The shoes' impact on the marathon/half is pretty undeniable and huge.
It's very deniable. Where's the rush of sub 2:03s?
The record run which ended 3 years ago was because Kipchoge and Bekele peaked and had a rivalry. Everyone faster than Kimetto was either one of them, or someone they towed to a 2:02. Now Kipchoge and Bekele are past their peak and there's noone as good.
I guess it makes no sense to people that two of the proven track GOAT's would break a few marathon records. Must be the footwear.
I have original Vaporfly, but Flyknit Streak and Streak LT are far superior shoes for 10k or less, because of less weight.
I also own Dragonfly and they are much better than Victory 2. They provide cushion and I can run with them like with shoes. With Victories You need to run on front of foot, which destroys my calves very soon in races
There has already been a decent amount of objective, lab-driven analysis of the shoes. At worst, they are a small marginal gain.
Which labs, funded by whom?
All the analyses that have confirmed some sort of "energy return" are moot. Bounciness is not what makes a fast runner fast.
I know the steeple has been less popular lately. So for a while were the 10,000 and half marathon, the two events with the biggest current records rush.
Put one of this new crop of American super-Rupps in the steeple and we'll have more than one sub 8er. American runners have improved dramatically
The 2018 Yokohama study was conducted by world-class researchers in a world-class environment. However, it WAS Nike funded, and this has become a sticking point for the non-scientific community who are largely ignorant of how this process works.
Indépendant labs have since addressed the studies and confirmed them.
And before you say 'But who!!' I will point you to the University of Austin's study, in which the results were also confirmed, with Alfafly leading the way, followed by Vaporfly.
Lab studies will never be perfect. There will always be points of contention, issues with sample size, funding, etc. But maybe studies don't matter; you strike me as someone who will simply continue to move the goalposts as more and more data comes to light. You also never mentioned if you even tried the shoes, so I'm guessing you're intentionally ignoring anything that could change your mind on this. To each their own, I suppose.
The shoes' impact on the marathon/half is pretty undeniable and huge.
It's very deniable. Where's the rush of sub 2:03s?
The record run which ended 3 years ago was because Kipchoge and Bekele peaked and had a rivalry. Everyone faster than Kimetto was either one of them, or someone they towed to a 2:02. Now Kipchoge and Bekele are past their peak and there's noone as good.
I guess it makes no sense to people that two of the proven track GOAT's would break a few marathon records. Must be the footwear.
How to explain the huge increase in sub-2:06 and 2:05 runners? And the half marathon list getting destroyed? There've also been numerous studies. If you're denying the shoes' impact at this point clearly you're hanging on desperately to an agenda.
The road shoes are a huge difference, probably between 3-4 seconds a mile. People are overreacting to the track shoes right now by saying they also give 3-4 seconds. Was Johnny Gregorek a 3:45 indoor miler with spikes? Yomif Kejelcha would be knocking on the door of 3:42? Jakob is actually 2 seconds slower now than he was at 17? Makes no sense.
You forget that the modern track is a cheater track in itself. The modern track shoe is aided by the modern cheater track.
Roads have not evolved the way tracks have. So wrong to say track shoes are not as (or more) superior to road shoes. Put the modern cheater shoe wearer on a grasstex track (if you can find one) and see how Johnny Gregorek does on that.
Have Rupp and Martin Hehir run a marathon in a traditional shoe circa 2008 and watch them collapse at 20 miles.
There is a reason Saladbar never had Rupp run a marathon until the cheater shoe was perfected.
I don't think Ryun would be a 3:37 miler with today's technology, but I think most of today's top milers would be herding cattle or washing dishes if they had to run with 1960's technology.
I don't think Ryun would be a 3:37 miler with today's technology, but I think most of today's top milers would be herding cattle or washing dishes if they had to run with 1960's technology.
Lydiard said Ryun was 3:47 capable if coached by him.
I still tend to air on the side of "the shoes help exponentially in training" and therefore athletes spend more time in spikes, recover faster, get quality work in, and turn around feeling fresher. Do we think the more access you have to them the better off you are? Undoubtedly if you take X athlete and train them then give them Y super shoe on race day it will help them. they literally make you faster but I also think they leave you feeling fresher and less beat up towards the end of longer or faster races, therefore they help prevent blowups as much as they enhance speed.
Until there is research that firmly, quantifiably, proves that supershoes are preventing injury in both the short and long-term, this remains nothing but a quip repeated again and again by today's athletes.
What we DO know is that each supershoe make you X% faster, and all results since their inception have shown almost exactly that % improvement. That's not suspicious–it just makes sense.
Research to support your claim has yet to be done. Until then, the shoes are just fast, and runners are learning how to run faster in them.
So is the next % better for track 5k/10ks vs the dragonfly, not including talk about the curves
Yes. That's why they've been banned in competition already, and the stack-height limit implemented.
That being said, the track is squishy, and you're running on a squishy shoe. Some don't like that, and think it's sloppy around the corners. But it worked for guys like Clayton Young, who wore the 4% when he won the NCAA 10k Nattys. A lot of guys were wearing them that day, though.
All the analyses that have confirmed some sort of "energy return" are moot. Bounciness is not what makes a fast runner fast.
I know the steeple has been less popular lately. So for a while were the 10,000 and half marathon, the two events with the biggest current records rush.
Put one of this new crop of American super-Rupps in the steeple and we'll have more than one sub 8er. American runners have improved dramatically
The 2018 Yokohama study was conducted by world-class researchers in a world-class environment. However, it WAS Nike funded, and this has become a sticking point for the non-scientific community who are largely ignorant of how this process works.
Indépendant labs have since addressed the studies and confirmed them.
And before you say 'But who!!' I will point you to the University of Austin's study, in which the results were also confirmed, with Alfafly leading the way, followed by Vaporfly.
Lab studies will never be perfect. There will always be points of contention, issues with sample size, funding, etc. But maybe studies don't matter; you strike me as someone who will simply continue to move the goalposts as more and more data comes to light. You also never mentioned if you even tried the shoes, so I'm guessing you're intentionally ignoring anything that could change your mind on this. To each their own, I suppose.
BYU also did their own study. Now while they're technically a Nike school, the biomechanics program that did the study is not related to the athletics department in any way.
It's very deniable. Where's the rush of sub 2:03s?
The record run which ended 3 years ago was because Kipchoge and Bekele peaked and had a rivalry. Everyone faster than Kimetto was either one of them, or someone they towed to a 2:02. Now Kipchoge and Bekele are past their peak and there's noone as good.
I guess it makes no sense to people that two of the proven track GOAT's would break a few marathon records. Must be the footwear.
How to explain the huge increase in sub-2:06 and 2:05 runners? And the half marathon list getting destroyed? There've also been numerous studies. If you're denying the shoes' impact at this point clearly you're hanging on desperately to an agenda.
Agenda?!? Lol
I guess you're on to me, I'm a regular-shoes company executive.
I can easily split those new goalposts. 2:05 is broken more easily because normal progression, i.e. 95th percentile is more populated than 99th. It would be weird to not see more than before. There's also more focus on fast courses, like Doha, Berlin. Half marathon is slaughtered because it got soft. Only reason it is news at all now is the records. I believe I mentioned this already.
The poster with the "you-don't-know-how-corporate-funded-science-isn't-really-corrupt" angle is trotting out the red herring I also previously pointed out. There is no utility in "energy return" to running form, it's not how running works, so there is no use trying to confirm it's there. You may as well use science to prove that a pogo stick bounces, it still won't make you run faster.
Downvotes only reveal that want-to-believe factor that drives the whole thing.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.