More people know who "go one more syringe" is because of the marketing. Brands aren't marketing their athletes like that. It was good that he left Aiscs, it might even be better for his achilles but ask CJ Albertson how Brooks is with all of his 2:10 marathons.
Fun fact, Citius actually got paid more to make the announcement IG post than Clayton would get to finish top 10 at a World Marathon Major under his old contract.
Brutally poor racing shoes as has been flagged on these threads many's a time before. Des, CJ and co at a sever disadvantage against competitors racing in the brand. Wish the guy well. He's a good one and comes across as a lovely person [as do Des and CJ for that matter]. But a subpar brand on the supershoe front.
Brutally poor racing shoes as has been flagged on these threads many's a time before. Des, CJ and co at a sever disadvantage against competitors racing in the brand. Wish the guy well. He's a good one and comes across as a lovely person [as do Des and CJ for that matter]. But a subpar brand on the supershoe front.
I thought all Super shoe brands basically have the same characteristics? How does Brooks differ in that respect? Less carbon plate, less foam, for example? Would be good to know where Brooks falls short, in your opinion.
Super shoes, also known as carbon-plated shoes, are a type of lightweight running sneaker incorporating carbon fiber plates and thick foam soles. They are typically used in long-distance runs, including trail running and mara...
I thought all Super shoe brands basically have the same characteristics? How does Brooks differ in that respect? Less carbon plate, less foam, for example? Would be good to know where Brooks falls short, in your opinion.
Foams differ wildly, as do plate structure, format, and angle.
Brooks Hyperion elite 5 provided at least 4% less energy return than the top Puma or Saucony shoes in '25.
And the hyperion elite 4 were almost 10% worse than Adios Pro 4.
They also struggled in inclement conditions; 8% energy return drop in cold conditions (whereas Nike/Adidas/Suacony only dropped 3%).
I thought all Super shoe brands basically have the same characteristics? How does Brooks differ in that respect? Less carbon plate, less foam, for example? Would be good to know where Brooks falls short, in your opinion.
Foams differ wildly, as do plate structure, format, and angle.
Brooks Hyperion elite 5 provided at least 4% less energy return than the top Puma or Saucony shoes in '25.
And the hyperion elite 4 were almost 10% worse than Adios Pro 4.
They also struggled in inclement conditions; 8% energy return drop in cold conditions (whereas Nike/Adidas/Suacony only dropped 3%).
I should stress that foam is simply one piece of the puzzle (along with plate) and a side effect of return is softness, but it does track that the top performing running shoes also usually have the best energy return.
Brutally poor racing shoes as has been flagged on these threads many's a time before. Des, CJ and co at a sever disadvantage against competitors racing in the brand. Wish the guy well. He's a good one and comes across as a lovely person [as do Des and CJ for that matter]. But a subpar brand on the supershoe front.
I thought all Super shoe brands basically have the same characteristics? How does Brooks differ in that respect? Less carbon plate, less foam, for example? Would be good to know where Brooks falls short, in your opinion.
To follow-on from 22Twos post above: Hyperion Elite3 & predecessors were woefully poor. As said above, what CJ & co did in their shoes is very much underrated given the incredible disadvantage they were at in that footwear.
Good to hear Asics apparently finally upping their game with recent updates of Metaspeed Sky series. Have been stung too many times buying into the hype that they buy/pay for (online influencers, running 'journo' reviews, etc). Also interesting/not surprised to read/hear Clayton not-so-criptically implying the Asics shoes were responsible for his injury woes. R Hall had similar problems with them.
Have bought several of their "high performance" racing shoe offerings & very disappointed with quality every time. Metaspeed Sky Paris (brutal foam) & initial Metaspeed racing shoes (Robertson spoke candidly about how these disadvantaged him compared to rivals sponsored by more progressive brands) in particular.
Asics have a reputation as a brand of churning out blocky, chunky shoes en masse without consideration for purchaser, in thd knowledge their shoes will be bought by loyal consumers.
I thought all Super shoe brands basically have the same characteristics? How does Brooks differ in that respect? Less carbon plate, less foam, for example? Would be good to know where Brooks falls short, in your opinion.
To follow-on from 22Twos post above: Hyperion Elite3 & predecessors were woefully poor. As said above, what CJ & co did in their shoes is very much underrated given the incredible disadvantage they were at in that footwear.
Good to hear Asics apparently finally upping their game with recent updates of Metaspeed Sky series. Have been stung too many times buying into the hype that they buy/pay for (online influencers, running 'journo' reviews, etc). Also interesting/not surprised to read/hear Clayton not-so-criptically implying the Asics shoes were responsible for his injury woes. R Hall had similar problems with them.
Have bought several of their "high performance" racing shoe offerings & very disappointed with quality every time. Metaspeed Sky Paris (brutal foam) & initial Metaspeed racing shoes (Robertson spoke candidly about how these disadvantaged him compared to rivals sponsored by more progressive brands) in particular.
Asics have a reputation as a brand of churning out blocky, chunky shoes en masse without consideration for purchaser, in thd knowledge their shoes will be bought by loyal consumers.
Interesting debate and recently I just watched South African runner Wildschutt (sorry if I misspelled his name) smoke everyone in the New York City half marathon wearing Hoka shoes which some posters have claimed are seriously mediocre at the elite level.
With this in mind I'm starting to think that the hype regarding certain brands might be overemphasized and that so-called lesser brands are actually minimally disadvantageous rather than significantly disadvantageous.
