Roho never gave "all the credit to the spikes".
He does say he thinks the spikes are helping to produce all these fast times and I don't see how anyone could possibly deny that based on the data
Roho never gave "all the credit to the spikes".
He does say he thinks the spikes are helping to produce all these fast times and I don't see how anyone could possibly deny that based on the data
It's become painfully clear that the phenomenal talent in today's top runners is being developed mostly in spite of this site and its founders, not because of their contribution to the sport.
rojo wrote:
"How many seconds do you think the super spikes are worth over 5000 meters?"
You can watch how he resonded to it below:
For the record, I didn't and do not credit everything to the spikes.
That's such nonsense. You give all the credit to the shoes. Why don't you link some of the articles you've written that discuss the effects of having a COVID year, or the fantastic rabbitting that all these races have had, or the data around all the fast times from people not wearing supershoes?
In your own words, you think the superspikes are worth "several" seconds per mile. So you think if Grijalva would've run 13:03 ish if he had just changed his shoes? Or Shelby Houlihan would've run 14:13 ish, and be knocking on the door of the world record? Do you really believe that?
There's a whole lot more going on right now than just shoes, which again, help slightly.
The Insider wrote:
rojo wrote:
"How many seconds do you think the super spikes are worth over 5000 meters?"
You can watch how he resonded to it below:
For the record, I didn't and do not credit everything to the spikes.
That's such nonsense. You give all the credit to the shoes. Why don't you link some of the articles you've written that discuss the effects of having a COVID year, or the fantastic rabbitting that all these races have had, or the data around all the fast times from people not wearing supershoes?
In your own words, you think the superspikes are worth "several" seconds per mile. So you think if Grijalva would've run 13:03 ish if he had just changed his shoes? Or Shelby Houlihan would've run 14:13 ish, and be knocking on the door of the world record? Do you really believe that?
There's a whole lot more going on right now than just shoes, which again, help slightly.
Didn't Shelby herself say that she thought she was in close to world record shape?
The Unkle wrote:
Roho never gave "all the credit to the spikes".
He does say he thinks the spikes are helping to produce all these fast times and I don't see how anyone could possibly deny that based on the data
You're exposing yourself. Be careful.
He doesn't give all the credit, he just posts about it constantly. IOW...he's full of chit.
Ask Cooper if Helio Castroneves could’ve won this years Indy 500 in a 1961 Indy car..?! Not happening.
Ask Cooper if he could’ve won last night in Jim Ryun’s 1965/66/67/68 spikes ..?! Not happening.
These guys are delusional about the role of the shoes/tracks/pace lights and their performances.
You really expect them to say it was all tech and not themselves? RoJoke is a disgrace to sport.
Why do you think they act as springs?
Makes Paper wrote:
Why do you think they act as springs?
They significantly reduce leg fatigue and the amount of oxygenated blood required to maintain a certain effort. The less fatigue your legs experience, the less oxygen required. This delays overall fatigue and allows a runner to maintain a pace for a longer period of time. It does the exact same thing as epo only in a different way.
This is all so simple. If you want to be taken seriously, stop wearing any type of super shoe. I’m sure nike still sells regular spikes. I ran my fastest 10k in a pair of $30 spikes I found on clearance. If Teare doesn’t think the have any affect on times than he should have no problem picking up a pair of regular spikes and providing everyone wrong. But you know what? He won’t - it’s as simple as that because he knows they work.
I know they work because I’ve instantly seen significantly improve from one race to the next by switching to dragonfly’s. This is going from indoor times (where they were in regular spikes) to an early spring outdoor 10k where they switched to dragonfly’s. They significantly improved from their indoor times. All of them. It was really eye opening and I couldn’t figure out why for sometime. I kept wondering what had changed. It never occurred to me that it could be the shoes.
The Unkle wrote:
Let it Rupp wrote:
People probably find them more comfortable and they help keep runners on their toes better during their races? You know, what all spikes are designed to do. What the spike hoaxers are trying desperately to say is that the spikes act as springs and make you bounce. That's insane.
