The amount of time depends on the speed of the athlete. 3% energy return is what I've seen published. So a 500 miler could get around 9s. A 400 miler 7ish.
A good way to look at it would be check the top 1000 1600 times in the Milesplit database in the last pre-super shoe era and the top 1000 times from 2025 for both genders.
The amount of time depends on the speed of the athlete. 3% energy return is what I've seen published. So a 500 miler could get around 9s. A 400 miler 7ish.
A good way to look at it would be check the top 1000 1600 times in the Milesplit database in the last pre-super shoe era and the top 1000 times from 2025 for both genders.
That's not how it works. 3% energy return doesn't equal running 3% faster.
And bicarb has also helped to lower times, it's not just better spikes.
Of course it is. I havebeen coaching for a long time. My guys are doing the same workouts as 20 years ago and 10 years ago and 5 years ago. Our top 10 lists in the 1600 and 3200 are essentially all from the past 4 years. The guys who hit particular times in a workout that used to correlate to 9:20 now correlates to 9:05, only because they wear different race shoes than the guys did 10 years ago.
Of course it is. I havebeen coaching for a long time. My guys are doing the same workouts as 20 years ago and 10 years ago and 5 years ago. Our top 10 lists in the 1600 and 3200 are essentially all from the past 4 years. The guys who hit particular times in a workout that used to correlate to 9:20 now correlates to 9:05, only because they wear different race shoes than the guys did 10 years ago.
No, it’s not as if a 3:55 miler will improve to 3:50, but a 3:50 runner will not improve to 3:45. Whatever the effects of the shoes are, it’s across the board.
It’s the same for your workout warriors that you think have improved from 9:20 to 9:05 based on workouts. If the new shoes are worth 15 seconds, then Verzbicas could have run 8:15 with them, or do you believe the new shoes help 9:20 guys but not 8:30 ones.
I don’t understand how a coach of many years can believe the shoes result in massive improvement in PRs.
Just look at the stats from 2022-2026, to 2012-2016, to 2002-2006, to 1992-1996.
The last 4 years have been remarkable in comparison to other decades all together. You couldnt even combine all of the previous decades into a single list that equals todays lists.
Remarkably so, 2022-2026, thats when carbon plated shoes came along.
You aren't very bright. In addition to superspikes, other factors improving performance include:
1. Much better training shoes that are very cushioned which don't beat up your legs as much.
2. Bicarb.
3. College athletes being allowed to run an extra year because of covid.
4. Improved training methods.
5. Runners taking indoor track more seriously now than they did years ago.
But you're a simpleton who decided to attribute all the decrease in times to just one thing, superspikes.
Give Hocker or Nuguse a pair of waffle spikes, lets see what he runs in a mile. I bet you he doesnt crack under 3:50. Maybe Jakob does but barely.
Just out of interest, if we gave Cole Hocker, Jared Nuguse or an (obviously healthy) Jakob a pair of Nike Jasaris or Ventulus's - the best distance running spikes of the late 90's and early 2000's, would they also be struggling to break 3.50?
Nike Jasaris definitely weren't "super spikes" - couldn't possibly be, they were created almost 30 years ago now. Daniel Komen ran 7.20 in a pair without wavelight. El Guerrouj ran under 3.27.0 5 times and 3 times under 3.45 in his ventulus spikes - just in case you weren't aware of that.
Of course it is. I havebeen coaching for a long time. My guys are doing the same workouts as 20 years ago and 10 years ago and 5 years ago. Our top 10 lists in the 1600 and 3200 are essentially all from the past 4 years. The guys who hit particular times in a workout that used to correlate to 9:20 now correlates to 9:05, only because they wear different race shoes than the guys did 10 years ago.
Give Hocker or Nuguse a pair of waffle spikes, lets see what he runs in a mile. I bet you he doesnt crack under 3:50. Maybe Jakob does but barely.
Just out of interest, if we gave Cole Hocker, Jared Nuguse or an (obviously healthy) Jakob a pair of Nike Jasaris or Ventulus's - the best distance running spikes of the late 90's and early 2000's, would they also be struggling to break 3.50?
Nike Jasaris definitely weren't "super spikes" - couldn't possibly be, they were created almost 30 years ago now. Daniel Komen ran 7.20 in a pair without wavelight. El Guerrouj ran under 3.27.0 5 times and 3 times under 3.45 in his ventulus spikes - just in case you weren't aware of that.
Im well aware of that. Whats your point? El Guerrouj runs 3:22 in them at a minimum. Dont believe me? Why dont you ask him yourself. Daniel Komen? Sheesh 7:20, cant imagine what he run now
Just look at the stats from 2022-2026, to 2012-2016, to 2002-2006, to 1992-1996.
