spikes to plated racers makes no sense

Road courses won't need the traction and stability XC spikes give. Imagine trying to take a 180* turn in grass in Vaporflys. Carnage

But on the road that's not an issue

Very few courses have a hairpin turn. I've taken sharp turns in streak lts just fine. I'd say more road courses have turns around cones to head back the opposite directions than do xc courses.

You've explained how high stack plated shoes are bad on xc, but of course, no one can give an explanation of why it would be needed to suddenly jump to a racing shoe that feels way different than your spikes when going to the road or why a spiked 39mm stack shoe wouldn't be ideal on the track. The dialed in feel of a racing flat is much closer to the feel of a spike.

This post is all over the place to be honest and I can't exactly comprehend what you are trying to get it---I think it's the you just don't like super shoes.

Anyways..

1. You can't run in high stack on the track at the pro level, so that's why people don't do it. Tons of college kids do though. Because they work.

2. The lower stack with plate does exist--example the New Balance Pacer, which has had success on the roads (Emily Sisson).

3. XC in a super shoe is not ideal because part of the advantage the shoe provides is a rebound off the ground. You don't get this when it's a muddy mess. Also the shoes aren't designed for tight turns so again, disadvantage, and you might as well stick with spikes.

I'm getting at that racing flats would be a viable option. It would be a lot more similar to the spikes that had been worn for 8 years of competition for post collegiate runners moving to the roads. Now you've got to train for the road and adjust to racing in way different shoes. A lot of runners used to racing in the lower stack of spikes will even run FASTER in a racing flat than in a plated shoe because of the similarity. Except no flats for racing long distance are available outside south america, japan/some of east asia, and australia.

Its kind of like if I drive a car every day, I'm not happy when I go on vacation and the rental car agency tells me all they have is a supersize pickup truck.

Yeah, you are definitely projecting here.

I started running in 1987. Shoes have changed a lot and I adapted, sometimes slowly.

I once wore the Saucony Kilkenny for a mountainous trail 25k because it was the most nimble "trail" shoe I had, but early adapters were already sporting hokas. I, like a bunch of other letsrunners mocked the high stack clown shoes only to be a convert 5 years later.

As far as racing shoes go, I loved the Nike LT series, but let's not pretend that the original Vaporflys weren't a way better shoe for 5k+ even for guys ripping 2:45 per kilometer.

The high stack super shoes were indeed better on the track before being banned. They weren't as tall as today and were a tad lighter. The newer "marathon" racers aren't purpose built for the track or cross country. That along with better distance spikes makes the whole comparison moot.

Btw, Asics is going to keep making the Tarther RP series.

They skip my size. They make every size from 6-12.5 except 10.5 . It'd be better to run in something else than ill fitting shoes.

The vaporflies are not a better shoe than the streak lt 2 and down and have never been compared to the streak lt2 and down in serious testing. They might be a better shoe for the marathon because the marathon racers on the market at the time of the vaporfly's release were all high drop, higher stack shoes. Except for the japanese extremely low stack racers. Your claim is essentially because the vaporfly is sold and the shoes I describe are not, the vaporfly is faster. There is no way to test the claim without the shoes I describe being available simultaneously. Or do you think shoes improve every year - so pegasus 26 is better than 25 better than 24 etc.

Novelty =/= better.

As for the tarther rp, it is sold in every size from 6 to 12.5 EXCEPT for the size I wear, 10.5 It'd be better to run in a different shoe than an ill fitting shoe. I feel like I live in clown world where no one in Asia has the same size foot as me. Its bizarre this size doesn't exist in asian shoes (its because they sell based on cm measurements or something) and anyone with my size foot would buy western shoes, run in ill fitting shoes and not reach their potential, or chose a shoe from another brand that makes shoes large (ie the mizuno 10 fits like a 10.5 in the mizuno japanese models).

The original Vaporflys were tested for running economy vs other shoes at that time (2016?). The Vaporflys were better than the Nike Streak for everything 3k on up. Note that this was the regular streak and not the LT, but you assume the LT and shoes like it are better than the Vaporflys without any testing yourself. The OG Vaporflys had a slightly lower stack (32mm?) than most current super shoes and were fairly lightweight at 6.2oz. Almost every Nike pro or college affiliated runner trained in the LT and switched to the Vaporflys and all of them are happier.

So your novelty minimalist racing flats are not better. It's just your opinion that they are.