Crazymule wrote:
Wildhorse and Vaporfly threads on Letsrun. Name a more iconic duo.
Salvatore Stitchmo and any shoe/spike thread.
Crazymule wrote:
Wildhorse and Vaporfly threads on Letsrun. Name a more iconic duo.
Salvatore Stitchmo and any shoe/spike thread.
The shoe looks like it was designed by a 5' 7" 130lbs runner , so they look taller . Even taller than wearing Hoka bondi shoes.
Im waiting fro the alpha spike versions that Sifan wore in Doha
460 cm3 (28 cu in) wrote:
They pushed it too far. Stack height regulations are coming. It's inevitable at this point.
PS: username is the maximum size of drivers for golf.
Stack height regulations would make the most sense. They can’t outlaw energy return: even the clunkiest trainers on the market (like Hoka Bondi, Asics Kayano) have foam that offer some degree of energy return. Carbon plates would be difficult to ban- given that they have been used in track spikes for decades. Limiting the stack height, however, would be easy and effective.
aesthete, thinker wrote:
These escalating shoe wars are such a bummer. Just look at how stupid those moon boot monstrosities LOOK. Look at them!
Is this what we want as a sport? Who can make the bounciest clown shoes?
At first I was hoping the claimed performance gains were hype, but now, sadly, it seems it's true--these darn shoes make a big difference. So now all the other manufacturers have to make their own bouncy clown shoes.
When I was competing seriously in the 1990s and early 2000s, the goal was was to make the shoes light, unobtrusive. Now the goal is to spring you forward. Why do we allow it--because it's Nike doing it?
Swimming crossed into the same level of absurdity with their super wetsuits in the early 2000s, radically changing their sport and record books. They were smart enough to realize the arms race was stupid, and changed course.
Will running also be smart enough to change course?
They look like the support shoe this one kid in my elementary school had because his one leg was much longer than the other. The his one shoe had a massive sole on it to make the difference up.
meanwhile elsewhere in the world
If these shoes make it easier on my feet and knees, I will happily accept an asterisk near my HM or marathon time.
Heck, even tax my time by 5%.
To the moon boot apologists, I am curious--where do YOU draw the line, if at all?
Is any "shoe" acceptable, as long as the midsole is made out of foam (however reactive)? Is other tech okay in your book?
If huge stack height with embedded carbon blade is a-ok by you, do you think these kangoo bounce shoes are ok?
I'm sure these kangoo boots in their current form would be slower than running, but if a manufacturer found a way to make them faster than the vaporfly, what say you?
https://www.bounceshoestore.com/
I hear a lot of apologists calling anti-vaporfly folks Luddites and dinosaurs, but I don't see anyone thinking this evolution of shoe "tech" through to its logical conclusion.
Cycling dealt with this by making a lower weight limit and defining the geometry of a racing bike. The materials continue to improve within those boundaries, but there are limits.
How do we define a running shoe? What limits--if any--do we apply?
fable. wrote:
Zante wrote:
Good question:
https://imgur.com/a/BG9K4uffake as f
I actually think they were designed for some bizarre desert race that ran through the Sahara. Somehow the sole is supposed to perform better on loose sand dunes.
IDK where I got the photos from but these are the only pics of them I know of on the internet
So looking at his wins..
2019 INEOS: Prototype (Alphafly)
2019 London: Next%
2018 Berlin WR: Prototype (Nike Vaporfly Elite one-off from Breaking2)
2018 London: Prototype (Nike Flyprint)
2017 Berlin: Prototype (Nike Vaporfly Elite one-off from Breaking2)
2017 Breaking2: Vaporfly Elite Prototype
2016 Olympics: Prototype (Vaporfly)
2016 London Marathon: Prototype (Vaporfly white)
2015 Berlin Marathon: Prototype (Zoom Streak 6 w/insoles falling out)
2015 London Marathon: Prototype (Zoom Streak 6 w/insoles falling out)
2014 Chicago Marathon: Nike Zoom Streak 4
So aside from this year's London Marathon, you have to go back a ways to find a race when Eliud wasn't using a shoe that was a prototype, or only available to him.
Correction. In London 2015, he was wearing the Zoom Streak 6 prototype, but the insoles did not fall out.
aesthete, thinker wrote:
Cycling dealt with this by making a lower weight limit and defining the geometry of a racing bike. The materials continue to improve within those boundaries, but there are limits.
Don't look at cycling as an example for gear regulation. The UCI has volumes of arcane and ridiculous regulation on bikes that make no sense and create all areas where bikes are designed with workarounds specifically to circumvent stupid rules. Fairings are prohibited, but if they have some other use they are not defined as fairings, which creates all of these overly complicated features that make the bikes overly-complicated to service. The UCI even governs the height of socks!