The last 4 years have been remarkable in comparison to other decades all together. You couldnt even combine all of the previous decades into a single list that equals todays lists.
Remarkably so, 2022-2026, thats when carbon plated shoes came along.
You aren't very bright. In addition to superspikes, other factors improving performance include:
1. Much better training shoes that are very cushioned which don't beat up your legs as much.
2. Bicarb.
3. College athletes being allowed to run an extra year because of covid.
4. Improved training methods.
5. Runners taking indoor track more seriously now than they did years ago.
But you're a simpleton who decided to attribute all the decrease in times to just one thing, superspikes.
Your analyical abilities are actually quite poor.
Its funny because I also think you're a simpleton who isnt very bright. You seem to have 0 intuition on the subject matter. How do you know that I haven't already analyzed those factors? They are minuscule in comparison, but lets go down your little list.
1) The training shoes have the same material as the spikes, which drastically improves performance during my training. Whether youre running, or racing, the super shoes and spikes affect your performances whether on a training run or race. You’re not running faster aerobically though, its the shoes doing the talking for you. And dont get me started on “recovery” and how “it beats your legs less up”, because I cant think of any shoes Ive worn before 2022 that would beat my legs up so much that it would incapacitate me from training. You would have to be wearing the wrong size shoes or SOMETHING for this to happen. Unless you had defective shoes, this is just a moot point. They feel nice, theyre definitely bouncy, but to say that the cushioning helps in “not beating your legs as much” is the sole reason for a nearly 5 second increase per mile across ALL events, from sprints to long distance, is just absurd. What do you even mean by that? Are you talking about blisters, injuries? What? Because injuries still occur today even with these nice shoes, I hope you know that. And this increase in times, its not just the mile… its all across the BOARD. From the 60m… to the 400m… to the marathon, so how do you explain that? Last I heard, sprinters dont even run ONE mile, so how can their performances magically increase when they barely run distances at all?
2. I would love for you to explain to me how Bicarb, aka baking soda, has had such a profound impact on performances. Please explain the science behind it, and how it attributes to the 5 second increase per mile in performances across the board. Please, explain, how a product thats been arouns for decades, centuries, literally found in pancakes, all of a sudden attributes to making everyone a super human 5 seconds per mile faster. I wouldnt even give it 1 second, you know why? Because people have been ingesting it already for DECADES. Some even say its placebo, and thats because they already have been getting their doses from other means. Sure, have some people who have never ingested baking soda seen a benefit? Of course. But to say this is a primary reason (#2 on your list) for all performances ACROSS THE BOARD. Man you would have to really pull the stats on this one… how many athletes are even taking bicarb anyway? Youre acting like its some sophisticated magical product, its baking soda in a pill form…by the way, how can you even measure this “analysis” of yours? Did you draw blood from every athlete abd measure their bicarb intake? Did you see EVERY athlete over the past 4 years ingest this magical pill? Ill tell you this mych, i can measure whos wearing super spikes…. EASILY. Just look at what theyre wearing.
3. This is just simply not true anymore. Its been over 5 years since covid. Most if not all of those athletes are out of the system by now. Even if they were still in, it doesnt account for the 5 second increase per mile across the board from the 60M to the MARATHON.
4.I love how analytical you are. Care to explain what new hip training methods are around now that werent 50 years ago?
5.This sounds more like an opinion than a fact. How can you even prove that this is true, and factors into the 5 seconds per mile? Get out of here man. You are DONE. You are biased, and have no facts, only emotions.
Why dont we have next years BU meet strictly non super spikes only? Why cant we do that? Oh nobody would want to do that though, OBVIOUSLY. Cant think of any other time in athletics history where this would be the case. I could rock el g’a spikes from the 90s, or vics from 2010s, and they would be minuscule in performance difference compared to what everyone has on today.
i can go on and on. But youre a simpleton, maybe this is too complex for you to understand as it is.
Just out of interest, if we gave Cole Hocker, Jared Nuguse or an (obviously healthy) Jakob a pair of Nike Jasaris or Ventulus's - the best distance running spikes of the late 90's and early 2000's, would they also be struggling to break 3.50?
Nike Jasaris definitely weren't "super spikes" - couldn't possibly be, they were created almost 30 years ago now. Daniel Komen ran 7.20 in a pair without wavelight. El Guerrouj ran under 3.27.0 5 times and 3 times under 3.45 in his ventulus spikes - just in case you weren't aware of that.
Im well aware of that. Whats your point? El Guerrouj runs 3:22 in them at a minimum. Dont believe me? Why dont you ask him yourself. Daniel Komen? Sheesh 7:20, cant imagine what he run now
Fantasy. How the hell does El G run 3:22 and almost 5 seconds faster than anyone else today? More than that with Hocker. What rubbish.
