I bought a pair of Cheaterfly 4% , how are they even legal?

---

Cherry Busted wrote:

---

Buster Cherry wrote:

---

juanito wrote:

---

Buster Cherry wrote:

- Some have compared to using EPO or to using types of doping that are sketchy but not illegal yet because the rules haven't caught up yet. That's ridiculous - this isn't like some blind spot in the rules that USATF hasn't figured out yet that you are taking advantage of. Look at it this way - you would never admit in an interview that you were doing that random type of doping that isn't illegal, but you would obviously be fine telling people you are wearing Vaporfly's because they can already see them on your feet!

---

They're more akin to the now-illegal swimsuits people were using to break records a few years ago.

---

Exactly. And in both cases you should wear them as long as they are legal.

---

Okay, so then what are you going to do when you set a lifetime PR in the cheater 4%s and then they are deemed illegal?

It's clear to everyone who is paying attention that these shoes give runners a significant advantage. People who defend these shoes are just desperate for faster times and don't want to face the music that they didn't put in the honest work to get faster but just paid for a faster time because everyone else was doing it. Where do we want to draw the line as runners?

---

It runs itself. A definite cheat shoes. I think Zoom X alone would still make it a great marathon shoes for cushioning but that plate gives you that bounce on each step. I am definitely working lot less to run the same pace. The guys who ran 2:03s in Boost would have ran Kipchoge's time if they had the 4% at that time.

Companies/athletes have been modifying shoes for awhile. Those shoes you have seen on elites feet aren’t always the exact same as the retail versions.

Nike are doing some good shoes at the moment, I do find the reacts too springy and show up all my strength weaknesses and bad form, unlike the Pegasus

All of this comes out of the fact that Mr Eliud Kipchoge had run 2:00:25 in Monza and then 2:01:39 in Berlin.
All of these "experts" are they so sure that without those 4% vaporfly Kipchoge didnt run so fast?
Many others elite guys have the vaporfly but I dont see any incredible improvments compared to before" vaporfly era".
At Monza also the other 2 guys had vaporfly. In Berlin same thing.
Mary Keitany has adidas and is still the fastest around. I really wish Mary will be able to break WR next year , so maybe everybody will say how adidas shoes are fast!!!!
You know running people are too much influenced by shoes that elite runners wear.
When Kipsang and Kimetto had the marathon WR with adidas adios everybody went to buy those shoes.
Now of course everybody (me too) wants gives a try to nike zoom fly, nike zoom flyknit, or for those who want to spend
250$ 4% vaporfly that have a different type of foam from the two model above.

Nike zoom fly (lunarlon foam, with plastic and carbon plate)
Nike zoom flyknit (react foam, with carbon plate)
Nike 4% vaporfly (zoom x foam ,with carbon plate)
Nike pegasus turbo ( zoom x foam, no plate)

I have the first two and I just say that are great shoes. Probably the 4% vaporfly with zoom x foam is better , But I dont know. To me the great revolutionary thing that Nike have done with the 4% and also with the zoom fly is that for the first time a shoes used by Elite so very fast and light, Can be used also by "normal" people. I mean that while with the
Adidas adios except if you are 50 kg and very fast is a risk to run a marathon, with the Nike zoom fly shoes also someone that run a Marathon around 3 hours can have a great running experience and also a lot of protection thanks to the foam volume.

I dont think so!!!! With all the respect that I can have for Kimetto and Kipsang, I think that Kipchoge time is not because
the 4% vaporfly.
Remember also that in 2015 Eliud run 2:04 with shoes insole fall out from the early miles of the race, a lot of pain, blistering on the left foot, big toe cut with lot of blood, and the shoes were the old zoom streak if i m not mistaken.
Kipchoge has the WR because of his talent. The shoes are important but not in terms of a percentage gain on the final chrono that is a marketing thing.

Nike needs to make the Streak LT with ZoomX foam. That would be a badass racing flat for the shorter stuff.

---

Bluesky wrote:

I dont think so!!!! With all the respect that I can have for Kimetto and Kipsang, I think that Kipchoge time is not because
the 4% vaporfly.
Remember also that in 2015 Eliud run 2:04 with shoes insole fall out from the early miles of the race, a lot of pain, blistering on the left foot, big toe cut with lot of blood, and the shoes were the old zoom streak if i m not mistaken.
Kipchoge has the WR because of his talent. The shoes are important but not in terms of a percentage gain on the final chrono that is a marketing thing.

---

Here's a devils advocate question for you. I've read a lot about these shoes, and reviews say the heel is higher than the forefoot but an amount greater than in most shoes.

