On a flat, windless course with even pacing Emily has a solid shot at 2:20 and in 4% she goes under. The U.S. just reloaded their female superstar spot. Maybe Jordan can bounce back but I would never count on her to stay healthy for long.
On a flat, windless course with even pacing Emily has a solid shot at 2:20 and in 4% she goes under. The U.S. just reloaded their female superstar spot. Maybe Jordan can bounce back but I would never count on her to stay healthy for long.
New Balance needs to come out with their own version of the 4% or next%. Sisson has potential to be the best American marathoner of all time and will need a shoe that will allow her to take her racing to the next level.
Scottykrutz wrote:
rojo wrote:
Not sure what the Hanzo S is but I too am wondering what shoe she wore. Can we assume if she didn't have Nike's on that her time is better than Hasay's?
She was wearing the New Balance 1500 v4, no where near on the same level as the 4%/Next%. No plate, no special foam. Just a basic marathon flat with some posting for pronation.
https://www.runningwarehouse.com/Reviews/New-Balance-Shoe-Reviews/New-Balance-1500-v4.html
Very impressive. She ran a 2:23:09 debut marathon in trainers. She’s a beast.
Scottykrutz wrote:
She was wearing the New Balance 1500 v4, no where near on the same level as the 4%/Next%. No plate, no special foam. Just a basic marathon flat with some posting for pronation.
I don't get it. It's clear to anyone with a brain that the Nike shoes are worth A LOT of time.
I thought it was due to carbon plate but apparently it might be the foam. Check this discussion out from Ross Tucker.
https://twitter.com/Scienceofsport/status/1122459549729001472https://twitter.com/williamg1/status/1122521021162983424When that NYTimes study was done the zoom fly didn't have the same plate as the vaporfly, in the original zoom fly it was a less stiff nylon plate.
It's not just the plate and it's not just the foam. It's having a shoe that's as light as anything, as stiff as anything, and still (thanks to the foam) as forgiving as anything...working altogether in one shoe. No other shoe has that complete combo saving you from muscle damage and muscle strain while maxing snapiness.
Tell me one elite that has raced in the Zoom Fly.
That's right, NOBODY.
That article is a joke.
Unpopular opinion, but shoes don't matter that much.
You could put Kipchoge in an Adios, or even barefoot with some training and he would still win it. Olympic marathons have been won before barefoot.
Most recreational runners and sub-elites are faster with the 4%, either due to more/better training or due to Placebo effect and them pushing more (the same way most meds work). Kipchoge is running each marathon at the absolute limit, so the effect of shoes would be negligible.
Saying Sisson would have run 2:21, or even 2:22 with 4% shoes only benefits Nike, as more people think the shoes would actually make them faster. She will run those times in future marathons simply due to natural marathon progression, no matter what shoes she will wear.
YMMV wrote:
On a flat, windless course with even pacing Emily has a solid shot at 2:20 and in 4% she goes under. The U.S. just reloaded their female superstar spot. Maybe Jordan can bounce back but I would never count on her to stay healthy for long.
You know nothing. Please, go to bed.
rojo wrote:
George213 wrote:
On a side note, was she wearing the Hanzo S?
Not sure what the Hanzo S is but I too am wondering what shoe she wore. Can we assume if she didn't have Nike's on that her time is better than Hasay's?
So you think 4% are cheater shoes? I do.
George213 wrote:
On a side note, was she wearing the Hanzo S?
Isn't Hanzo the mythical sword maker in Kill Bill?
American assassin wearing Hanzo's? I like it.
rojo wrote:
Can we assume if she didn't have Nike's on that her time is better than Hasay's?
Her time is not better than Hasay's time, because Hasay's time is faster.
Sisson more impressive wrote:
I agree Sisson's run should be the real debut record as it was run on the London course which holds way more weight than Boston and is certified.
I agree with this too.
rojo wrote:
It's clear to anyone with a brain that the Nike shoes are worth A LOT of time.
You back up your false claim with links to a charlatan who makes his living from nonsensical drivel.
Yeah...so Ryan Hall hasn't really run 204 since it was at Boston. Bunch of clowns on here today.
Sorry but Boston does not count for any type of records per IAAF.
Rojo, stop listening to Tucker.
Should carbon plate spikes+Mondo tracks be banned too?
This isn't a major step up for any company to add a carbon fibre plate to a shoe, they have been doing it with track spikes for decades.
You and Wejo probably used carbon spikes back in the day.
LateRunnerPhil wrote:
Marathons are cruel. One bad day and half of the year is f*cked.
Unless you are Kawauchi ....
A thread about a great run and all you nerds can talk about it shoes. Lame.
I don't know about the shoes, but I think she would pick up time if she cut her hair.
That's a lot of weight. Not very aero.
I think he was throwing shade at NOP and Bowerman here...