Hoka's and Leo in NYTimes

Ruppy wrote:

Yes, for a big 8th-place in Monaco? Manzano has had more dud races than big races in the last 2 years. Many of the people they have signed are on the downturn of their career. Torrence? C'mon.

When you talk to people, Do you speak with your mouth like regular folks? Because it sounds like the words are coming right from your a$$! hahaha[/quote]

I DO speak with my mouth like regular folks. Thanks. Don't capitalize after a comma in that case, btw...

He made your point with the comment about the silver medal? Hmmm. Interesting point. He won the USA Championships last year, ran the 5th best American time in history and ranked number 1 in the US. I would say that pretty much sucks.

Shinzano wrote:

He made your point with the comment about the silver medal? Hmmm. Interesting point. He won the USA Championships last year, ran the 5th best American time in history and ranked number 1 in the US. I would say that pretty much sucks.

I would too. You're a small picture guy. Being #1 in the U.S., what does it mean really? My point still stands. Manzano wasn't running for Hoka when he got his medal. My original point was that since signing their athletes, they haven't done much. Point stands, moron. Glad you think he's so great! i see him as a dud for 75 percent of his races.

get real wrote:

I would too. You're a small picture guy. Being #1 in the U.S., what does it mean really? My point still stands. Manzano wasn't running for Hoka when he got his medal. My original point was that since signing their athletes, they haven't done much. Point stands, moron. Glad you think he's so great! i see him as a dud for 75 percent of his races.

But he was a dud for 75 percent of his races BEFORE signing with Hoka. So this conversation should be under the "'get real' has no love for Manzano" thread.

icharus wrote:

get real wrote:

I would too. You're a small picture guy. Being #1 in the U.S., what does it mean really? My point still stands. Manzano wasn't running for Hoka when he got his medal. My original point was that since signing their athletes, they haven't done much. Point stands, moron. Glad you think he's so great! i see him as a dud for 75 percent of his races.

But he was a dud for 75 percent of his races BEFORE signing with Hoka. So this conversation should be under the "'get real' has no love for Manzano" thread.

Actually, good point. He got hammered by a steepler Saturday. Hope Hoka is getting their dollars' worth.

Hoka sponsored runner promotes Hoka shoes. Schlok, horror! I hope Hoka paid for that product placement.

Now a Coach wrote:

Hoka sponsored runner promotes Hoka shoes. Schlok, horror! I hope Hoka paid for that product placement.

There is no product placement in his case, that's what is interesting. He goes to big meets covered on television, and is nowhere to be found, while wearing his Hoka kit. Then he goes to WC's, kills it, gets lots of TV time, all the while wearing a NIKE USA singlet! If I was Van Dine, I would be annoyed.

There have been quite a few threads on Hoka and there is of course strong opinions both ways.

One thing I've noticed is that the pro Hoka posters are all wearing the shoe, and the complainers all seem to have never worn them and are forming their opinion based on looks or the usual "I'm letsrun tough and run in flats with 20000 miles on them".

Is there anyone who has worn them for a considerable amount of miles and NOT liked them?

I do know someone who tried the HOKA's and didn't like them. I do like them - A LOT. We're still friends...

Larger point is this: HOKA is putting a lot of money back into the sport. Sure, they see it as an investment. But they are shaking things up on the corporate side and on the shoe technology side. HOKA's entry into the market, and their willingness to sponsor both athletes and events, are positives for our sport. Whether or not the shoe works for you, if you're a fan of track and field, recognize that HOKA is doing good things - particularly in this Nike-dominated era of American track and field...

oldenuf wrote:

I do know someone who tried the HOKA's and didn't like them. I do like them - A LOT. We're still friends...

..

I'm 53 and still am running injury free, but the pavement really beats my legs now. Im hoping the Hoka will put a little pop back in my legs.

Did you go through a bigger adjustment period with them, or are they just like any new pair of shoes you need to get used to?

Thanks for the info!

Hdda8 wrote:

There have been quite a few threads on Hoka and there is of course strong opinions both ways.

One thing I've noticed is that the pro Hoka posters are all wearing the shoe, and the complainers all seem to have never worn them and are forming their opinion based on looks or the usual "I'm letsrun tough and run in flats with 20000 miles on them".

Is there anyone who has worn them for a considerable amount of miles and NOT liked them?

Great points.

