So multiple carbon fiber plates are banned, but what about multiple Pebax plates? What about other forms of reinforced plastic instead of carbon fiber reinforced plastic?
So multiple carbon fiber plates are banned, but what about multiple Pebax plates? What about other forms of reinforced plastic instead of carbon fiber reinforced plastic?
The shoe must not contain more than one rigid embedded plate or blade (of any material) that runs either the full length or only part of the length of the shoe. The plate may be in more than one part but those parts must be located sequentially in one plane (not stacked or in parallel) and must not overlap.
fly swot ter wrote:
The ruling sucks.
This is the first time in our sport’s history we can’t trust performances due to the equipment.
Read the interview with Shalaya Kipp. These shoes make a mockery of our beautifully pure sport.
"Beautifully pure"? I love running just as much as the next guy, but unless you're talking about at the amateur level, doping is a much more prevalent, far more sullying issue than cheaterflys.
I agree with many other posters that a few years down the line we'll be looking at this from the same perspective that people look at synthetic vs cinder tracks. Tracks are also still getting faster, and not only can we accurately scientifically measure it, we have a mechanism for HOW that works, unlike the vaporfly which I still can't find a conclusive mechanism on. The ruling is good because it puts a halt on some of the biggest issues that people like myself who were okay with the vaporflys had in terms of where shoe technology is going to go from here. I'd focus more on the issue having to do with prototypes. 4 months is a decent amount of time to wait, and will likely end up benefiting Nike athletes at the trials and Olympics.
The mechanisms include:
1) Enhancing the windlass mechanism through "forced" pronation.
2) Reducing the work done by some muscles in the foot through having longitudinal stiffness.