Ashamed to buy next%

Can be both, mate! A humblebragging troll isn't uncommon among us letsrunners :)

Anyway NOT a track shoe and I won't be even trying. Just thinking of running curves in it makes my calves hurt :)

How come you people rave about what great shoes they are, the whole 4% thing, but you never post races TIMES or race IMPROVEMENT. You only boast about efficiency, which is not measurable the way race TIMES are.

Now start posting your race times goddamnit.

At least we got ONE response on here that cut to the point ie. race time improvement.

Another thing, it seems you people only race the 'thon. And you are way to hung up on Strava.

We had strava in the old days...........it was called a stopwatch.

I own two pairs and run 3:05

Haters gonna hate. Like you I don't get any blisters with long runs with these shoes and my legs are not as sore.

If you can afford them then why not? I put 300 miles on my 4%...

Only long run shoes that just work for me. I am hoping the new skechers will work once they come out. Tried the cliftons, turbos, and nb propels to no avail. Either they bother my feet, give me cramps or blister up.

Get em though at 10-25% off with noo tax, no full retail

I dropped my half from 128 to 124 in 4 weeks racing in these

If you're taking over 2hrs to run a half I don't really think they're worth the bother or expense.

Hot Takes wrote:

2:45 is certainly respectable enough, I say go ahead and get them. Now if you were only running 5 hours, I'd say just train a little more to run faster rather than buying top end racing flats.

They're for racing, sure, but they're not flats

You're a female.

You are national class-> world class.

If it makes you self conscious to buy the shoes, give the $$$ to charity - something you care about.

But honestly, you could simply give yourself permission to buy the shoes and enjoy the boost. There's no shame in it, grant yourself permission, either way, to feel great and celebrate your choice.

Yabba dabbba do wrote:

I own two pairs and run 3:05

Haters gonna hate. Like you I don't get any blisters with long runs with these shoes and my legs are not as sore.

If you can afford them then why not? I put 300 miles on my 4%...

Only long run shoes that just work for me. I am hoping the new skechers will work once they come out. Tried the cliftons, turbos, and nb propels to no avail. Either they bother my feet, give me cramps or blister up.

Get em though at 10-25% off with noo tax, no full retail

For retail i bought Hoka Challenger atr 5s and NB Fuel Cell Rebel 260-

I did pickup a pair of Nike Zoom Fly SPs at the outlet for 50- while heavy they're not as heavy as the flyknit ZF or ZF3. The sizing with SPs is a size off.

I bring up these points because you can buy modern tech that competes well without buying VF. I think all three of these are great for training and workouts. For racing though the NB fuelcell rebel at just over 7oz, forefoot plate, special foam, durable ftw

Hobbyjogger High wrote:

Title says it all.

I earn enough to not think to buy 'em

But I' m just a hobbyjogging ~2:45 marathoner currently.

Can't stop thinking that I Can't really be buying expensive gear for a minor achievement when so many people are barely getting by. Who cares if a 40 YO guy gets under 2:40 again? I hate spending on charities at the same time.

So... Talk me into it ;)

How many repeats of Tim Minchin's notorious song does it take? ?

"Who cares"? The only relevant question is do YOU care?

Don't race for other people, race for yourself. To test your limits; to create and find your best possible self.

If you really don't care, and you think sub 2:40 is a "minor" achievement (I don't), then put your time and energy into something else. Forget about shoe choices.

fethi wrote:

How come you people rave about what great shoes they are, the whole 4% thing, but you never post races TIMES or race IMPROVEMENT. You only boast about efficiency, which is not measurable the way race TIMES are.

Now start posting your race times goddamnit.

This year I ran 5k and 10k in VFF and LT3

LT3- 5K 15:48, 10K 33:31

VFF- 5K 16:17, 10K 34:05

42yo hobbyist wrote:

fethi wrote:

How come you people rave about what great shoes they are, the whole 4% thing, but you never post races TIMES or race IMPROVEMENT. You only boast about efficiency, which is not measurable the way race TIMES are.

Now start posting your race times goddamnit.

This year I ran 5k and 10k in VFF and LT3

LT3- 5K 15:48, 10K 33:31

VFF- 5K 16:17, 10K 34:05

So you ran slower in both races with the Vaporfly's? Any external reason like weather or training or were you in similar fitness. I think they're a great shoe for 10k & up. Can see wanting less shoe for 10k & down.

Also OP, there's nothing wrong with getting the shoes. You're fast; don't downplay that. I feel like the 4%'s are being worn by tons of people in that BQ range.

Thanks. And as I said, I got em, I will post a half result next Sunday. Will do it @ GMP and see how it goes. Goal marathon is late in October, but I'm reasonably fit to run half that distance @pace

They're good shoes. After about 100 miles, the foam compresses enough that they lose their major advantage, so maybe save them for races at $2.50/mile unless you're flush (and don't mind looking like a jerk running long runs in them).

NERunner053 wrote:

42yo hobbyist wrote:

This year I ran 5k and 10k in VFF and LT3

LT3- 5K 15:48, 10K 33:31

VFF- 5K 16:17, 10K 34:05

So you ran slower in both races with the Vaporfly's? Any external reason like weather or training or were you in similar fitness. I think they're a great shoe for 10k & up. Can see wanting less shoe for 10k & down.

Also OP, there's nothing wrong with getting the shoes. You're fast; don't downplay that. I feel like the 4%'s are being worn by tons of people in that BQ range.

I'm getting the impression that Vaporfly is less effective for shorter distances. Not as effective as a racing flat. All I hear about the Vaporfly is related to the 'thon.

Is this an accurate statement. How many elites wore Vaporfly at Carlsbad 5k?

Pictured is the Nike Zoom LT3 mentioned above.

Hobbyjogger High wrote:

I know I know :) but feelings are confusing sometimes and at least I'm honest :P

No, if you were honest your first post would have been:

"I am a pretty good runner and plan to buy Vaporfly Next%s tomorrow. I am not ashamed at all and am looking forward to trying them out. Please affirm my decision and compliment me on my PRs below."

For christ's sake, he number of times people go on about how expensive vaporfly shoes are compared to all the other ways people spend an obscene amount of money on their recreational running that no one seems to blink an eye at including:

1) Paying a coach 100+ per month to coach to a BQ

2) Spending money on out of town races (such as Boston) which comes out to a significant expense once you consider registration, hotel/air B&B/going out to eat/PTO for taking off a random Monday, etc.

3) All the bloodwork when you suspect your iron levels are off, PT appointments that aren't covered by insurance, dry needling, trips to the sports chiro, etc. when injuries inevitably crop up

4) What works out to about a pair of trainers a month running high mileage

5) All the extra food expenses, including lots of fresh produce, grass fed meat, etc. when people are trying to eat extra "clean"

and so on, it begins to seem like a drop in the bucket

They are cheaper than $250 with running warehouse discount codes and shopping around

They absolutely work. I wore a pair to my gym work out and I improve my back squat PR by 4%. Quite amazing considering I had plateau for a while.