Mostly curious about 5k/10k (maybe 15k) as it seems like they definitely are for the marathon at this point. Would someone be at a disadvantage if they showed up to a moderately competitive local 10k in traditional racing flats?
Mostly curious about 5k/10k (maybe 15k) as it seems like they definitely are for the marathon at this point. Would someone be at a disadvantage if they showed up to a moderately competitive local 10k in traditional racing flats?
The 10k road record was set in a low stack hight shoe that doesn’t have a true “carbon plate”
5k : no, you can run fast road times in flats, there’s almost no difference between Next%s and flats on this distance. My friend and I both ran ~14:50 on the road I had carbon shoes and he had flats. We ran pretty much identical track PRs too.
10k : the carbon shoes are definitely advantageous here.
15k: no question
If you are truly elite, then yes. For everybody else, no.
Except for the real elites, we are all just out there larping.
If you are a 15 min guy and the race consists of other 15 min guys (with the help of carbon plates) you can still compete just fine.
Just like before, whether or not someone is competitive in a race depends just as much on the competition as the persons fitness.
Carbon shoes will make you faster, but no they are not necessary, you can still race without them just fine.
saucony user wrote:
5k : no, you can run fast road times in flats, there’s almost no difference between Next%s and flats on this distance. My friend and I both ran ~14:50 on the road I had carbon shoes and he had flats. We ran pretty much identical track PRs too.
10k : the carbon shoes are definitely advantageous here.
15k: no question
No doubt, a good carbon plated shoe is still the best at 5k. I don't like the propulsive shoe tech being allowed, but it's no doubt the fastest.
No. I take special pleasure in beating people wearing pogo shoes at my local races. It actually provides ME an advantage as it drives me to race on PURE HATE when I see some clown in cheater shoes and I blow his doors off in my low heeled, traditional racing shoes.
cramberrys wrote:
saucony user wrote:
5k : no, you can run fast road times in flats, there’s almost no difference between Next%s and flats on this distance. My friend and I both ran ~14:50 on the road I had carbon shoes and he had flats. We ran pretty much identical track PRs too.
10k : the carbon shoes are definitely advantageous here.
15k: no question
No doubt, a good carbon plated shoe is still the best at 5k. I don't like the propulsive shoe tech being allowed, but it's no doubt the fastest.
Neither do I, but it doesn't seem like it's going away at this point. Feels like a 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em' scenario
Honestly I thought that before but I’ve been doing more 5k paced stuff in flats and they feel just as good if not better... I’d say the lighter weight and more responsive feel pretty much equal the benefit (legs are less trashed at the end of race) of carbon plated thick shoes since the distance is so short
However 5k is the distance where flats and carbon marathon shoes are equal .. anything higher I’d take the carbon shoes 100%
Sketchers VANISH is the fastest 5k shoe and it has no carbon plate.
That's fair. I feel like the ideal setup is a pair of racing flats for shorter stuff, track workouts, etc and some carbon shoes for longer stuff
What carbon shoes do you run in? I've been reading about the Asics Metaracer and Skechers Speed Elite, seems like they're more oriented towards shorter stuff than the marathon supershoes and take some design cues from traditional racing flats (lower stack height, low-weight, etc)
Carbon shoes I've tried: Saucony Endorphin Pro and Nike Next%, I prefer the Next %. I have some Saucony Fast Twich 9s as flats. I'm most excited for the Nike Streakfly, looks like it could be a perfect medium between a flat and a carbon plated shoe .. something like the Dragonfly but for the road.
I wasn't sure about getting skechers or asics lower stack shoe because I'm not sold on their foam .. however I know that the next% zoom X and the saucony foam is the real deal, so I'll be on the lookout for a low carbon shoe from them
this is "saucony user" btw, I'm just on a different device
I've heard good things about the Endorphin lineup, and I guess Nike's carbon shoes speak for themselves. I stumbled across a site selling Reebok Floatride Run Fast Pros for $70 earlier today and ordered a pair to use as racing flats. Pretty psyched :D
leviocastorial wrote:
Mostly curious about 5k/10k (maybe 15k) as it seems like they definitely are for the marathon at this point. Would someone be at a disadvantage if they showed up to a moderately competitive local 10k in traditional racing flats?
