How long until the Vaporfly 4% is illegal

On an elite level, you see a lot of success (and wins) with the Vaporfly. However, it seems like a lot of these winners are sponsored by Nike. So kudos to Nike for sponsoring nearly everyone and raking in a ton of wins to make the shoe look dominant.

On the amateur level at local and regional races, I see no outburst of Vaporfly victories to go along with the hype, or any thought of them giving a huge advantage. Sure, there are some fast guys wearing them, but the majority of Vaporfly consumers at my local events, are mid-pack people running 8min/miles.

Most of the fast people in my region are younger, in college or run more than they work and thus, can't afford $250 shoes. It's the same Kinvaras, Adidas Adios, Zoom Streaks or Brooks winning all the time.

Ohio HS athletic association banned them from interschoastic competition.

Stopcecil! wrote:

If virtually everyone can easily acquire these, with no I'll effects to health, what exactly is the issue? Should we ban rubber tracks because they make for faster times than cinder?

The difference is the track is the same for all racers, I would hate to see it come to this

or this

or for that matter even this

.

link for Ohio ban?

Jack Meoff wrote:

link for Ohio ban?

Don't hold your breath

It will not become illegal Track Spikes have had carbon fiber plates for a long time (going back to Michael Johnson's Gold Spikes) The Vaporfly 4% is simply a track spike for the road carbon fiber shank and all.

Hopefully never. They shouldn't ban a shoe just because of high-end technology.

angryjohnny wrote:

Bdubs wrote:

After reading the Colorado study, and observing the anecdotal evidence on the message board, how long until a governing body makes these shoes illegal?

Shortly after I send rupp home devastated on Monday while sporting my new vaporflies. #stoprupp

As we speak Salazar is calling for an investigation into AJ’s size 13 vaporflies that sent rupp home devastated today. #stoppedrupp