New Study: "Super" Spikes Improve Running Economy by 2.1% Compared to Traditional Spikes

Dang, was hoping it was more.

The "It's the shoes" crowd heavily discount the significant advances in training and nutrition.

Even outside of the shoes we race in, the shoes we train in today are so much better.

The shoes definitely matter, but runners are getting better at every aspect of the sport.

No, it's definitely the shoes.

I think the key limitation is the translation of sub-threshold speeds to something like 800 or 1500 pace. I appreciate you documenting this, but I think most people would agree that supershoes help in the 10k and up. 5k maybe. Where I think there's disagreement is from an anecdotal perspective, superspikes don't make top end speed feel any slower AND the energy savings from the extra foam don't have time to accrue over 2-4 minutes. Probably depends a good deal on each individual's ankle tension too. Would be curious to see this test done at vVO2Max and mile pace.

1second per lap is what every coach and athlete and fan has claimed. 25 seconds is 1 second per lap. It is the shoes.

25 seconds in the 10000m? Sure.

We’d see much bigger performances in the 5000/10000 at a world class level if this were the case.

I’m suspicious of these findings.

Would we? Go look at all the results in the post EPO era to 2020 and then let us know why you would expect bigger improvements. Yeah the top guys are closer to like 2/3rds of a 2nd instead 1.

Any of the people who don't believe in the shoes can race in the old ones. You notice nobody does. Even in HS where you can be better than you comp, everyone at states is wearing them

.

Not a great study design

The 2 guys who are denying the science are far left wingers.

You mean armstrong and kickers?

2.1% knocks 4 seconds off a 4 minute mile.

that’s exactly what everyone has been saying.

4:05 mile is 245 seconds.

245 x .979 =239.855

or 3:59.855 mile.

It’s exactly what everyone suspected. Today’s “sub 4” are just 4:05 guys in cheater shoes.

We are still trying to figure out how to test at at faster speeds outside of having athletes do multiple 800 to 5k time trials in different shoes (a protocol I wouldnt wish on my worst enemy). Based on multiple analyses of elite race times before and after super spikes/shoes, athletes do experience benefits even at the 800 but the improvement seems to increase with race distance. Whether this is an effect of race speed or race duration is something I am very curious about.

We have seen that on average, 5k and 10k race times are getting faster for college and elite runners. However, it is interesting that we havent seen any big chunks taken off of the 5k and 10k world records. I will say that it is crazy to me that we are almost desensitized to American men running 12:4x for the 5k. I remember when Galen Rupp broke 13 for the first time and I was shocked that he ran so fast.

There was a decade where nobody came close to either of them. They were like the woman's WR from the eastern block in the 90s. College kids didn't have access to EPO. Pros did ..

A 2.1% improvement in running economy does not directly translate into a 2.1% improvement in running time.

Anyone who has read the studies done on the original Vaporfly 4% should understand this.

It's crazy how people have to regularly be educated on concepts that were clearly laid out almost 10 years ago now. Then again, given current literacy and reading comprehension rates in the US amongst adults, I shouldn't be too surprised...

It's likely a function of both, and you can't really separate one from the other. Longer races are intrinsically always run at a slower pace than shorter ones.

More steps in more efficient shoes = compounded effect, and longer distances where deterioration in running economy comes into play more means the shoes will matter more. Hence, the marathon seeing the most drastic improvements (though road stack regulations also plays a big part in that).