Listen, to those who have not worn them, be sure and find a running specialty store that carries several or all the models, some are narrower than others.

I recently switched to Stinson Trails, and they are narrower than the model I had before (forget what they are now, gave them away). So, I solved the narrower problem by just wearing thinner socks, which worked.

It's really important to get the right model for you. As I've said before it may take 3-10 days to get used to them, so wear them around the house some first, etc.

Like another older runner stated, these things have helped my legs a ton, they reduce the impact and pounding by a lot. Like running on a soft sandy flat beach.

That said, figure out the right model for you; a friend of mine isn't sure he likes them yet because they cause him to run (he feels) more flat footed. Could be the model he got, cos I don't feel that way in mine.

Ironically, Hoka is marketing to the younger market, and the shoes are a boon for the older running body. Rave reviews!

Lauren Fleshman, a national champion in the 5,000 meters, likened the maximalist upswing to past footwear phenomena, now rejected as passé.

“To me, maximalist shoes fall right in the line of every other shoe trend,” she said. “There’s some good reasoning, but we don’t know enough about how it affects the body longer term, and we won’t know until everyone has been using it a while and all the other research comes out about how it destroys your body or whatever, and then there’s a lawsuit, and then there’s a campaign about how to use the technology properly, and then in the midst of all this confusion the next trend takes off. There is no shoe savior coming for us.”

Gee isn't this the same person hocking "nutrition" bars? 4:1 ratio based on the science of some guy who wrote a book who also was selling something? Lauren there is not nutrition bar savior coming for us either..... oh yea, she is telling us we need to spend 50-100 bucks on technical running shirts as well.

Thanks so much for this A Duck. I wish I had the option of going to a store, but I wear size 14 and they never have them (or any shoe I want) in stock so I usually have to roll the dice unless I want to wait over a week just to hopefully try them on.

At worst I'll wind up with a pair of walking shoes, but its worth the chance because I run almost exclusively in asphalt and concrete and need something to ease the shock. I'm thinking the Clifton's are the way for me to go.

get real wrote:

NATIONAL title? Yawn. No one cares, annually.

At what level above running 3:30.98 AND winning a National Title should someone care? How much better would someone need to get before they merit your attention?

get real wrote:

Tell us about wrote:

Tell us about your Olympic Silver Medal....from the last OG's in London.

You just made my point, idiot. He wasn't running for Hoka then. You're dumb.

No Track Athlete was running for Hoka in 2012 a$$ wipe. You brought up the annual championship yawn bs. There hasn't been an OG since 2012 when Hoka wasn't doing Track...

let us know when you win a national title and run even a sub 6:00 mile...we know you aren't anywhere near a single Hoka Sponsored Miler..lol!!!

Lates you fckn troll!

"“I run 70-80 miles a week, which is extreme, and I was suffering from extreme issues,” he said. “So I need extreme support.”

Whoa back off people! We are talking about an EXTREME EXTREME runner here. Did Manzano run across the border to get here? Seems like it considering he likes to run around the track with the mexican flag on his back.

Hdda8 wrote:

There have been quite a few threads on Hoka and there is of course strong opinions both ways.

One thing I've noticed is that the pro Hoka posters are all wearing the shoe, and the complainers all seem to have never worn them and are forming their opinion based on looks or the usual "I'm letsrun tough and run in flats with 20000 miles on them".

Is there anyone who has worn them for a considerable amount of miles and NOT liked them?

There are clearly quite a few Hoka shills here.

We got some "digital media specialists" on our hands boys. These interns are slimey...wonder how much they're getting paid. Rather, wonder IF they're getting paid???

I started wearing them after years of minimalist shoes (I'm in my 50s, running since Shorter was pre-empted by an imposter in '72). The first day was like a dream, floating on clouds for 12 miles. Next day: shinsplint pain! I had started overstriding slightly, due to the lack of impact and extra bounce. So dovetail them in on your easy runs first, then work from there. Well worth the effort.

Hdda8 wrote:

oldenuf wrote:

I do know someone who tried the HOKA's and didn't like them. I do like them - A LOT. We're still friends...

..

I'm 53 and still am running injury free, but the pavement really beats my legs now. Im hoping the Hoka will put a little pop back in my legs.

Did you go through a bigger adjustment period with them, or are they just like any new pair of shoes you need to get used to?

Thanks for the info!