Rupp isn't the only one with injury issues since using the Cheaterfly. It's a big coincidence, I guess.
Rupp isn't the only one with injury issues since using the Cheaterfly. It's a big coincidence, I guess.
Cho chaang wrote:
In the ultimate irony, the vaporfly designs, with their ridiculous stack heights and mushy foam, caused the previous bulletproof Rupp to develop a career ruining Achilles injury.
I noted, watching both Kipchoge and Berkeley in these monstrosities, that it causes the heel to torque inward and the toes to point outward upon toe off.
A runner with beautiful form like Rupp who needs just a neutral shoe and was always healthy was crippled by these unstable gimmicks.
A tragedy for Rupp, and a joke on our sport.
I know this is just anecdotal but I tried them on in the store and ran back and forth a few times and there was no doubt in my mind that my achilles would be wrenched into full on tendonitis if I dared race in them. I have chronic achilles issues that I have to manage all the time and I'm so careful about overly cushioned shoes. They cause the most problems for it.
nattygoat wrote:
I have been saying the same thing since the 4% came out a few years ago. Of course there is increased chance of injury when you instantly alter your form. I rarely see it mentioned. In fact it's the opposite, many people claim they are better for injury prevention. But I have never heard Nike say this. Surely that would be a major selling point if true.
That would actually be illegal - you can’t make a claim that something reduces or prevents a medical condition without FDA approval as a medical device. Vibram got popped for this for their FiveFingers marketing a number of years ago. Don’t expect any shoe company to ever claim injury prevention/reduction, even if their shoe does it, because the bar to be able to make that claim in the marketing material is so high (and costly).
Ssssss wrote:
Considering the fact that many people claim they feel less beat up after wearing those shoes, I would be convinced to wear them for all my hard workouts - if money were no burden.
My legs sometimes feel beat up from them especially in a 5k, too much squish.
He had Hagland's deformity? Not related to Achilles I thought.
The only time I ever got calf or hamstring injuries was in the vaporfly.
Every pro trains in super shoes these days. Whether on the track or the roads. The shoes are reducing injuries. They’re not causing them. They’re allowing people to train harder and with more volume.
epicTCK wrote:
Ssssss wrote:
Considering the fact that many people claim they feel less beat up after wearing those shoes, I would be convinced to wear them for all my hard workouts - if money were no burden.
You do feel less beat up in them, but it also weakens the legs because you aren't doing as much work. Better to train in other shoes the majority of the time for injury prevention, then do some of the more taxing sessions in VFs.
The new shoes are essentially "stiff soled shoes" (think shape ups). These were used for 100 yrs for serious foot injuries because they basically keep your foot from "bending" espec in the forefoot (this is, in part, also the reason you wear a cam walker boot with a foot injury-it doesnt bend).
Now, time will tell, but it makes sense that supershoes will improve your pain with neuromas, big toe arthritis etc... but if we take away the the natural mechanics of the great toe flexing at toe off among lots of healthy athletes i do wonder about things like PF or AT cropping up. It just makes sense. In theory they should improve some things and make you more prone to others.