So when you isolate specifically the shoes, I just don't know.
This is what I am considering:
1. Nike athletes have done well in both the Dragonfly/Air Zoom Victory, some in protos in Doha '19.
2. Some non Nike companies (On specifically) allow their athletes to wear Nike spikes.
3. However, the performance of ADIDAS athletes like:
- Gudaf Tsegay - 3:53 and 1:57 in Adidas Avantis
- Bryce Hoppel - 1:44 and 2:16 in Adidas Avantis
in "regular" spikes, or Justyn Knight who runs for Reebok (owned by Adidas) has been exceptional.
4. When Houlihan and Schweizer ran 14:23 and 14:26, Houlihan wore 2014 Nike Victories (either Vic 2s or Vic Elites), while Schweizer wore the Dragonflies. I think this was reflective of their fitness at the time, but I will concede that any potential effects of the DF's are multiplied as distance increases.
Here's how I'll re-phrase it to you. If True was wearing his old spikes, how fast do you think he would have run? I think he would have been hard pressed to get the standard.
Or how about this? If Grant Fisher was forced to race last night in Ben True's spikes from 2019, who do you think wins? Firsher or True? I don't think it's even close. True.
Yes, Rojo, I think Ben True in a pandemic setting, with everything considered, wearing Nike Matumbos or Mambas would have run sub 27:28. I do not think the Dragonflies would have been the SOLE thing that allowed him to break that barrier - rather, I think they may have given him some slight margin in terms of sore legs AND the mental placebo of wearing the shoes. Similarly, Fisher would have been able to run sub 27:28 in standard Nike Victorys/Mambas/Matumbos, or whatever Saucony spikes True was wearing. He's developed tremendous range and has the aerobic strength to run a time like that. It may have been harder for him, but I still think Fisher could have kicked hard for it in a slightly-slower paced race.
However, if we find out that Adidas has been giving prototypes to athletes, I retract everything I said and humbly apologize.