stuff, but recently I’ve felt like it’s been more clickbait/advertising. Probably has more to do with Outside’s editors and the state of the magazine industry than Hutchinson himself though.
Have Taylor Roe and Alex Maier been wearing this shoe?
Amazingly no. I texted coach Alistair Cragg last night around midnight and woke up to the following reply.
Alistair Cragg wrote:
Hey Robert, Great, amazing shoes! No our team haven’t raced in the Fast-R3’s, they are WA legal as of last week at the European Road Running Champs… this weekend at Boston, BAA Mile and 5km will be the first our team gets to race in them… we are excited, they are fast! Taylor will get to use them in the BAA 5km… Maier will race Düsseldorf Marathon on the 27th in them for the first time.
Very exciting to see they've been running so so well without cheater shoes.
What's wild to me is that it in this arms race it A) took someone all these years to officially best Nike and B) Nike hasn't been able to find that 'next' innovation since the original Alpha/Vaporfly breakthroughs.
Since developing ZoomX I don't think Nike has made any significant changes to their foam, which is the real magic ingredient in any supershoe. ZoomX is PEBA, which is now what almost every supershoe uses, but it seems the very top end shoes are now using aTPU - first the Adidas Evo Pro 1, and now this Puma shoe.
Per the article: "Superfoams such as PEBA in the Vaporfly and other supershoes return about 85 percent. Puma’s Nitro Elite foam, an 'aliphatic thermoplastic polyurethane' (A-TPU), reportedly returns over 90 percent. In Hoogkamer’s testing, compressing the whole shoe (not just the midsole foam) returned 89.9 percent of the energy, compared to 85.0 percent in the Nike shoe and 85.7 percent in the Adidas."
Another big issue is that in recent iterations, Nike seems to be increasingly trying to democratize the Vaporfly and Alphafly - they have to be everything to everyone, be it midpackers, hobbyjoggers, or elites. As a result, these shoes (VF3 especially) sacrifice performance for comfort. Maybe the new CEO will right the ship a bit and allow the design teams to focus on pure performance again, but Nike will have to both tweak their foam and make a more aggressive shoe if they want to get back on top.
Puma may not have top tier elites, but they sent these to everyone in the Project 3 program, so we're about to get some quality fast hobbyjogger data.
I never raced in the Fast-R 2, but I tried it on once and my impression was that it felt uniquely propulsive for a super shoe, but the weight was a dealbreaker. So if they've solved that issue but kept the positive aspects of the design, I can certainly see this shoe being a world beater.
I'm sure the data on this shoe is accurate for a population, no reason to believe the researcher is biased if he's attaching his name and reputation to it. But I'll always believe individuals respond differently to these shoes. So it's a bit of a stretch to say they're "better" than another shoe when n=1. That said, I'd absolutely give them a try, but I'd have pretty modest expectations.
Just came to say that the author of this article, Alex Hutchinson, is a delight to read.
He is Phd and runner himself and has the capacity to distill a pile of data in to comprehensive readable product.
A few years ago second book Endure was NYT bestseller. He has a Facebook page Sweat Science that is worth checking out.
If you like to read running related articles that are not 'dumbed down' to the lowest level, I would highly recommend checking out his writings (and some related YouTube vids).
