Tue for vapourflys?

Something like a tue for vaporflies on a track or xc should never be granted. An athlete who can not run in 25 mm or lower stack height shoes should be pointed to the road and explained that races occur there, in a manner in which even a kindergartner could understand.

There should be a immediate disqualification from the event for attempting to use a vaporfly in a track or xc race.

Renato posted in another thread. IIRC, Moen has foot/ankle/something down there issues that prevent him from wearing spikes.

As ridiculous as it may sound, it's really no different than the need for any other TUE....I need ______ drug so I can be "normal".

WA permit a TUE for preserving the integrity of the body in the case of proved problems in the feet, only for athletes wearing spikes. There are not examples about this rule, and honestly I don't know how a request of Tue can work : maybe higher thickness for a jumper in case of heels problems ?

Therefore, if a Tue regarding different thickness is allowed for athletes wearing spikes, there is no reason for not having the same treatment in case of athletes running long distances.

On track, there is really no advantage using Vaporfly comparing with a good pair of spikes. The rule not allowing racing shoes with thickness higher than 25 mm on the track, when we speak about long distances on track that are organised once every 5-8 years, is really ridiculous, considering that the athletes running those distances on track are the same running HM and Marathon on road : they do training with those shoes, are all in the same conditions, duration and speed of the race are the same of a HM, there is not advantage for some athlete compared with another because facilities can be at disposal of every athlete. Practically, one hour on track is like a HM on track, and this happens only because of the cancellation of the competitions on road, due to Corona virus.

Really, the prohibition of using racing shoes validated for road races also on track is a rule without any sense, decided for political reasons and following not technical factors , but the common feeling created by wrong propaganda.

One easy question :

Which performance do you think can achieve the following athletes, wearing Vaporfly instead spikes, in their distance ?

Rudisha in 800m

Tim Cheruiyot or Ingebrigtsen in 1500m

Barega, or Cheptegei, or the young Bekele in 5000m and 10000m

Shaheen in steeple

Give your answer, and after you can see which advantage athletes can have, running on track in the long distances with racing shoes as Vaporfly (specifically created for running on tarmac or concrete, and for saving the legs of marathon runners after 30 km, reducing the effect of the impact on the surface).

Renato, I would agree with you on the advantage but i would say trying to run for one hour (half marathon) in this case would be difficult in spikes. IMO i would say you would benefit from a pair of vapourflys. PS I'm not really a track athletic so i could we be wrong

But this is exactly what I mean : to put a race of one hour, or longer than 20 km, in the same group, and with the same rules, of a "track competition" (that in the last 10 years was organised one time only, in Kristiansand....), is a technical stupidity, because NOBODY runs 20 km or longer distance on track using spikes.

Haile Gebrselassie used racing shoes during his WR of one hour, the same Barrios.

Moses Mosop used racing shoes in Eugene for his WR of 25000m and 30000m.

Sondre himself used racing shoes during his European Record of 25000m in Oslo on 10.06.

The common denominator for the type of shoes cannot be the same Surface, but is the DISTANCE.

Final consideration : the athletes running on track events longer than 20 km are road runners (HM and Marathon), allowed to wear Vaporfly on the road, and can use on the track the shoes that normally use on the road, therefore the situation is the same for everybody, and nobody can take advantage against the other competitors since everybody can wear shoes validated for road races.

One hour on track, or 25 km on track, is like a race long one hour, or 25 km, on the road : same distance, same duration, same speed, and there is not logic authorising athletes to run in one case with shoes 40 mm high, in another case not.

A real contradiction, clearly showing that the Working Group for shoes doesn't have any technical vision, but follows the general feeling against "technological doping" without knowing the real performances of the shoes, in different conditions.