My thoughts on Eliud Kipchoge's marathon/Nike stunt

Let me address your points:

1) People didn't see that valid WR as inferior to the Boston 2011 performance

2) This event wasn't wind aided

3) These shoes have been deemed valid by IAAF, where the Spira shoes weren't

4) OK Nike got publicity. Mostly form this site, by the way. This event is not going to lower fees for other runners.

5) The sport does benefit because it got some attention

And the fact that people like you can't stop talking about it proves the point about how much attention it garnered.

If it was merely a stunt, it would be ignored.

The event was in fact wind aided, because they had a major wind breaker driving in front of them. Instead of having a 13 mph "wind" in their face (their running speed against still air), they had lower air density which probably made it the equivalent of a 5 mph tailwind.

Try this: go run 8 mph into still air. Note your heart rate. On the same course, wait for a day with a 5 mph headwind, and then run your 8 mph. From an air resistance standpoint, that's the difference between 8 and 13 mph. Compare your heart rate between the two tests.

Then come back and tell me if the event was wind aided or not.

I am sorry but wind-aided means wind at your back, period.

Like they had in Boston 2011.

It doesn't mean reduction in wind resistance.

I'm sorry that you failed science 101 and do not understand the concept of why wind-aided courses are not record eligible.

Record eligible courses, with regard to wind assistance, are courses that start and end near the same point.

Like this course - a track.

The track that they ran on was record eligible.

Point-to-point courses are not record eligible because you could have wind at your back for a significant potion of the race.

The reason why the event was not record eligible was because the pacers did not lead from the very start.

They got to rest and then jump back into the lead.

Only valid competitors can pace.

Once you get lapped or jump in from the side, you are not a valid competitor.

The people that are against the Nike sub2 project are the 60yr old white men that run our government. Both cannot handle change and want to keep the "tradition" and the "institution" alive.

Running NEEDS events like this to happen. It gets people hyped up about the sport. Good or bad media or social media coverage of this event, it got a LOT of people talking about it.

I said this in another thread. Nike sub2 reminds me of formula car racing. The intense amount of innovation and R&D is not practical for 99.999% of the population involved, BUT the trickle down technology and science is seen in every car (or now shoe) we use today. Events like this help further us in sport, and in everyday life.

A note for all of you. The endless hating threads on here are, none-the-less, talking about Nike. So feel good knowing that your rants are exactly what they want.

Star wrote:

Let me address your points:

1) People didn't see that valid WR as inferior to the Boston 2011 performance

2) This event wasn't wind aided

3) These shoes have been deemed valid by IAAF, where the Spira shoes weren't

4) OK Nike got publicity. Mostly form this site, by the way. This event is not going to lower fees for other runners.

5) The sport does benefit because it got some attention

And the fact that people like you can't stop talking about it proves the point about how much attention it garnered.

If it was merely a stunt, it would be ignored.

Finally a smart person, I originally thought this thing was bs, but it got running a ton of attention, this was trending on twitter for over a day after it was over, tell me the last time running got that much attention?

Most casuals/non runners were more focused on what kipchoge was doing as well not Nike, if people did any paying attention they would see how good this was.

If at the Berlin Marathon there was a windbreaking tesla billboard with a laser behind it showing the optimal place to run, that too would become a record-ineligible race.

The fact that this stunt got attention maritz very little. Bad music and bad people get a lot of attention but it doesn't mean that it's a good thing. I agree with the original poster that this was merely a stunt, it will not help the running Community especially Kenyans. The poster is obviously a big-time Insider in the sport.

Oddfart at the table wrote:

The poster is obviously a big-time Insider in the sport.

Glad you can spot the "insiders".

OMG your so incredibly wrong wrote:

If at the Berlin Marathon there was a windbreaking tesla billboard with a laser behind it showing the optimal place to run, that too would become a record-ineligible race.

Yes, I agree, that would make it record-ineligible.

That doesn't make it wind-aided.

It falls in the line of illegal pacing.

No one is saying this is record legal.

I was saying that each of the OP's points were wrong.

For some reason, none of the points were about illegal pacing.

The OP ironically pointed to Banister's first sub four as a good example.

But that technically had illegal pacers based on the rules of the time.

He had rabbits and that was bad etiquette at the time. If his pacers didn't finish, his record would not have counted.

They have since changed those rules.

Maybe, maybe not. It just appeared that the author of this thread seem to know on various front many levels of this port. He/she obviously brought an historical element to it as well.

Apologies from the jetlag, having watch the event and flying back from Europe I think I get a pass.

I stand by my assertion that this is not good for the sport for elites.

There is a lot of hypocrisy with powerhouse Nike and upstart Spira and what is considered "sanctioned" or certified.

My Bannister comment was that all athletes had the same shoes, oval track and 240 seconds to do what he did. No special gimmicks and Landy proved that true days later. This event had too many favorables thrown in, it wreaked of what it was, a publicity stunt.

Where has it been stated by IAAF that the shoes are valid? I've only read that Nike claims they are within the rules, but nothing from IAAF.

Star wrote:

Let me address your points:

1) People didn't see that valid WR as inferior to the Boston 2011 performance

2) This event wasn't wind aided

3) These shoes have been deemed valid by IAAF, where the Spira shoes weren't

4) OK Nike got publicity. Mostly form this site, by the way. This event is not going to lower fees for other runners.

5) The sport does benefit because it got some attention

And the fact that people like you can't stop talking about it proves the point about how much attention it garnered.

If it was merely a stunt, it would be ignored.

Trending on twitter?! It was PROMOTED by Nike. They bought that trend.

Not a Nike fan. But damn, am I only one who apreciates this effort. They had pacers. Handed them water. So what?

Marathons should be like this for elites. More like Tour de France.

I watched a full marathon since I saw Special K break the WR in Chicago. I thought is was a great set up.

So if someone sits and kicks and sets a WR it shouldn't count? It wasn't downhill. There was no giant wind fan. The dude ran on his own effort proving 2hrs may indeed one day be broken.

As for records... No one knows the difference between 2:00:25 and Oprah's 4+ hours. So hardly bad for the sport.

Why not have races and time trials?

Get rid of the rabbits in most races - they may get a lot more like Beijing or some of the older marathons. Rabbits make some big races dull and sometimes bad pacing blows up the whole race.

Then make Berlin, Dubai, or this event a true time trial.

I don't think OP is right about impact

This is a great article.

http://deadspin.com/nikes-two-hour-long-eliud-kipchoge-documentary-was-beau-1794984200

"... the project was unsuccessful because it failed to show the limitless potential of humans, if you generously grant that was one of its goals. It failed to show how close we are to breaking the two-hour barrier. Quite the opposite: It demonstrated in no uncertain terms how far we are from it. If an athlete of Kipchoge’s caliber can’t do it under perfectly contrived conditions, it’s not going to happen anytime soon.

But the most unanticipated failure of the army of highly paid Nike folks—whose job it was to think of every possible eventuality—was that somehow Eliud Kipchoge managed to steal a show Nike set up to be about them. The multi-year, multi-million dollar Breaking2 project was supposed to be about Nike, for god’s sake—Nike’s innovations, Nike’s technology, Nike’s dominance of the sport, Nike’s triumph over human physiology, and Nike’s stuff you can buy. Kipchoge was supposed to be a mere part of the project, the platform on which Nike would build their great pyramid. Months of heavy hype attracted millions of eyeballs to an event that turned out to be an ode to Eliud Kipchoge, not Nike."