The majority of people who run sub 4 for the first time are in college. And if you don't run sub 4 in college, you're probably starting to work a real job and running takes the back seat and you stop training seriously. So basically it comes down to having more college guys running sub 4. I think a huge thing that started happening after 2000 (when we started having more and more sub 4's every year) is people started to utilize their redshirts more in college. In the 1960's and early 70's the redshirt didn't even exist, people were done with eligibility around their 22nd birthday. Then in the 1990's and 2000's some programs started redshirting a lot of people and we started having more sub 4's in the mid to late 2000's. Then it seemed almost everyone was redshirted after 2010, and we had a even more sub 4's. And then now we have redshirts AND covid years, giving people 6 years in college to develop and run sub 4 before they hang it up and start their careers. That is a huge reason why there are so many now.
And then the other reason, where do we run the mile? It's mostly indoors. There are a ton of new 300 meter and 200 banked tracks that are really fast that were built in the past several years. Go back 20 years there were not many options outside of the typical 200 flat track to run an indoor mile. Now every weekend the 300 meter and banked tracks are stacked with meets. So many opportunities to run fast now.
Eh, it’s tough because you’ve also got better nutrition, training, coaching, etc. Kids have more access to information. Not saying shoes don’t matter at all, but comparing them to an airlift grossly exaggerates how much dragonflys elevate your mile time.
I actually don’t know the answer to this, so maybe you can tell me. If things like shotput and all the other field events where shoes don’t matter much have not improved performance averages in HS/college and only things on the track have, then I’d be more open-minded to the case you’re making.
That is a valid question that I had to do some quick research on. My belief that the shoes are improving HS times is based on the fact I follow the CA SS mostly, and athletic.net has pretty complete data for the last decade on top performances. A simple way to measure this is to look at the 25th best mark for a given year ( to adjust for outliers). Distance times were pretty stagnant from 2014 until last year. Last year times were a little faster than ever in just about every way to measure the top 25 (all grades, each individual grade). This year they are as well. You could try to say that was population increase, but my understanding is track and field participation as a whole is not significantly higher than before. So did nutrition, training and coaching just get better these last 2 years. Well, as you suggested I looked the shot put, and these last 2 years have a 25th best mark that is worse than any of the non-covid years for a decade. The discus also has worse marks than through the 201x's. these last 2 years. So what is the explanation for those getting worse? Nutrition is worse? Training is worse? The 100m and 200m times look stagnant. Better than some past years, worse than others.
I agree that the airlift compression is a ridiculous comparison. Looking at the data, it looks like 1-2 seconds improvement in the 1600m, and about 4 seconds in the 3200m directly tied to the last 2 years. What changed specifically and only in the last 2 years? And why is it only distance running?
This is a fair point, and I have no problem conceding that a second or two on today’s times may be attribituable to shoes in the mile. If the data you offer are accurate, that’s a convincing arument.
Dragonflies > 1980s spikes. But they aren’t turning 4:10 guys into sub-4 guys. “The Record Shows” isn’t arguing this, but some people seem to be implying that vastly different candidates of runners are now breaking 4. Evidence shows that it’s just the people who were just quite not there (but oh so close) that are getting over the hump.
Tech improves. Dragonflies are not fundamentally changing T & F. I’ll let other people discuss vapor and alphaflys, but the mile is not under assault.
While the Vaporflys have changed the game for the marathon. (not because of the carbon plate but mostly because nobody had ever made a lightweight cushioned marathon racer. It was either run fast and trash your legs or wear trainers and run 3 minutes slower.)
The so called "super spikes" make little difference in the mile, except I admit they fit my feet better than the victories ever did. I would still choose the Ventulas or Jasaris over anything out there today if I could find them.
All these article are likely written by people that haven't actually worn them.
But agree BU is fast, but not unreasonably so. It's comparable to running on a well maintained outdoor track in perfect conditions ( how often do you get that though?)
Eh, it’s tough because you’ve also got better nutrition, training, coaching, etc. Kids have more access to information. Not saying shoes don’t matter at all, but comparing them to an airlift grossly exaggerates how much dragonflys elevate your mile time.
I actually don’t know the answer to this, so maybe you can tell me. If things like shotput and all the other field events where shoes don’t matter much have not improved performance averages in HS/college and only things on the track have, then I’d be more open-minded to the case you’re making.
Things like shot put haven’t improved. The HS record was set in 1979. Most years the best don’t get within 10 feet of it.
the nutrition / coaching idea is so dumb. nail on the head. there haven't been huge changes in other events. just the events that got new shoes released in 2020. It's so obvious. The shoes are producing faster times. even five years ago if you ran under 3:40 for 1500 you had a good chance at making NCAA's. now? you're second string.
Thanks for sharing this article. It’s nice to see increasing recognition that super shoes have damaged the sport. Anyone who runs 3:59 with the benefit of super shoes and calls themselves a sub-4 miler is fooling themselves. In reality, they are just a 4:03 miler who had a tech boost.
The only damage caused is due to the troglodyte’s such as yourself constantly whining about shoes.
I am not a shoe denier and have run in the super spikes and believe they work, just not sure how much. I like the theory that they get runners over the hump. I would add that some people back in the day who focused on 3k/5k and might run 4:07 in the rare 1500/mile would be much more likely to make a run at sub 4 and focus on that objective if they’re now down to 4:04-5 with the super spikes. Just because it’s cool to break 4 even if that’s not your main event. I think this helps explain the increase in the college sub 4:00s despite not seeing the same level of improvement in top pro 1500 times.
The vaporfly gave me my first ever hamstring strain. It's never been the same since. I used to tempo in much heavier shoes like the novablast without any issues.
All you dickwads who bought super shoes so you can take a 'chair lift up mount everest' are going to look like damn fools now. Damn fools!
Yawn.
So what was the analogy when we had an even bigger leap in footwear innovation - from PU to EVA midsoles and leather to woven meshes? A helicopter from basecamp right to the top?
Who seriously writes this sh-t? The saddest part about it is that it's totally believable these days given how stupid even allegedly credible and "intelligent" we expect journalists to be.
Personally I feel like the dragonfly can makes a given pace FEEL easier, but doesn't necessarily make me faster. This can help with distance races, but not much in a 1500m and not at all in an 800
Shoes with EVA midsoles also "spring back" (shrugging shoulders).
Narrator - EVA doesn't "spring back"
Is this a joke post? You don't think EVA has any elastic resilience? So you think that even someone stands on an EVA midsole it simply squashes down/compresses and remains forever in that "compressed" state? Please explain your "science" here.
Is this a joke post? You don't think EVA has any elastic resilience? So you think that even someone stands on an EVA midsole it simply squashes down/compresses and remains forever in that "compressed" state? Please explain your "science" here.
If that's your definition of "spring back", then wool socks "spring back".
Your overly broad definition makes your comment nonsensical.
Yeah this is a pretty terrible analogy. It would be much better to compare it to the use of supplemental oxygen in mountaineering. An advancement that has made climbing Everest easier, but by no means a "Chairlift" up the mountain
article TL;DR but the shoes offer in no way an additional energy that wasn't there. It just loses less energy and returns more in a kinetic form.
We had people running barefeet on soft surfaces, little energy return. Some ran on grass once they figured that out. Then they ran on compact cinder, or gravel/clay (I did)...bit better. Then they put on spikes...even better. Then the same thing on roads...better shoes and this latest is even better shoes.
If you debate this, by all means, but explain to me where the external energy is coming from, as in the analogy of chair lift or additional oxygen.
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.