Is there any advantage to wearing spikes for a track 10,000m?

According to Daniels, assuming your flats and spikes weigh the same, there is no advantage to spikes vs flats on a dry track. A slick track, spikes can be useful.

Typically track spikes are just lighter than flats. But nowadays lots of flats are as light as a pair of distance spikes.

One of the reasons people experience such soreness after a 10k race in spikes is because they train in shoes with a high heel-toe drop. Then when they put on spikes, a shoe with little if any drop, their achilles tendon uses a fuller range of motion than it normally experiences.

Train in flats and you won't be as sore from spikes anymore.

reader of the forums wrote:

One of the reasons people experience such soreness after a 10k race in spikes is because they train in shoes with a high heel-toe drop. Then when they put on spikes, a shoe with little if any drop, their achilles tendon uses a fuller range of motion than it normally experiences.

Train in flats and you won't be as sore from spikes anymore.

Not necessarily. I train in low drop shoes (Kinvaras (4mm) and Altras (0mm) for easy runs, Type A6 (4mm) for workouts) and I still find that my calves are sore after running in spikes (especially the 10k).

My suggestion is that if you want to race in a certain shoe without soreness you have to train in that shoe. Try doing strides in spikes 2-3 times a week, or maybe some of your workout reps in spikes. That being said, I recently started racing my 10ks in the Saucony Endorphin Racer instead of the spike equivalent Saucony Endorphin LD4, and I don't think a light pair of flats will slow you down.

Flashback to the 1998 - Spanish athlete - Fabian Roncero, ran a European record of 27.14 in the Euro challenge 10,000, Lisbon wearing flats. No one, since then, has come close to that time wearing flats.

Ghost in China

ghost wrote:

Flashback to the 1998 - Spanish athlete - Fabian Roncero, ran a European record of 27.14 in the Euro challenge 10,000, Lisbon wearing flats. No one, since then, has come close to that time wearing flats.

Ghost in China

What about Jason Rexing?

If you are an elite who runs 64 second laps 25 times in a row, there's as much reason as wearing them for a 4:16 1600, which is quite a bit of reason.

If you run 100 second laps then there is no reason. But no reason not to either. Distance spikes aren't much different from distance flats.

Portugal not in Europe?

Take a closer look at elite's shoes. A lot of American elites have "spikes" that are really hybrid flats. Dathan Ritzenhein had a pair of "spikes" made that had a spike upper, the midsole and outsole of the Streak XC, with a Matumbo spikeplate tacked on to the bottom. I dunno if that's what he wore when he ran 27:22 but he definitely used them for quite a while on the track.

That's because spikes have essentially a negative drop. Without the spike implements in, the heel-toe differential in a spike is usually about 0mm but the spikes force your ankle into a greater eccentric stretch, and effectively raise the forefoot height of the shoe, making the heel/toe drop negative.

Also don't forget that RUNNING FAST also creates a greater magnitude eccentric contraction, so to some extent, unless you're already used to doing 10km of work at 10k pace in spikes, you're gonna get sore calves from a track 10k if you wear spikes.

I think you should wear spikes for a 10,000m race only if you are the Jeilan/Farah type. If you rely on your kick in the last 600m or less then spikes could give you the edge you need over your competitors.

As a former decent 10,000m guy I ran 29:05 in spikes and 29:56 in flats I relied heavily on finishing speed and mid race surges. Wearing spikes had a huge advantage for myself. At some points I was able to close in 54 or faster over the final 400m which is something that would have been near impossible in flats. I feel flats are better for the runner that is set on running one hard gear for the entire race but for the runner that changes gears numerous times spikes are much more useful. For the runners that expierence pain and severe soreness I would evaluate training and preperation as a 10,000m is not a beginner's event.

Hope this is somewhat helpful and best of luck.

I don't think it has anything to do with speed or whether you rely on a kick or not. Each person should just wear the lightest shoe that does not interfere with their ability to run as fast as they can over the distance. The shoes, whether they be flats or spikes, should be comfortable enough that you don't notice them. For some people, this will apply to spikes, and for many others, it will apply to flats. Personal preference.

The New Balance RC5000 weighs 3.1 oz. The Mizuno Wave Universe weighs 2.8 oz. What spikes are that light? You are running on a rubberized track. Do you really think you need spikes for traction? Spikes weigh more, put too much strain on the ATs and calves and they just plain hurt. They may help for sprints and the SC but I don't think they help for any event longer than 400m.

As a guy who maxes out around 31 low for 10k, I must say I experience absolutely zero soreness after wearing spikes. I wear reasonably minimal shoes in training, but I think if you're trained to the best of your ability, you shouldn't experience any disproportionate amount of soreness from wearing spikes. If you're getting soreness from wearing them, unless they fit really poorly, it's probably because you're undertrained and could probably run faster if your calves were proportionally as strong as the rest of your body.

Does anyone think you get more return from the harder spike plate than the cushy flat? Especially when running on softer tracks. I don't know the answer but I used to wonder about this. On a dry track I'm not sure th traction makes any difference in a 10k.

Tribe wrote:

Does anyone think you get more return from the harder spike plate than the cushy flat? Especially when running on softer tracks. I don't know the answer but I used to wonder about this. On a dry track I'm not sure th traction makes any difference in a 10k.

Theoretically, if you can tune the stiffness of the track + your shoe so that the rebound time of the track & shoe is similar to your ground contact time, you can get a slight "boost" as the rebounding track and shoe help propel you off the ground. In practice, this is extraordinarily difficult to achieve, since it all depends on how fast you run, how stiff your legs are, the ambient temperature, etc. But I have a hunch that when people feel like a certain track and shoe combination gives them more "pop" or "response" in their stride, it's because they're keying in on this effect. A track and shoe combination that feels "spongey" or "soggy" is probably too soft for you, at least at that speed.

Are there any spikes as light as the two flats I listed? Does anyone dispute that you can run faster in a lighter shoe than a heavier one? How will the design of the spike overcome the 1-3oz weight advantage for these flats?

I believe the Nike Victory Elites are the lightest spikes on the market, and they're listed at 3.6 oz. The Victory 2s and Matumbos are listed around 4 oz. I don't really know anything about other brand spikes though. The original victories were the lightest ever when they came out in 2008 or so.

I'm not going to google because I'm feeling a little lazy, but I believe the Saucony LD4 is a small-but-measurable amount lighter than the Vic Elites. If the 5th generation of that spike is out yet perhaps it's even lighter.

Tangentially: the Vic Elites are the same weight as the OG Vics (actually weighed mine). In some small way it seems like the Vic 2s were actually a downgrade from the OGs, since they are in fact heavier.

A. Hipster wrote:

I believe the Nike Victory Elites are the lightest spikes on the market, and they're listed at 3.6 oz. The Victory 2s and Matumbos are listed around 4 oz. I don't really know anything about other brand spikes though. The original victories were the lightest ever when they came out in 2008 or so.

I don't know about the current elites but your second statement is wrong the Zoom Matumbos were actually lighter than the Zoom Victories. I believe Zoom Matumbo 2's are still at 3.6 oz as their weight so they atleast match the elite.

Honestly at this tiny amount of weight and difference between it improved performance purely just because its lighter isn't much Matumbo 3.6 v the RC5000 3.1 is .5 oz. Once you get into this range of flat/spike weights its really just which feels more comfortable and will allow you to run the most efficiently(not being over/under aggressive for the distance)