If you think Ryan Hall wasn't in an ice bath after racing a marathon you're probably wrong. Even the elites get their body trashed wearing traditional flats.
If you think Ryan Hall wasn't in an ice bath after racing a marathon you're probably wrong. Even the elites get their body trashed wearing traditional flats.
I've read some stupid shi† on this forum over the years but "three-hour marathoners aren't much fitter than four-hour marathons" is a strong candidate for stupidest.
a brilliant podcast
Wild Stallions wrote:
Wildhorse wrote:
morans
Did you just out yourself as a troll? Anyone who spells 'moron' with an 'a' immediately loses all credibility.
There's just so much to unpack here. We aren't talking 4 hours marathoners, yeah that person probably shouldn't wear flats, but we're talking 2:40+ which is the number you threw out, yes that person can get away with flats when they've trained for it. And to say there isn't much difference in fitness between 4 hours and 3 hours. The mind just boggles. Again, you've spent so much time down the rabbit hole of elite running, that you've become deluded and out of touch with reality.
Deer Wildhorse - "Moran" is a Letsrun thing going way back, sorry you're new here, you'll figure it out someday.
That's so sad. Taking pride in being a letsrun vet. That's like bragging about being one of the first bronies or a longtime incel. Regular people find this place, go "hey awesome a big running forum!", then start to realize what it really is get leave. Y'all have fun in your little cesspit here!
Wildhorse wrote:
https://media.acast.com/realscienceofsport/theshoethatmayhavechangedrunningforever/media.mp3Very interesting listen. Enjoy!
It’s not interesting. Moran.
Wild Stallions wrote:
Wildhorse wrote:
The problem with a lot of 2:40'+ runners is they had no business racing in the Adios or Streak, or any traditional racing flat. Nit enough cushioning for them, legs would get trashed mid-race. The Vaporfly are better cushioned, so there. Most of those guys would race 26.2 faster in the Pegasus than the Streak.
I was kind of on your side reading through this thread, but this might be the stupidest thing I've read today. Sure, 2:40 isn't elite, but if you're running just over 6 minute miles for 26.2, you've put some work in (people don't just roll out of bed and run sub 3. You guys spend so much time in your echo chamber of elite running numbers, that you lose all perspective on reality.) Throwing on a pair of Streaks isn't going to undo all of the conditioning your legs went through, and ideally if you aren't an idiot, you would have run in the Streaks/Adios to get your legs used to them prior to racing anyway. If you're at those numbers, flats are faster than trainers. And don't try to play all gatekeeper with racing shoes, like anyone can't go wear regular flats if they want to. Acting like those poor 2:40+ people need Vaporfly cushioning to protect their poor little babby legs, or they'll never finish a marathon. Shut up dude. You're a condescending sh*t head.
Bingo. One of those guys that think they're a lot smarter than they are. That Rossi dipsh!t falls into the same category.
LetsRun Noob of 2+ days wrote:
That's so sad. Taking pride in being a letsrun vet. That's like bragging about being one of the first bronies or a longtime incel. Regular people find this place, go "hey awesome a big running forum!", then start to realize what it really is get leave. Y'all have fun in your little cesspit here!
"Incel" must be the popular word to call people these days. Moran.
A lot of trash in this thread. Just bumping for the podcast. It's very good. Everyone should give it a listen.
Zlatan wrote:
A lot of trash in this thread. Just bumping for the podcast. It's very good. Everyone should give it a listen.
Yeah, I've enjoyed the listen so far. I tend to think Ross is on the higher end of the effect, BUT you can't really argue with his logic. I wonder how it all applies to us hobbyjoggers, as we're getting a decent bead on it for the super-elites.
Wild Stallions wrote:
Wildhorse wrote:
morans
Did you just out yourself as a troll? Anyone who spells 'moron' with an 'a' immediately loses all credibility.
You must be new here.
jklk wrote:
Sounds like none of those guys have ever run a serious day in their lives. Sound like armchair QBs..
I guess you don't realize that the expert on the matter is Geoffrey Burns, a 2:24 marathoner.
I just listened to the podcast. It was AMAZING in my opinion.
1) The shoes may benefit certain types of runners more than others (those with short ground contact time may gain more rearfront strikers may gain more than forefront) but that's not 100% certain. If that's the case that would be a good reason for an outright ban of the shoes. One of the reasons why the swim suits were banned is they didn't benefit all types of people the same.
