Vaporflys (presumably) crush it again. Produce amazing times in Valencia. 26:38 10k, A 2:03:51 and 4 2:18s!!!

There is a drug that has, for Nike, happily coincided with their Fly shoes. The shoes may help some, but humans don't run this fast this consistently without pharmaceutical help.

define disruption wrote:

PIK wrote:

People understand perfectly why the shoe produces faster times. The controversy comes from the fact that they produce disruptively faster times.

The only disruptive thing about the shoes is that they highlighted the complacency of the running shoe industry of the pre-vaporfly era. They were stuck in the line of thinking that emphasized light weight and minimalism of road racing shoes and essentially kept recreating versions of the same shoe. I would feel pretty bad if I was a lead designer in a company and a rival creates this superior of a product (as superior as the vaporfly is portrayed to be). And of course now that one company has been able to break the mold and finally show progress, everyone is complaining that "these are not the shoes our fathers used to run in" or whatever.

If you think blade running is cheating, then Vaporfly's are also cheating, because Nike took blade runner technology and put it in a shoe. It is NOT the foam, it is the blade.

I notice ALL Vaporfly defenders OWN VF's.

Couple notes:

1) You can get it for 187 on Eastbay.

2) In a few years this line of argument will be stupid when every major shoe brand has a racing shoe that pretty much is along the same lines and the price comes down to 150 bucks or so. So you can either stick with your old shoes forever, or adapt with the times and not be the only person wearing outdated racing shoes.

If you think blade running is cheating, then Vaporfly's are also cheating, because Nike took blade runner technology and put it in a shoe. It is NOT the foam, it is the blade.

I notice ALL Vaporfly defenders OWN VF's.[/quote]

Nike's win at any cost theory!

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

In a few years this line of argument will be stupid when every major shoe brand has a racing shoe that pretty much is along the same lines and the price comes down to 150 bucks or so. So you can either stick with your old shoes forever, or adapt with the times and not be the only person wearing outdated racing shoes.

Which is sad because we don't know the long term effects yet. Wonder what the stats will eventually look like on the possible increase in Achilles or ankle issues? I just remember a quote of the day on here where a bio-mechanics person said something along the lines that eventually the chickens will come home to roost. It would be interesting to know if Rupp actually thought it was worth it since his surgery.

StillCautious wrote:

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

In a few years this line of argument will be stupid when every major shoe brand has a racing shoe that pretty much is along the same lines and the price comes down to 150 bucks or so. So you can either stick with your old shoes forever, or adapt with the times and not be the only person wearing outdated racing shoes.

Which is sad because we don't know the long term effects yet. Wonder what the stats will eventually look like on the possible increase in Achilles or ankle issues? I just remember a quote of the day on here where a bio-mechanics person said something along the lines that eventually the chickens will come home to roost. It would be interesting to know if Rupp actually thought it was worth it since his surgery.

the vaporfly's have a massive drop which is [supposedly] good for achilles wear - 11mm in the 4% and 8mm in the Next% - this is nothing abnormal vs. a regular shoe.

People - technology gets better, people get faster. You're acting like cyclists in the early 1990s or swimmers.

Phelps, one of the greatest swimmers ever, basically has no WR left. Its not about the TIME, its about the achievement (placings) during one's period RELATIVE to his / her peers.

I Spy Pink and Green Shoes wrote:

Tsegaye Getachew (ETH) 2:06:50

Leul Gbrselassie (ETH) 2:07:18 Nike Vaporfly Next% (but Adidas singlet, funny)

Thomas Rono (KEN) 2:07:45

WOMEN's Marathon

Zeineba Yimer (ETH) 2:19:27 Nike Vaporfly Next%

Workenesh Edesa (ETH) 2:20:24 Nike Vaporfly 4% Flyknit (but Asics singlet this time)

Purity Rionoripo (KEN) 2:20:39 Adidas red shoes

Abeba Gebremeskel (ETH) 2:22:29

Tadelech Bekele (ETH) 2:22:53

10.Priscah Jeptoo (KEN) 2:24:16

[/quote]

I like how people assume that if someone has an adidas shirt, they are doing something wrong by having Nike shoes. Aside from the fashion faux pas, perhaps they just have mismatched clothing. Not every runner out there is sponsored. I'd bet most of the runners in the elite field, especially the Kenyans and Ethiopians, get handouts from the very top guys in their training groups. ie. Bekele gives his training buddies gear, and so on. Much easier for Nike to send 20 pairs of shoes to Kipchoge, who then hands them off to his training partners, than to sponsor everyone on the continent.

