Non Vaporfly4% wearers prayers about to be answered!!!

Asics already has prototypes of a shoe with a plate. Sponsored athletes are testing them now.

Vaporfly Asterisk wrote:

errrrrr? Yeah, like I said jumping onto a trampoline is EXACTLY the same as jumping on to cushions.

All spring components have exactly the same properties!

A plate is not a spring. You’re a prick.

A plate is not a spring you dick wrote:

Vaporfly Asterisk wrote:

errrrrr? Yeah, like I said jumping onto a trampoline is EXACTLY the same as jumping on to cushions.

All spring components have exactly the same properties!

A plate is not a spring. You’re a prick.

Call it what you want. Does not change the fact that 4%=cheating.

Everyone here who does not see the 4% as cheating, I have a question.

Say a non-Nike company develops a shoe with foam, and a plate made out of some sort of material, and the two have to work together or the shoe is impossible to wear or use for running. Now, say this shoe causes an average runner to have a stride of 17 feet, and suddenly the marathon record falls to 1:56.12. Hobby joggers the world over can run 2:23 with ease.

Track records fall by crazy amounts, and NBA hoops have to be raised to factor in the amazing jumps now seen. Baseball fields are enlarged, since anyone can steal a base off any pitch or near pitch, speeds are just too fast.

There's a patent on this technology, which the industry can't touch for 7 or 8 or 10 years, whatever. This company booms, Nike falls to bankruptcy status, and every single athletic world record is owned by this shoe, or a version of it, owned by one company.

Now what?

4%=cheating wrote:

That's not answering my prayers. Answering my prayers would be the IAAF banning them.

So they should ban all events on foam/rubber track's and go back to cinders ??

The shoe don't make the man, the man makes the shoe.

4%=cheating wrote:

A plate is not a spring you dick wrote:

A plate is not a spring. You’re a prick.

Call it what you want. Does not change the fact that 4%=cheating.

So racing on a rubber/foam track is cheating?

Work a few more hours and you can afford a pair.

A plate is not a spring you dick wrote:

Vaporfly Asterisk wrote:

errrrrr? Yeah, like I said jumping onto a trampoline is EXACTLY the same as jumping on to cushions.

All spring components have exactly the same properties!

A plate is not a spring. You’re a prick.

Once again here is a picture of the actual plate:-

Only an absolute idiot would claim that this isn't clearly pivoted and therefore acting as a levered spring. Perhaps being so simple minded as to call out random strangers as "pricks" what has happened here is that you are mentally incapable of understanding that a coiled spring is not the only type of mechanical spring. Moran.

You can bend your 4% on the floor, let go, and it will bounce several feet. Do your other shoes do that?

These suits floated. Anyone who swims will tell you that if you float on top of the water, you swim faster. These suits were banned from competition:

https://youtu.be/chwxaUtnfUk?t=13

You're dumb as dumb can be. The plate accounts for less than 1/30 of energy saved by foam.

Basically everyone who is commenting hasn’t used the 4% and has been suckered in by great marketing. All that being said, we are at a point in time that even if a shoe advancement did change the game, so what get with the times and get a better shoe or run in your old kinky shoes.

marshal wrote:

You're dumb as dumb can be. The plate accounts for less than 1/30 of energy saved by foam.

Lovely. Ok, since I'm so "dumb" and you are clearly so smart I guess you won't have any problems telling me how you came up with that figure?

... And no, I do not just want a link to that article. What I want is a sensible argument at how you / they arrived at that figure given, by their own admission, they did not test the plate in isolation. What they have done is compressed the foam with the plate still inside it and attributed the ENTIRE energy return to the foam ? But I guess you can tell me how that's acceptable... Thanks!

If it was just the foam then the Zoom Fly would be as fast as the 4%. Spoiler alert: they're not.

What's faster is the SYSTEM foam+plate, idiots.

Races sssss wrote:

Going to go on a limb and say it will be 2-3 more years before any company comes up with anything near as special as the 4 % is. That shoe is the future of shoes and it’s not from the plate it is 100 relative to how soft the cushion is. If the plate did anything people would PR shorter distances in the shoe. I have went through numerous pairs of 4% as I’ve tested them even before release the shoe does nothing for anything shorter than a marathon and the only reason it works for a marathon is because the shoe is so soft it reduces muscle tear and breakdown. Any shoes emulating the 4% by making a hard shoe with a plate will fail so badly.

It really took this long for a post straight from Beaverton? They used to start entire threads; now they're just MB trolls!

Akser of queasiness wrote:

If it was just the foam then the Zoom Fly would be as fast as the 4%. Spoiler alert: they're not.

What's faster is the SYSTEM foam+plate, idiots.

BOOOOM!

That’s exactly what I said, If the plate was causing the great times in marathons then everyone would rock the zoom fly’s as they get 300-400 miles compared to 150 miles for the 4%. The extremely soft nature foam the 4% is definitely the trick .. the plate just gives the shoe stability.

I really like Skechers shoes but wrote:

I will not buy anything with a carbon plate in it.

But if you're out running in them for a shorter time you reduce your carbon footprint! ;-)

Have you calculated the energy requirements to have a stride length of 17 feet for an average human, the speed they would need to maintain for an average athlete matobolic rate?

I will say this again as the people commenting on the 4% is a cheating shoe, it’s is the principal of making shoe faster for any shoe which is not a single material midsole. They are meant to make us faster by enabling us to maintain a higher speed for longer so we can fatigues later. The 4% does it better than other shoes. The Nike Pegasus 35 has a nice long full length zoom air bag, bit like a plate aka spring?!? Or is that just cushioning? A bit like an unstable foam aka boost which needs Eva foam and a shank to stabilise or Zoom x which is very stable and needs a full length plate, (4%) or react (turbo) right?

Akser of queasiness wrote:

If it was just the foam then the Zoom Fly would be as fast as the 4%. Spoiler alert: they're not.

What's faster is the SYSTEM foam+plate, idiots.

You got your spring plate on my PBX foam!

Pretzel Man wrote:

4%=cheating wrote:

Call it what you want. Does not change the fact that 4%=cheating.

So racing on a rubber/foam track is cheating?

Work a few more hours and you can afford a pair.

Synthetic tracks, everyone is competing on a even playing field. 4% cheating shoes means a unfair playing field. I do not wear the cheating 4% shoes even though I can afford. For I want to know it was me and my hard work, not some cheating shoes for my results.

4%=cheating wrote:

That's not answering my prayers. Answering my prayers would be the IAAF banning them.

Why would you want them banned?