New IAAF rules are out - Will Zoom Vaporfly 4% be banned for violating "spirit of the universality of athletics?"

Shouldn't that mean that prototypes cannot be used in races? You could interpret the rule to mean if the shoe isn't commercially available, then one cannot compete in it.

Then you get into more gray areas like is limited availability okay? Can you not sell the shoe, but make it known to other elites they're welcome to wear your company's shoe if they'd like?

---

nop critic wrote:

---

IAAF wrote:

"Rule 143: Clothing, shoes and athlete bibs
- Any type of shoe used must be reasonably available to all in the spirit of the universality of athletics. Shoes must not be constructed so as to give athletes any unfair assistance or advantage."

---

I don't think it will be banned but I wish they used that rule for the rest of athletics thought. If they used the same phrase "spirit universality of athletics" it would result in the ban the NOP and Salazar. Salazar forgot about the spirit of athletics a long time ago.

https://www.iaaf.org/news/iaaf-news/competition-rule-amendments-june-2018

---

---

get over it wrote:

---

nop critic wrote:

---

IAAF wrote:

"Rule 143: Clothing, shoes and athlete bibs
- Any type of shoe used must be reasonably available to all in the spirit of the universality of athletics. Shoes must not be constructed so as to give athletes any unfair assistance or advantage."

---

I don't think it will be banned but I wish they used that rule for the rest of athletics thought. If they used the same phrase "spirit universality of athletics" it would result in the ban the NOP and Salazar. Salazar forgot about the spirit of athletics a long time ago.

https://www.iaaf.org/news/iaaf-news/competition-rule-amendments-june-2018

---

Nike Vaporfly's are resonably available to all. I've bought two pairs from the manufacturer at retail price without any issue whatsoever. They are released many times per year and it's known in advance when that'll happen. Nike also gives you the option of downloading their app and having push notifications sent when they're released. If you want them you can get them.

---

Is Rupp’s shirt with holes reasonably available? I’ve never seen it sold in stores. LOCK HIM UP..or something

---

IAAF wrote:
Shoes must not be constructed so as to give athletes any unfair assistance or advantage."

---

Not the zoom vaporfly 4%, but the Vaporfly Elite 4% should be. When was the last time anyone saw it reasonably available to all ?

Rule 143: Clothing, shoes and athlete bibs
- Any type of shoe used must be reasonably available to all in the spirit of the universality of athletics. Shoes must not be constructed so as to give athletes any unfair assistance or advantage.

Could be a placebo

Does this mean custom shoes will be banned?

Now what about Adidas Boost? Wasn't their claim that boost improved running economy by 2% or something, more than any other shoe on the market?? That is until Nike one upped them?

Where do we draw the line?

---

And Boost wrote:

Now what about Adidas Boost? Wasn't their claim that boost improved running economy by 2% or something, more than any other shoe on the market?? That is until Nike one upped them?

Where do we draw the line?

---

Nike won't allow this rule coexist .

---

Work Commute Track Club wrote:

Does this mean custom shoes will be banned?

---

Hope it's not true. Last I heard, the spirit of the universality of athletics was a virgin and wished to remain so. Horrible if the spirit was violated.

If manufacturer-A makes a shoe 3g lighter than manufacturer-B is that an unfair advantage to athletes sponsored by manufacturer-B?

If you anti-Nike pvssies want parity then everyone should have to wear the exact same kit and shoes for every race.

Men have to wear kit A.

Women have to wear kit B.

Caster Semenya has to wear kit A.

Just because they're available now doesn't mean they were always. VF protos were on the feet of elites winning WMM'S for two years before they were publically released. A discussion board slightly ahead of LR knew this for quite some time...

---

Work Commute Track Club wrote:

Does this mean custom shoes will be banned?

---

Oops, the answer is......no! NIKE owns the IAAF

---

Shirt with holes wrote:

Is Rupp’s shirt with holes reasonably available? I’ve never seen it sold in stores. LOCK HIM UP..or something

---

this follows the logic in cycling races that require everything on a bicycle used in a race be available to the public within a few months (but some stuff is so exotic and produced in such limited quantity it skirts the rules)

however I know exactly why this "availability" rule popped up now

Brooks just finished supplying it's prototype 4% shoes with springs to all of it's sponsored athletes (expect many PRs from Brooks runners this autumn/winter that weren't using vapors previously)

Nike is well embedded within IAAF and USATF, if not directly sponsoring voting members, they purposely sponsor people in their immediate family to maintain control (ie. how could you vote against Nike, they put food on my plate, etc)

Nike knows it's patents will slow down any competitor from producing a similar shoe to the public but cannot stop prototypes (or competitor 5%, 6% etc. improvements from semi-custom 3D printing etc)

so this is an end-run-around

just ban full-length spring plates made of any material in any shoe from any manufacturer like the original rule 143 did

https://www.iaaf.org/news/news/iaaf-council-introduces-rule-regarding-techni

http://google.com/search?q=USATF+Rule+143+wearer+any+unfair+advantage+such+as+a+spring