Couldn't the feeling of being propelled forward just be coming from having your heel higher than usual?


Thanks for the feedback.

---

Devils Advocate for vaporfly wrote:

Here's a devils advocate question for you. I've read a lot about these shoes, and reviews say the heel is higher than the forefoot but an amount greater than in most shoes.

Couldn't the feeling of being propelled forward just be coming from having your heel higher than usual?


Thanks for the feedback.

---

---

another runner wrote:

---

Devils Advocate for vaporfly wrote:

Here's a devils advocate question for you. I've read a lot about these shoes, and reviews say the heel is higher than the forefoot but an amount greater than in most shoes.

Couldn't the feeling of being propelled forward just be coming from having your heel higher than usual?


Thanks for the feedback.

---

We are not talking about feeling. We are talking about measured efficiency. These shoes have been measured to be more efficient for a given runner than when they wear any other shoe. Some the efficiency improvement comes from the carbon spring. Other shoes with the same heel to toe offset do not give the same efficiency improvement. Remove the carbon spring and no one has a problem with it.

---

No, I can't stand Nike. But Nike isn't the only company who are creating shoes with carbon fiber springs that should be banned. Sketchers and Hoka both have racing flats that also should be banned. I hold the same opinion as Ross Tucker. This issue is extremely similar to the LZR swim suit that was eventually banned. Athletes wearing these shoes have an unfair advantage just like the LZR athletes had.

---

Devils Advocate for vaporfly wrote:

Here's a devils advocate question for you. I've read a lot about these shoes, and reviews say the heel is higher than the forefoot but an amount greater than in most shoes.

Couldn't the feeling of being propelled forward just be coming from having your heel higher than usual?


Thanks for the feedback.

---

You can literally use what you wrote to describe the action a foam midsole is going through during loading and expansion. It’s not incorrect, but you need a better argument before labeling the VF cheating.

---

The feeling of being propelled forward is because the plate is shaped precisely to force that. Just look at it. The heel point is raised way above the forefoot so every foot strike when you rock back it bends but then stiffens back into place LIKE A SPRING. That's mechanical aid it provides.

---

---

Well...maybe wrote:

You can literally use what you wrote to describe the action a foam midsole is going through during loading and expansion. It’s not incorrect, but you need a better argument before labeling the VF cheating.

---

The feeling of being propelled forward is because the plate is shaped precisely to force that. Just look at it. The heel point is raised way above the forefoot so every foot strike when you rock back it bends but then stiffens back into place LIKE A SPRING. That's mechanical aid it provides.

---

---

"another runner" and others, thanks for the reply. Much appreciated.

Should we ban all track spikes?

---

another runner wrote:

---

Well...maybe wrote:

You can literally use what you wrote to describe the action a foam midsole is going through during loading and expansion. It’s not incorrect, but you need a better argument before labeling the VF cheating.

---

The feeling of being propelled forward is because the plate is shaped precisely to force that. Just look at it. The heel point is raised way above the forefoot so every foot strike when you rock back it bends but then stiffens back into place LIKE A SPRING. That's mechanical aid it provides.

---

---

Do you believe Oscar Pistorious should of been allowed to break the work record with his blades? Do you think the bionic boots should be allowed? I do not think we should allow shoes with springs in them. And I am not talking about the foam. I am talking about adding a spring of external material to the foam. Nike's own patent for the vaporfly shoes use the words "spring plate". Even they acknowledge that is what it is. Here is a patent lawyer's interpretation: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/nikes-breaking2-project-patent-attorneys-phil-jeffrey

Something needs to be done to prevent these shoes in the future to protect the integrity of the sport moving forward. The 4% is only the beginning. It is going to turn into an arms race and we will have our selves a big problem just like swimming did.

---

---

Well...maybe wrote:

You can literally use what you wrote to describe the action a foam midsole is going through during loading and expansion. It’s not incorrect, but you need a better argument before labeling the VF cheating.

---

The feeling of being propelled forward is because the plate is shaped precisely to force that. Just look at it. The heel point is raised way above the forefoot so every foot strike when you rock back it bends but then stiffens back into place LIKE A SPRING. That's mechanical aid it provides.

---

---

---

Vaporfly Asterisk wrote:

That report was completely embarrassing pseudo-science. They didn't even look at the plate and foam components in isolation, merely guessed based upon the bending involved.

But here's the thing - the carbon fiber plate does sit on top of foam. So the plate is supported by the foam until the foam deteriorates, then I guess the point of lever begins to go and that is why their effectiveness becomes shot so quickly.

---