Amazing: The Vaporfly Controversy Has Come To Cross Country - Vaporfly Wearing Teams Stun Fields at Northeast Regional

vapor+ wrote:

So they were running marathons then? Vaporfly shouldn't hold the advantage in a 5-10k race.

Also with zero traction they should have been scared of wiping out on the wet asphalt - any bad falls?

Actually, the vaporflys may have cost Syrause a spot at NCAAs. In the women's race, Syracuse's Rachel Bonner was in 21st place at 4k. She was wearing the Vaporflys. Around 5k, she slipped on a piece of ice and was badly injured. DNFd and apparently may be in the hospital. They would have definitely qualified had that not happened with points even if they weren't top 2.

It's my understanding tha BC wasn't wearing the vaporflys. Here is the vaporfly status as I understand from 2-5.

Cornell - Vaporfly

BC - No vaporfly.

Columbia - No Vaporfly.

Syracuse - Vaporfly I believe.

That being said, even if Cornell was third, Cornell would have gotten in even. In fact, the entire NCAA field would be the same - just not in the same order. So while the vaporflys changed the order of finish at regionals, they may have not altered the outcome of the NCAA women's field.

Beautiful scenery!

rojo wrote:

PS. I had like a 10-second video showing the Cornell women in the shoes at the start but flotrack filed a copyright claim against it. What a joke. It's called fair use. Are they going to prevent parents from uploading family videos of races soon?

You are a business, dumb bell.

John Clendon wrote:

Leave it to Robert Johnson to s**t talk the school he coached at.

Vaporfly shoes did it for Cornell, right? It wasn't the athletes, the coaches, or the other staff behind them. Good eyes, rojo.

Little surprise that he's no longer coaching there or anywhere else.

omg can we shut up about the vaporfly already? let them be. unless if somebody smashes bekele's 10000m WR with them, let the people wear whatever they want.

rojo wrote:

PS. I had like a 10-second video showing the Cornell women in the shoes at the start but flotrack filed a copyright claim against it. What a joke. It's called fair use. Are they going to prevent parents from uploading family videos of races soon?

File a response. You can get fees. Put an end to baseless takedown notices

The real game changer was watching Syracuses' main runner Bonner pull up lame. Huge loss of points and couldn't help her team as everyone ran by her in agony. That's two of their top 3 that didn't even make it to the finish line at Regional for them. And yes they had Vaporfly on

On the bright side of things, for many of the men they won't have to wonder how their fitness translates from a XC course to a road course. Like when you run 25 min for a 5 miler and you are adamant that you can hold sub 5 pace for 5 miles. By moving it to a road 10k everyone is acutely aware of how fast they would have run.

And If it was your video, it’s doesnt even matter whether fair use or not. Its just not copyright infringement

Low IQ Tool wrote:

rojo wrote:

PS. I had like a 10-second video showing the Cornell women in the shoes at the start but flotrack filed a copyright claim against it. What a joke. It's called fair use. Are they going to prevent parents from uploading family videos of races soon?

You are a business, dumb bell.

Businesses can still have fair use claims, dumb bell

KAV wrote:

So Rojo, do some digging and find out if this was a charade from the beginning. Here in Europe they dont cancel races if you got ice - normally people use spikes and you run on ice. The whole thing beggars belief. Either you brothers at the other side of the pond are really soft and have no idea what a XC is, or somebody took everyone for a ride....

They changed course because the ice was broken up and choppy in such a way that it resembled a field of grapefruit sized rocks, not just basic ice. Based on the pictures I saw, it was totally justified. I've run XC in snow/ice before, but this was another level of dangerous. Maybe running solo or in a small group terrain like that would work, but in a pack of 200 where you can't see the ground there is no way.

I would hesitate to race in VFs in a race under 21K on wet pavement, much less on icy pavement.

The problem with our sport is not the steroids or the shoes. It’s the constant complaining and assumptions about why somebody is better or faster.

Maybe this wrote:

And If it was your video, it’s doesnt even matter whether fair use or not. Its just not copyright infringement

This. They should host the video on their own or another site. Then no one can take it down or force you to take it down.

College XC has a much higher variance than an elite field at a WMM.

No way the vaporflys did anything more than standard day-to-day variance of 21 year old athletes.

What's the shortest distance I could race in Vaporflys on the track? The Japanese lads all race 5,000m in them.

Rojo, how would you compare this to the 1934 New York Giants - Chicago Bears Championship game? The field was all ice. The Giants coaches ran out to get their players gym shoes at half time and won the game.

I think that enough teams were wearing the vaporfly to make this observational “study” null. The Cornell women had a great race. But it obviously wasn’t because of the vaporfly because they beat several teams that also had the vaporfly. There are waaaaaay too many factors to draw a causal relationship.

If you still were coach rojo for this race, would you have invested your own letsrun/trust fund money to outfit your team in Vaporfly shoes? Asking for a friend.