So you agree the spikes are a factor? You seem to be saying that, but then denying it at the same time.
I think they do act as springs? No?
Of course they are a factor. They are one factor in a sea of factors that go into how someone performs in a race. The "super spikes" will definitely help you run faster than Crocs or tissue boxes, but are they significantly better than the rest of the spikes on the market? I would say not. I think Dragonflies would give you less than a second advantage over 5k vs. all the other spikes, even Vic 3's. I think what makes them slightly better than past spikes is their stiffness and comfortability compared to past distance spikes, not some mechanical advantage like the Spike hoaxers claim. This is what spikes are designed to do, and are no different than the advantage the Vic 2's gave over past spikes.
Not as much as a factor as the high jump mats are in the High Jump and I bet RoJo doesn't ask the winner of the high jump that. Hey how much not landing in a sand pit helps you jump higher.
The best answer would have been
I don't know. RoJo how much do you think growing up rich with connections help you get credentials as a journalist when you obviously aren't one.?
fxhjb2 wrote:
Makes Paper wrote:
Why do you think they act as springs?
They significantly reduce leg fatigue and the amount of oxygenated blood required to maintain a certain effort. The less fatigue your legs experience, the less oxygen required. This delays overall fatigue and allows a runner to maintain a pace for a longer period of time. It does the exact same thing as epo only in a different way.
This is all so simple. If you want to be taken seriously, stop wearing any type of super shoe. I’m sure nike still sells regular spikes. I ran my fastest 10k in a pair of $30 spikes I found on clearance. If Teare doesn’t think the have any affect on times than he should have no problem picking up a pair of regular spikes and providing everyone wrong. But you know what? He won’t - it’s as simple as that because he knows they work.
I know they work because I’ve instantly seen significantly improve from one race to the next by switching to dragonfly’s. This is going from indoor times (where they were in regular spikes) to an early spring outdoor 10k where they switched to dragonfly’s. They significantly improved from their indoor times. All of them. It was really eye opening and I couldn’t figure out why for sometime. I kept wondering what had changed. It never occurred to me that it could be the shoes.
-There's no 10k indoors.
-If you want to be taken seriously in regards to running, then win. Be good enough to get paid to run. Considering your PR is while buying your own shoes, I'm guessing you aren't sponsored by a major shoe company. People don't take you more seriously than a pro runner simply because you wear old models of spikes.
-People aren't saying they don't make any difference compared to some other random shoe.
-As a competitor, you compete to win. It's not about being most physiologically fit; it's about winning. Period. As long as its within the rules, you do everything you can to win. You train, you get the best recovery tools/therapists, you optimize sleep, you optimize your diet, you supplement, you take both race day and daily ergogenic aids, you fine-tune your form, you minimize your stress, you wear the lightest clothes, you wear the best shoes, you wear nasal strips and mouthpieces if you think they help you, you do weird warm up stuff like RPR, you develop a championship mindset, and then you go out and optimize the best race tactics- taking into account the conditions and competition. So yes, you should wear the best shoes, and believe that your shoes are equally as good as anybody else's. They don't decide the race; athletes do. If an athlete wears combat boots and loses by a tenth of a second, it's not the shoe's fault. It's the athlete who decided to wear dumb shoes. The athlete decides, not the shoes, not the caffeine, not the massage therapist, not the coach, not the iron supplements (or lack of), etc.
Why the heck are runners on this site so uncompetitive. No true competitor wastes their time complaining and advocating that we should compete in sub-par technology. If you're competitive, you'll make sure you're giving yourself the best chance to win. If you feel you're in sub-par shoes.. that's at least partly your fault. Even college athletes made the decision to go to a school knowing who they are sponsored by (sometimes schools change sponsors; but even then, we've obviously seen athletes wear a different sponsors shoes.)