2) Everyone talks about the carbon plate. The carbon plate really would do little without the new PBAX foam.
EVA - the foam used in runnign shoes for decades - returns about 65% of energy>
Boost - TPU - foam returns mid 70s.
PBAX - the foam in the Vaporfly returns in the high 80s.
3) The shoe effectively creates "free energy" as it’s better than the body's natural system. All of the fools who say, "You will have to run," need to read the following."
Geoffrey Burns said :
“A really really important thing to understand here is that second idea of we’re not just extending the effective leg length of the biological leg, we are doing so with a non-biological element. And this gets into that very hairy subject of you know carbon-fiber prostheses and blades, because what that is it’s adding a non-biological element -a near perfectly elastic element - to our imperfectly elastic human system.
One of the things I hear all the time that really frustrates me with this topic is, ‘Well the shoes don’t create any energy - they don’t do any of that. You still have to do the running. You still have to create the speed.’ Well yes, you do but the shoes store and return that energy with no energy cost. So our legs and our bodies function as springs.
At a very simple level, think of your achilles tendon - that stores and returns energy, but it requires energy to operate as a spring. It requires your calf muscles - your gastroc and your soleus - to maintain that spring tension whereas the shoe underneath your foot does it better and carries no energy cost. So you now have no cost to maintain that elasticity and that’s a really important concept here. You have an indefatigable elastic element on your body and it functions more efficiently than your body could otherwise. So if like I said the human arch is estimated to function at like 70% efficiency in terms of energy return, the shoe does that better. So there is this idea that, “Yes it obviously cannot create energy, but it can give you back more energy than you otherwise would have otherwise gotten.”
So it doesn’t create energy but it gives you back more or it allows you to store and return more at a higher speed or something like that. It’s kind of like having lower interest rates or something on a loan you take out.
4) They speculate whether the shoe will lead to injuries. Burns has a "governing theory that you can’t gain mother nature." Are Cragg, Rupp, Hasay's injuries just coincidence or the result of wearing these shoes?
5) Ross Tucker doesn't hesitate to call it "mechanical doping" and says we know have to reconsider what is a good time.
I 100% agree particularly when we consider the 2016 Olympics when the shoes were only given to a few runners.
Tucker said :
A 205-206 used to be a world-class marathon. nowadays' it's 203 to 204 because we have to recalibrate what marathon performances mean. So what used to be fast is now good, what used to be world-class is fast and what used to be world record level is now only merely world-class. So everything has shifted by 2-3 minutes.
The marathon has now been recalibrated. A person who is a 21:15 marathon runner will now run 2:12. A person who is a 206 can now run a 2:03 and a person who is a 202-203 can now run 1:59.
rojo wrote:
2) Everyone talks about the carbon plate. The carbon plate really would do little without the new PBAX foam.
EVA - the foam used in runnign shoes for decades - returns about 65% of energy>
Boost - TPU - foam returns mid 70s.
PBAX - the foam in the Vaporfly returns in the high 80s.
I 100% agree particularly when we consider the 2016 Olympics when the shoes were only given to a few runners.
[/quote]
The problem isn't that they were only given to a few people; the problem is the IAAF (or whomever) isn't doing anything about it. Linden won Boston in shoes that are not available. Sara Hall ran 2:22, Jared Ward's 2:09, Hawkins 4th at WC and so on. At least Nikes, now, are available. Hard to complain that the leaders are much faster and it's not fair when half of the age group field have the same shoes on.
I do agree about the plate part, however. Plates are nothing new and they're not the only ones out there. People assume that plate=super fast. Not the case. If it were, people would be winning races in the Zoom Fly, which is basically identical aside from the foam.
1. All shoes benefit some runners more than others. That's why we have support shoes, motion control shoes, neutral shoes, zero-drop shoes, wide and narrow shoes, etc. The solution is for more development of shoes to benefit more groups of runners.
2. Sorry, I guess I'm not seeing the logic behind, "After a 7-year battle between corporate giants to develop the best foam for running shoes, WE MUST BAN THE WINNER."
3. We've been running in shoes for centuries because shoes are fundamentally better in some ways than the human body. Some ways are perfectly fine (more traction than the sole of your foot? A-OK!), and some are not (wheels? No). So far, anything beneath the foot/ankle, basically anything that corresponds to the shape of a shoe, seems to be fair game.