Its a slippery slope. If there is regulation, keep it very simple, black / white. Stack height is probably an elegant solution.
Don't make running like cycling in this respect....
In 2015, Kipchoge ran 2:04:00 in Berlin with his insoles flopping out for most of the race.You are a colossal dumb@ss.
I’m calling for a total ban on sports bras. These assist performance by not allowing the knockers to flop around.
No more bras allowed while racing!
Ban bras wrote:
I’m calling for a total ban on sports bras. These assist performance by not allowing the knockers to flop around.
No more bras allowed while racing!
Again, do you propose any limits to shoe design?
If Pistorious blades were attached to the bottom of a shoe, is that acceptable? How about if it's encased in foam?--Because that's basically what Kipchoge is wearing.
excyclisto wrote:
aesthete, thinker wrote:
Cycling dealt with this by making a lower weight limit and defining the geometry of a racing bike. The materials continue to improve within those boundaries, but there are limits.
Don't look at cycling as an example for gear regulation. The UCI has volumes of arcane and ridiculous regulation on bikes that make no sense and create all areas where bikes are designed with workarounds specifically to circumvent stupid rules. Fairings are prohibited, but if they have some other use they are not defined as fairings, which creates all of these overly complicated features that make the bikes overly-complicated to service. The UCI even governs the height of socks!
Its a slippery slope. If there is regulation, keep it very simple, black / white. Stack height is probably an elegant solution.
Don't make running like cycling in this respect....
Just keep in mind that like cycling, things will get banned for the pros but amateurs all over the world will still use it as UCI regulations mean nothing to most cyclists (weight limits being the main one). Triathlon even gets its own set of rules which are much looser than the UCIs.
I guess the big difference is that in cycling (at least in the US) there aren't races available every weekend where anyone can just sign up and potentially win prize money. For typical hillclimbs in the UK, cyclists can use just about any bike they like regardless of weight as long as it has brakes (all of my knowledge gleaned from GCN videos so take it for what it's worth).
Point being even if Nike's shoes are 'banned' that ban will only affect pros. And if that ban somehow trickled down to amateur events, Strava would still be filled with everyone's PRs in their new shoes, assuming the shoes actually made the average runner any faster. Nike will still be happy.
I think everyone might as well give up on them getting altogether banned. Will they make a limit to stack height or something like that? Could they ban prototypes for competition? Maybe on both. But the shoes are a boon for road racing, all the shoe companies are catching up, and in a few years the technology will be widespread with the edge between shoe brands in a manageable place. Cat's out of the bag.
Wildhorse wrote:
From the Berlin puctures, Kipchoge ran his WR in a 4% Flyknit upper on top of a Next % tooling.
The Next % wasn't available yet, so it can be cosidered a prototype.
And yes, he's been getting the shoes before everyone else since the first time he broke 2:04. Think of that, Weldon - - Kipchoge was a 2:04 guy without the different Vaporfly prototypes.
The secret of his longevity and why he's getting faster with age? As good as Patrick Sang may be, Kipchoge's been getting faster shoes every year. Everyone else too, only well after him.
Kipchoge is a great marathoner, but his dominance has a lot to do with shoe advantage ever since he first broke 2:04.
Kipchoge ran 2 marathons before vaporflys existed, including his one loss, a 2:04:05 when Kimetto ran a 2:03:23 WR. Do the shoes help him run faster? Probably, but his dominance has had very little to do with the shoes when most of the elites (including some Adidas runners) are running in Vaporflys.
You could argue that Kipchoge has just had newer prototypes than other guys, but no difference has been found between VF 4%, VF 4% FK, and VF Next% (in fact, NYT recently stated that there was no difference from 4% to Next% in their big study), and he has yet to run a real race in Alphaflys. So, his dominance cannot be reasonably based on the shoes. How much faster would he be than the other 2:02:57-2:04 guys without Vaporflys? Hard to say, but I suspect he'd have the record regardless.
Sorry, misremembered dates. Kipchoge had 4 or 5 marathons before Vaporflys, but the point remains that prototypes vs commercial shoes probably didn't matter and his dominance is because he's actually better than the competition.
This whole shoe race is bizarre. So nobody has actually worn or tested other than Kipchoge but we all agree they're faster. And we know the amount because he's basically a 2:12 runner/ 45 year old man at this point without him (maths right?)
So testing other shoes's new prototypes is irrelevant okay and an arms race in shoes is probably crazy - I'll agree on that but why are the other companies only making 2018 versions of shoes? why have they not gone for the Hydrogen bomb right off the start? Why are they making Fat Mans?
That part doesn't make any sense. Why would Ward and his unlimited budget in the Sacouny research lab say okay this is what I want and that's good enough?