do vaporfly deniers also favor the steam engine over modern internal combustion engine?

All Foam is Springy wrote:

JohnnyS wrote:

My issue is that the design actually works as a spring, which is something a running shoe shouldn’t do.

Boost material also works as a spring.

Everrun material also works as a spring.

Those materials were built to return energy to the runner. Should those be banned as well?

The OP's point stands here: you're saying that everything up to some arbitrary point that you concocted is ok and anything beyond that is not ok. Why is your arbitrary line in the sand legitimate?

being arbitrary doesn't in itself make something illegitimate. Setting a speed limit of 65mph is arbitrary--it could as easily be 64 or 66--but that doesn't imply that there aren't valid reasons for setting a limit (maybe 80mph is unsafe on that road). So if there is a level of energy return that we simply don't want in a shoe, then we're going to end up needing to set an arbitrary cutoff below. The only other alternative is to ban certain designs like coils springs, leaf springs, air pods, ... but trouble with that is it is very hard to ban designs that no one has thought of yet.

The swim suit was buoyant so they floated more at the top of the water giving them less water resistance. The shoes give a negligible advantage. I'd give at most a minute over a marathon, and mere seconds over a half marathon and nothing over 5k and shorter. I've worn them on and off for the past year and don't see any obvious time improvement. But they are more comfortable and can prevent injury compared to other flats.

Juice Springsteen wrote:

Although their post is brief, Ohia has a point. The top of the line running shoes from 10, 20, 30 years ago are laughable now and no one would think of running in them. Didn’t swimming run into this years ago with a new wetsuit that was super aerodynamic? And all the records got smashed. You gotta evaluate greatness in running within the context of the point in history it took place.

Yes, and everyone(except you) know the suits got banned. You used a terrible analogy for your argument. Like shooting yourself on the foot.

I agree. I’ve seen guy that run 30:00 on the 10k still running 30:00, and 1:04 half marathoners still running 1:04’s. However , the prototype shoes Kipchoge used are a totally different monster. It uses 3 small carbon plates sandwiched between what look like air pods on the front of the shoe creating what looks like a spring. Take a look at the design closely.

All Foam is Springy wrote:

JohnnyS wrote:

My issue is that the design actually works as a spring, which is something a running shoe shouldn’t do.

Boost material also works as a spring.

Everrun material also works as a spring.

Those materials were built to return energy to the runner. Should those be banned as well?

The OP's point stands here: you're saying that everything up to some arbitrary point that you concocted is ok and anything beyond that is not ok. Why is your arbitrary line in the sand legitimate?

Vehicle suspension systems are always based on some sort of "spring" concept. Often this is conventional metal springs that elastically deform and return, but air springs are also common. For a rigid (not really completely rigid) bicycle, the spring comes in the form of slight bending of the frame.

The question is: What do you all want? What would you allow, and what would you not allow? You want the "spring" to be there to provide cushioning (you do want this or you would be running barefoot), but you disallow the "spring" to return to its original shape after being compressed. What you want is physically impossible. Why don't you tie a balloon full of sand or feathers to the bottom of your feet.

The fact is that you are going to put something under your foot to reduce the impact forces when running. Why not engineer that as best as possible to improve your experience. At the next race, I will be wearing running shoes that have taken advantage of decades of development and improvement, and I hope to see you there with no shoes on your feet.

Capo wrote:

I agree. I’ve seen guy that run 30:00 on the 10k still running 30:00, and 1:04 half marathoners still running 1:04’s. However , the prototype shoes Kipchoge used are a totally different monster. It uses 3 small carbon plates sandwiched between what look like air pods on the front of the shoe creating what looks like a spring. Take a look at the design closely.

1. Based on the scientific modeling, the straighter course with far fewer curves in Vienna was estimated to be 30 or 40 seconds faster than Monza.

2. Consider also he had a couple years more of training (and a world record in that time), improved pacer strategy, better weather, faster course, the experience of/wisdom from Monza, and he had increased his training mileage fairly significantly....and was able to improve by only ~2 seconds per mile.

Conclusion: You still think it was the new shoes?