It can do, nothing like cheater spikes. You can run great times in any shoe but the you want the lightness shoe for the distance you body can tolerate without compromising your performance.
Most of the lightest shoes have a plate to stabilise the unstable foams. They also have the most cushion and responsive too which is the other key factors for road running. Most carbon plate shoes are ott for 5k distance on the road, I’ve run just as fast in the Reebok floatride pro as the Nike next %.
Carbon plates like with spikes (other than the insane extra grip and massive speed advantage - the ultimate cheater shoe) take some loading off the Achilles as you can either run faster for a same distance or the same pace for longer due to the added efficiency.
Just find a link shoe which works for you for the race distance you want to run
leviocastorial wrote:
I've heard good things about the Endorphin lineup, and I guess Nike's carbon shoes speak for themselves. I stumbled across a site selling Reebok Floatride Run Fast Pros for $70 earlier today and ordered a pair to use as racing flats. Pretty psyched :D
I have both Endorphin Pro and Next% and they are very different. Endorphin is extremely firm for being a high stack height, carbon plated shoe.
Not necessary at all. They unquestionably help, but it's probably within the margin of error between an average day and a good day for the same athlete. You're not running in a different race if you don't have them.
They also help all the way down to the 5k, and probably below. People (myself included) don't LIKE them for the 5k because they don't feel as responsive, but they absolutely help you go slightly faster at the same level of oxygen consumption. The only case for not wearing them in a 5k is if you're racing tactically, where you're at a manageable pace for most of the race and then you need to rip a fast 800 with super low ground contact time. Under those circumstances it's probably preferable to sacrifice a little bit of running economy for slightly higher speed.
800 dude wrote:
they absolutely help you go slightly faster at the same level of oxygen consumption.
So do lighter shoes.
For example the:
Reebok Floatride Run Fast Pro & Sketchers Horizon Vanish
800 dude wrote:
The only case for not wearing them in a 5k is if you're racing tactically, where you're at a manageable pace for most of the race and then you need to rip a fast 800 with super low ground contact time. Under those circumstances it's probably preferable to sacrifice a little bit of running economy for slightly higher speed.
I wouldn't say the Only case. People have different preferences, foottypes, biomechanics, ect... that pair well with specific shoes.
Good point though. I hate the feeling of squish during a kick....
Are you asking if people were unable to run fast times before carbon shoes? A few did. Scientists consider that proof it's possible to run fast in normal shoes.
ViperDom wrote:
800 dude wrote:
they absolutely help you go slightly faster at the same level of oxygen consumption.
So do lighter shoes.
For example the:
Reebok Floatride Run Fast Pro & Sketchers Horizon Vanish
Yes, it's pretty clear that added distal weight decreases running economy, while added cushioning increases it. That's what makes shoes like the Vaporfly so special: extreme cushioning and low weight. At 6.9 oz, the Vaporfly is comparable to a lot of traditional racing flats like the Asics Hyperspeed. The Floatride Run Fast Pro is another 3 oz lighter (one of the lightest racing flats ever), which equates to about 1% better economy, if cushioning were equal. But of course it has much, much less cushioning. I'm not aware of any lab tests involving the Run Fast Pro, but I would be shocked if it is competitive with the Vaporfly in terms of running economy.
Which isn't to say that it isn't a great shoe. I actually have to pair, and I REALLY like them. There's something about running in a traditional flat that's just fun, and these are maybe the best traditional flats ever made. But when it comes to racing for time, I don't think they're competitive with the Vaporfly. They're like driving a sports car with a stick shift. They're visceral and fun, but if your only priority is winning, you would obviously have a (somewhat soulless) double-clutch transmission.