Carbon fiber zoom x spikes! I know they’ve been around for a bit, but now another world record falls to Nike technology... Are they fair, what do you think??
Pics of the shoes seen in this article:
www.sportsnewsireland.com/other_sports/sifan-hassan-breaks-womens-mile-world-record-in-monaco/amp/
Other pics on insta:
Carbon plates are the new EPO.
Your continued and constant obsession with this is just plain weird.
Clown shoes strike again!
These should banned along with drugs.
Bizarre shoe fetish wrote:
Your continued and constant obsession with this is just plain weird.
I don't think the obsession is weird at all. In running, a small advantage is huge. There is a new rule, noone has seen it enforced and people want to know what the deal is.
Someone explained to me in another thread that the actual shoe doesn't have be available but similar ones do. So the fact that Jared Ward's Saucony marathon shoe isn't available doesn't matter because Nike has it's own and presumably better shoe out there.
But there is no one else out there with a 4% spike. Perhaps Nike could argue that the 4% flat isn't that much different but I totally understand why someone is obsessed about this. If we have a new rule, we want to see if it will be enforced.
I know I saw a good photo of the spikes somewhere today online. If you find them, please post it.
Note: Typos in Rojo's 2nd sentence have been corrected.
She didn't win by hundreths or tenths. She won by seconds. The shoes don't do that.
How much did she break the world record by? Does that matter?
Springer wrote:
How much did she break the world record by? Does that matter?
4:12.33
4:12.56
u do the math
It’s a shoe, and she broke the world record. Doesn’t need to be more complicated than that. Get over it.
RonSwanson wrote:
Carbon fiber zoom x spikes! I know they’ve been around for a bit, but now another world record falls to Nike technology... Are they fair, what do you think??
Pics of the shoes seen in this article:
www.sportsnewsireland.com/other_sports/sifan-hassan-breaks-womens-mile-world-record-in-monaco/amp/Other pics on insta:
https://www.instagram.com/p/BzDcTfCnQ_d/?hl=en
Hate to break it to you but Hassan was not wearing the cheaterfly spikes. Hassan was in a different Nike prototype spike, most likely the next progression of the Nike Victory spike or a new model that will replace that line. And before you argue they are prototypes so the record is void. This prototype testing has been done by Nike and other brands for at least 12 years. Nike always released their new spikes with the summer Olympics, and can be seen testing out prototypes of the new spikes in the year or two leading up to the Olympics. This was done in 2014/2015 with the Nike Victory 3 and Matumbo 3 along with some sprint spikes.
4% is the new epo wrote:
Carbon plates are the new EPO.
absolute horsesh@t. Try running in a pair of Nike zoom fly flyknits. Slow and soft and heavy. It's the cushioning in the 4% that makes them pop.
Charlie Grice ran a 4 second pb in the car on plate spike in Monaco. 3.34-3.30
Cheaterfly spike wrote:
Charlie Grice ran a 4 second pb in the car on plate spike in Monaco. 3.34-3.30
Cheater shoes on a cheater track. SMH.
Rojo I was actually going to start a thread on this but then thought I better get for a run. Anyhow the women's mile record was soft compared with the 1500m, my on issued uveitis
I would say the run shouldnt count, wish rules would be enforced.
If we were using the shoes I ran in in HS still, ugh. And then the tracks we ran on back then. And that was after cinder and horrid old leather shoes folks like Ryan had to run in. So yes, shoes and tracks are now different. To stop that is just silly. Records don’t quite compare, but that’s life. No motors in the shoes like the ones found hidden in some bike races. A bit more spring, yes, but that’s so true today vs my prime running days.
rojo wrote:
Someone explained to me in another thread that the actual shoe doesn't have be available but similar ones do.
What else has been explained to you in other threads? Why cherry pick your lessons? I get it that some are harder to accept that others, but it doesnt make them less true.
rojo wrote:
Bizarre shoe fetish wrote:
Your continued and constant obsession with this is just plain weird.
I don't think the obsession is weird at all. In running, a small advantage is huge. There is a new rule, no one has scene it enforced and people want to know what the deal is.
Someone explained to me in another thread that the actual shoe doesn't have be available but similar ones do. So the fact that Jared Ward's Saucony marathon shoe isn't available doesn't matter because Nike has it's own and presumably better shoe out there.
But there is no one else out there with a 4% spike. Perhaps Nike could argue that the 4% flat isn't that much different but I totally understand why someone is obsessed about this. If we have a new rule, we want to see if it will be enforced.
I know I saw a good photo of the spikes somewhere today online. If you find them, please post it.
How boring, predictable and tacitly partisan.
If she couldn't be realistically claimed to have doped, I guess the shoes had to be discussed (as per Kipchoge, etc.). The same discussion point occured with Nike sprint ("brush") spikes in 1995. If they're so good, throw away the Brooks et al spikes and run in Nike shoes unsponsored; get a paper round before getting paid when the 4% improvement comes.
Subway Surfers wrote:
Rojo I was actually going to start a thread on this but then thought I better get for a run. Anyhow the women's mile record was soft compared with the 1500m, my on issued uveitis
Don't know what happened here, anyhow my only issue with these new spikes is the triangular heel flicks water straight upwards at people behind on wet days.
rojo wrote: There is a new rule, no one has scene it enforced and people want to know what the deal is.
I agree.