StillCautious wrote:

Which is sad because we don't know the long term effects yet. Wonder what the stats will eventually look like on the possible increase in Achilles or ankle issues? I just remember a quote of the day on here where a bio-mechanics person said something along the lines that eventually the chickens will come home to roost. It would be interesting to know if Rupp actually thought it was worth it since his surgery.

Maybe, maybe not. Nothing has been proven yet. Injuries are a part of elite and hobbyjog running.

For non-elites these are also racing shoes only and run in very sparingly. If the injury rate uptick isn't crazy (does not appear to be) and you're wearing these four times a year, I think basically anyone will take the trade-off.

You are so full of garbage. Not everyone has access to these tracks. I have access to pull up the internet put the damn shoe in my cart and buy it. The closest mondo track would cost me a Next% to get there. Have you ever heard of PLACEBO effects? Literally same thing as the shoes. If you think you'll run fast especially after training consistently day in and day out, why wouldn't you run fast? You guys discredit hard work so much, you act like the shoes are PED's. Well, guess what. Every brand is about to have a carbon plated shoe so no one can cry about it. Then you and the rest of the nike hating world will have to find something to complain about. If it wasn't nike that came out with this shoe first no one would be crying. You create a biased opinion that other letsrun trolls follow because they are "uneducated" or just want to stir the pot.

douglas burke wrote:

If you notice though MOST of the Good Times are only coming from 2 countries, or athletes not from those 2 countries who train in those Countries Example Moen, Wanders, Robertson Brothers etc.

Zane Robertson - 59:47 for the 1/2, in 2015 in adidas Boston

Jake Robertson - 59:57 for the 1/2 three years later, in Vaporflys.

You could argue one of them is faster than the other, but they are genetically the same, train mainly in the same places, and..

Zane: 2:08.19 for 26.2 - Vaporflys

Jake: 2:08.26 for 26.2 - Vaporflys

It's hard to find a better lab experiment than that.

Technology keeps improving. What I don't understand is why Major League Baseball doesn't allow the double wall titanium bat.

ukathleticscoach wrote:

The East African myth was just epo wrote:

I’m sure the shoes help a lot, but the main ingredient is still the epo.

It is like the Lance era where everyone thought his secret to success was high cadence or bike aerodynamics.

Exactly

Lance still claims that is largely true, however. The drugs kept them on the same playing field as everyone else (who was also on drugs). Then, the marginal gains were what made a difference in helping them win all the time.

UA Runner wrote:

It is like the Lance era where everyone thought his secret to success was high cadence or bike aerodynamics.

Aerodynamics is the secret to cycling success, whether it was his particular advantage or not.

Springy shoes is NOT a secret to running success, and it can't be, any more than bouncy tires on a bike. It's just not how the mechanics of running work.

Cyclists thoroughly understand the physics of their sport. Runners are not only thoroughly ignorant, they will fiercely defend their ignorance against all contrary information. They want to believe in magic shoes.

Let's see how these spring shoes work in the long jump, or even the high jump. Wagers?

big day for Ethiopia!

wonder what the training is like out there........ [sarcasm]

The East African myth was just epo wrote:

I’m sure the shoes help a lot, but the main ingredient is still the epo.

It is like the Lance era where everyone thought his secret to success was high cadence or bike aerodynamics.

Yes.

100% agree.

Bdubs wrote:

Do the Vaporflys make some people run faster? YES! But that's not the entire picture, and you two are creating a very misleading narrative.

Perhaps or perhaps not. Ban the Vaporflys and then we'll find out. I wonder if we'll ever see a non-vaporfly sub-2 minute. I'd really be curious what race times look like after a Vaporfly ban.

Bad Wigins wrote:

Cyclists thoroughly understand the physics of their sport. Runners are not only thoroughly ignorant, they will fiercely defend their ignorance against all contrary information. They want to believe in magic shoes.

I couldn't agree more.

intenserunner wrote:

I'd really be curious what race times look like after a Vaporfly ban.

Me too. There would be something in it for Kipchoge, to run a marathon in the Zoom Streak 7, but it would not be good for Nike if he ran the same times in a $110 traditional racing shoe.

Bad Wigins wrote:

Springy shoes is NOT a secret to running success, and it can't be, any more than bouncy tires on a bike. It's just not how the mechanics of running work.

Yes it is actually. When you run most of your energy is spent re-gaining the kinetic energy lost every stride. Therefore if you reduce the kinetic energy loss you can maintain a higher kinetic energy at the same effort level.