4. The Vaporflies are probably reducing stress in some areas, allowing more stress to be applied in others. Any relocation of stress is liable to cause injury if people aren't careful. I believe the "born to run" fanatics blame shoes in general for injuries, but we still don't ban shoes.
5. We have been revising expectations based on technological developments for a long time. There are sometimes reasons to limit those developments (souped-up javelins endangering spectators), but I don't see Vaporflies as one of them. Maybe humanity has finally figured out how to design shoes that actually live up to the hype. That sounds like a big win for everybody.
If you haven't tried a comeback lately, you should try it. Spend a while getting back in shape and try some Vaporflies in a 5K/10K race. You'll see.
my 2c wrote:
Maybe humanity has finally figured out how to design shoes that actually live up to the hype. That sounds like a big win for everybody.
If you haven't tried a comeback lately, you should try it. Spend a while getting back in shape and try some Vaporflies in a 5K/10K race. You'll see.
Except for the price and longevity.
"We're not all typical LRC types on $250." - That's k a year.
What's the cheapest cost for them anyway?
rojo wrote:
[quote]jklk wrote:
Sounds like none of those guys have ever run a serious day in their lives. Sound like armchair QBs..
I guess you don't realize that the expert on the matter is Geoffrey Burns, a 2:24 marathoner.
I just listened to the podcast. It was AMAZING in my opinion
I totally agree
4) They speculate whether the shoe will lead to injuries. Burns has a "governing theory that you can’t gain mother nature." Are Cragg, Rupp, Hasay's injuries just coincidence or the result of wearing these shoes?
hmmm... my experience is coaching female who ran 1:11 half and 3-4 days later injured. Burns could be on to something.
Zlatan wrote:
A lot of trash in this thread. Just bumping for the podcast. It's very good. Everyone should give it a listen.
It was great and I think presented the Scientific evidence that the shoe does provide a significant boost in performance. That it is as significant of a boost and it affects everyone differently I don't think there is a good argument for not banning the shoe and coming up with some rules.
One challenge they talk about with limiting restrictions is the testing of shoes. There is a very simple rule to solve this and it is already on the books. The shoes the runners compete in must be readily available on the market. It is against the rules to run in these prototypes in competition and the IAAF and races are not enforcing the rule. All shoes should have to approved as within the rules. On race day a very simple test is to see what shoes the top athletes are wearing and is it one of those shoe models. If its not they should be disqualified. I don't care what people are running in to get their Boston qualifiers and no one should put resources in policing that. Solve the problem at the elite level and let everyone else do whatever they want. If there's some suspicious modification to a shoe one of the winners wear at a major composition take it apart and make sure it hasn't been modified. Flats are cheap and I wouldn't care if the race took my shoe for testing. It's not like a sponsor won't give their runner more flats.
Any further thoughts on the "governing theory that you can’t gain mother nature" and the idea that "you can’t shut off a key part of how the body works in running without paying a price. It won’t happen right away, and the effects will probably vary somewhat from person to person, but the reckoning will come"? We are now starting to see more and more high school (and younger) athletes wearing these shoes....is this short term gain for long term negative consequences?
https://www.balancedrunner.com/chicago-marathon-2019-brigid-kosgei-running-form-analysis/
Primo Numero Uno wrote:
On race day a very simple test is to see what shoes the top athletes are wearing and is it one of those shoe models. If its not they should be disqualified.
Agreed. It's not hard. They do it in auto racing, baseball with corked bats, I believe in golf, cycling, swimming and others.
I guess I don't know enough about marathon majors, however. Are there people onhand from the IAAF to stand around and enforce rules at all?
After the top three cross the line, they head in for drug testing and take off their shoes and set them on a table while someone glances them over. Pretty simple really.
Jakob Ingebrigtsen has a 1989 Ferrari 348 GTB and he's just put in paperwork to upgrade it
Strava thinks the London Marathon times improved 12 minutes last year thanks to supershoes
Is there a rule against attaching a helium balloon to yourself while running a road race?
NAU women have no excuse - they should win it all at 2024 NCAA XC
Mark Coogan says that if you could only do 3 workouts as a 1500m runner you should do these
How rare is it to run a sub 5 minute mile AND bench press 225?
Move over Mark Coogan, Rojo and John Kellogg share their 3 favorite mile workouts