You aren't very bright. In addition to superspikes, other factors improving performance include:
1. Much better training shoes that are very cushioned which don't beat up your legs as much.
2. Bicarb.
3. College athletes being allowed to run an extra year because of covid.
4. Improved training methods.
5. Runners taking indoor track more seriously now than they did years ago.
But you're a simpleton who decided to attribute all the decrease in times to just one thing, superspikes.
Your analyical abilities are actually quite poor.
Its funny because I also think you're a simpleton who isnt very bright. You seem to have 0 intuition on the subject matter. How do you know that I haven't already analyzed those factors? They are minuscule in comparison, but lets go down your little list.
1) The training shoes have the same material as the spikes, which drastically improves performance during my training. Whether youre running, or racing, the super shoes and spikes affect your performances whether on a training run or race. You’re not running faster aerobically though, its the shoes doing the talking for you. And dont get me started on “recovery” and how “it beats your legs less up”, because I cant think of any shoes Ive worn before 2022 that would beat my legs up so much that it would incapacitate me from training. You would have to be wearing the wrong size shoes or SOMETHING for this to happen. Unless you had defective shoes, this is just a moot point. They feel nice, theyre definitely bouncy, but to say that the cushioning helps in “not beating your legs as much” is the sole reason for a nearly 5 second increase per mile across ALL events, from sprints to long distance, is just absurd. What do you even mean by that? Are you talking about blisters, injuries? What? Because injuries still occur today even with these nice shoes, I hope you know that. And this increase in times, its not just the mile… its all across the BOARD. From the 60m… to the 400m… to the marathon, so how do you explain that? Last I heard, sprinters dont even run ONE mile, so how can their performances magically increase when they barely run distances at all?
2. I would love for you to explain to me how Bicarb, aka baking soda, has had such a profound impact on performances. Please explain the science behind it, and how it attributes to the 5 second increase per mile in performances across the board. Please, explain, how a product thats been arouns for decades, centuries, literally found in pancakes, all of a sudden attributes to making everyone a super human 5 seconds per mile faster. I wouldnt even give it 1 second, you know why? Because people have been ingesting it already for DECADES. Some even say its placebo, and thats because they already have been getting their doses from other means. Sure, have some people who have never ingested baking soda seen a benefit? Of course. But to say this is a primary reason (#2 on your list) for all performances ACROSS THE BOARD. Man you would have to really pull the stats on this one… how many athletes are even taking bicarb anyway? Youre acting like its some sophisticated magical product, its baking soda in a pill form…by the way, how can you even measure this “analysis” of yours? Did you draw blood from every athlete abd measure their bicarb intake? Did you see EVERY athlete over the past 4 years ingest this magical pill? Ill tell you this mych, i can measure whos wearing super spikes…. EASILY. Just look at what theyre wearing.
3. This is just simply not true anymore. Its been over 5 years since covid. Most if not all of those athletes are out of the system by now. Even if they were still in, it doesnt account for the 5 second increase per mile across the board from the 60M to the MARATHON.
4.I love how analytical you are. Care to explain what new hip training methods are around now that werent 50 years ago?
5.This sounds more like an opinion than a fact. How can you even prove that this is true, and factors into the 5 seconds per mile? Get out of here man. You are DONE. You are biased, and have no facts, only emotions.
Why dont we have next years BU meet strictly non super spikes only? Why cant we do that? Oh nobody would want to do that though, OBVIOUSLY. Cant think of any other time in athletics history where this would be the case. I could rock el g’a spikes from the 90s, or vics from 2010s, and they would be minuscule in performance difference compared to what everyone has on today.
i can go on and on. But youre a simpleton, maybe this is too complex for you to understand as it is.
I recall Nick Willis saying something like 2-3 seconds for a 1200m workout, so it sounds like that is in the ballpark.
I never think of these numbers as hard and fast guarantees. 5 seconds for the high school miler will not be be 5 seconds for a peak Nick Willis, and 2-3 seconds for Nick Willis in a 1200m timed workout may not fully translate to a 3-4 second mile PR.
But maybe Nick Willis breaks into the 3:27s like Cole Hocker, in a perfectly paced race, and Farah breaks into the 3:26s like Ingebrigtsen.
I recall Nick Willis saying something like 2-3 seconds for a 1200m workout, so it sounds like that is in the ballpark.
I never think of these numbers as hard and fast guarantees. 5 seconds for the high school miler will not be be 5 seconds for a peak Nick Willis, and 2-3 seconds for Nick Willis in a 1200m timed workout may not fully translate to a 3-4 second mile PR.
But maybe Nick Willis breaks into the 3:27s like Cole Hocker, in a perfectly paced race, and Farah breaks into the 3:26s like Ingebrigtsen.
You're just letting off gas as usual. There is nothing to support any of what you have just said; it is total guesswork on your part.