The media can ask and speculate about the shoes if they want, but at some point, it gets old. As I said before, the real story should be why has this taken this long? Why did we only see very marginal improvement in shoes from basically the 80s to 2015 ish? Dive in to new shoe technology. Report on a new shoe design that isn't even out yet. Explore in depth the design and materials in shoes, along with the manufacturing processes and then compare that to other industries. Is running shoe technology advanced or actually behind? Can't we come up with some new, interesting content around the shoes instead of speculating on how many seconds they are worth and asking athletes dumb questions they really don't care about answering?
Still Waiting wrote:
The best answer would have been
I don't know. RoJo how much do you think growing up rich with connections help you get credentials as a journalist when you obviously aren't one.?
Kinda funny, but you can't miss the irony that you're literally posting on HIS website- which validates this site as a type of media outlet for running.
tinisaur wrote:
Teare sounds ridiculous when he says he does not want to credit the spikes at all. However I sort of understand because he is running hard to win just like runners from years before. Teare probably does not break McChesney’s record without the spikes but surely he showed guts to get the victory and he deserved it.
Sure, and without modern shoes and modern tracks the WR would be over 13:15. So basically everyone is extremely slow.
c7runner7 wrote:
Still Waiting wrote:
The best answer would have been
I don't know. RoJo how much do you think growing up rich with connections help you get credentials as a journalist when you obviously aren't one.?
Kinda funny, but you can't miss the irony that you're literally posting on HIS website- which validates this site as a type of media outlet for running.
LOL! This site as a news site? You're kidding.
La sopa de Sabadell wrote:
tinisaur wrote:
Teare’s comment:”I don’t really like to credit anything to the spikes, necessarily.” This is an absurd comment and shows how he is pumping himself up with delusional thinking. Teare likely would have finished no higher than 15th running barefoot. However, the question is naturally going to annoy anyone because it is taken as if one is trying to discredit one’s achievements. So naturally he dismisses it as if the question has no merit. The question has merit but at the same time it appears irrelevant to a guy who just won a hard fought NCAA title and he naturally wants the credit to go to himself, his coaches, his teammates and not the shoes. And so it should.
Does a carpenter accredit his hammers? There are better hammers and worse hammers, but when someone looks at a table, they praise the carpenter and not the hammer.
Same goes here. It is ludicrous to ask a guy who worked really hard for this race if it's the shoes.
Other sports that are heavy in technology absolutely credit the tech. In biathlon and other shooting sports, the athletes 100% know and acknowledge that the technology is important and gives and takes away a competitive edge. It's insane that running is so touchy about this.
Al Sleet wrote:
c7runner7 wrote:
Kinda funny, but you can't miss the irony that you're literally posting on HIS website- which validates this site as a type of media outlet for running.
LOL! This site as a news site? You're kidding.
I can’t ever tell if people are sarcastically agreeing with me or completely disagreeing lol!
But I find every piece of running information the quickest on this site (sometimes not everything is true but race results are almost always accurate). So yes, it’s news…despite a bafflingly amount of nonsense threads and comments hahaha.
Still Waiting wrote:
The best answer would have been
I don't know. RoJo how much do you think growing up rich with connections help you get credentials as a journalist when you obviously aren't one.?
Amazing that two of the most overrated keyboard users and "track guys" of all time were once roommates at Princeton.
It's a fair question. Maybe not the best time to ask it, but when else do we have the opportunity to ask questions and get answers from top runners on these topics? I'm guessing they just hang up if letsrun requests an interview.
Of course the spikes help. And of course we will continue to see faster and faster times. To deny that at this point is silly. Something is going on and if it isn't the spikes then what is it? Like maybe when MLB used to say the balls were wrapped tighter but then it became clear that in reality all of the HRs were due to widespread steroid use. There has to be some big change to produce all of these fast times. And it isn't that people just all of a sudden decided to train better or race harder. People have always pushed the envelope.