Carrie Dimoff - a 34-year old Princeton alum whom you've never heard of- just beat Schwiezer and almost beat Jorgensen!!

plebeian wrote:

And the shoes. Severe disadvantage in the 4% on the track.

Those are the dumbest shoes that I've ever seen.

I wouldn't wear them for any reason at all.

Wearer of Vaporfly's wrote:

plebeian wrote:

Spikes are faster for the track. The 4% are marathon shoes. This puts her at 29:55 IMO. The shoes are not grippy at all.

The 4% shoes are best for the 10k. I've experienced it. In the marathon and half, the bounce is gone after 10 miles. I've seen unreal 10k PRs with the 4%.

You could put some hex-head screws in the soles for optimal traction + bounce.

well, it’s certainly worth mentioning that Gwen was not running for time, she ran to win. I’m sure she could have gone way faster if she were going for it, and of course, wearing spikes. The 4% are great for 10k yes, but on a track? No.

[quote]rojo wrote:

As a Princeton alum myself

Weird brag Rojo.

It looked like Carrie Dimoff was not wearing spikes either.

yoyoyoyyoyoyo wrote:

well, it’s certainly worth mentioning that Gwen was not running for time, she ran to win. I’m sure she could have gone way faster if she were going for it, and of course, wearing spikes. The 4% are great for 10k yes, but on a track? No.

An you have something to back up your claim, hard data specific to a comparison of racing in the 4% vs a spike? It actually makes more sense with a flat like the 4% giving energy return ( midsole and plate) vs nothing out of spike for this distance. You might note many of the woman had flats on for the race.

I’ve heard of her. She’s known here in Portland.

Actually, the harder the sole and the more efficient the design (like barefoot), the greater the energy return.

Soft soles are not efficient. They absorb the energy, and do not have good energy return.

Coach Cookie wrote:

Not flats... Vaporfly 4%.

Which really puts her at 32:12.

Yaaaaaas

Wearer of Vaporfly's wrote:

plebeian wrote:

Spikes are faster for the track. The 4% are marathon shoes. This puts her at 29:55 IMO. The shoes are not grippy at all.

The 4% shoes are best for the 10k. I've experienced it. In the marathon and half, the bounce is gone after 10 miles. I've seen unreal 10k PRs with the 4%.

Look at Flanagan when she ran her indoor 3k in Seattle- in the Vaporfly 4% with a spike plate. Same for Infeld at Usatf and worlds last year. The shoes work on the track.

plebeian wrote:

Spikes are faster for the track. The 4% are marathon shoes. This puts her at 29:55 IMO. The shoes are not grippy at all.

How much slippage do you think there is with the 4%? Christ you people are dumb.

Rojo deleted my post asking him what did his major in at Princeton.

Coach Cookie wrote:

plebeian wrote:

Spikes are faster for the track. The 4% are marathon shoes. This puts her at 29:55 IMO. The shoes are not grippy at all.

How much slippage do you think there is with the 4%? Christ you people are dumb.

+1

No distance runner is slipping on a dry all-weather track in any shoe.

Just wow... wrote:

It looked like Carrie Dimoff was not wearing spikes either.

Dimoff was wearing spikes. Look at 3:51-55 of this:

alumnus*

Comprendo ` wrote:

Actually, the harder the sole and the more efficient the design (like barefoot), the greater the energy return.

Soft soles are not efficient. They absorb the energy, and do not have good energy return.

Oh yea that makes sense, please go out and run around central park in pair of 5 fingers and tell us about energy efficiency.

The harder the mid-sole the less return. Super soft is not the answer but a blended compound as we see in the 4% and other brands is working.

elihu wrote:

alumnus*

Actually since she's presumably female, it'd be alumna. Unless you wanted to go with a neutral gender then it'd be alumnum.

Comprendo ` wrote:

Actually, the harder the sole and the more efficient the design (like barefoot), the greater the energy return.

Soft soles are not efficient. They absorb the energy, and do not have good energy return.

Yea ok wrote:

Oh yea that makes sense, please go out and run around central park in pair of 5 fingers and tell us about energy efficiency.

The harder the mid-sole the less return. Super soft is not the answer but a blended compound as we see in the 4% and other brands is working.

5 fingers don't have hard soles. Keep drinking the kool-aid you idiot.