So, I’ve been following the Runner’s World editor David Willey’s attempt at BQing with the help of Nike coaches. I think Nike intended it to be one big shoe ad, and you can argue about whether the editor of Runner’s World should have already known some of the things he “learned†during his training, or if the editor should be someone who already runs faster than a 3:30 marathon, but that’s not the point of this post so leave that discussion for elsewhere. All in all I think it was still an interesting feature to follow along with, so I'm glad they did it even if the marketing aspects are annoying.
His attempt was last weekend at Bayshore and he ran 3:28:55…meeting his 3:30 BQ time but probably not good enough to actually get in to Boston. All in all it was presented on the podcast as a resounding accomplishment.
Here’s my question: He wore the Nike Vaporfly 4%s for the race. He had only run ~25 miles in these shoes in his life prior to the race..."easing into them". At about half way he started feeling a hamstring tweak, and between mile 18 and the finish he had to stop FOUR times for 10-30s each because his hamstring was seizing up. What are the chances the shoes had something to do with the hamstring issues? He was on his feet for longer than the pros that wear similar (but custom-made versions) of the shoes, he’s likely not as biomechanically sound as the pros, and he hadn’t had much time to adjust to the new shoe that he described as “making him run differently.†The podcast was interesting because they went through the checklist of Nike marketing points before the race as expected, and then never mentioned the shoes again. I think he would have been better off sticking with the shoes he trained in, and it may have cost him a chance to actually run at Boston.
Oh, and he started the race a minute late because he warmed up in his regular shoes and had to take the time to switch shoes before the gun went off. Ha.