A visitor sent us this photos:
https://www.letsrun.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/IMG_0032.jpg
He cropped it from a social media post. From what I understand this may be the shoe coming out this spring that is presumably close to what Kipchoge wore in his sub 2:00 run.
Kipchoge seems to be given a shoe before everyone else now.
I think when he ran 2:01:39 he was racing in a prototype.
Is that the how you all understand it?
From the Berlin puctures, Kipchoge ran his WR in a 4% Flyknit upper on top of a Next % tooling.
The Next % wasn't available yet, so it can be cosidered a prototype.
And yes, he's been getting the shoes before everyone else since the first time he broke 2:04. Think of that, Weldon - - Kipchoge was a 2:04 guy without the different Vaporfly prototypes.
The secret of his longevity and why he's getting faster with age? As good as Patrick Sang may be, Kipchoge's been getting faster shoes every year. Everyone else too, only well after him.
Kipchoge is a great marathoner, but his dominance has a lot to do with shoe advantage ever since he first broke 2:04.
To me, it's not better than doping. To me, he hasn't bettered Kimetto's WR legitimately. I know it's an unpopular opinion, but there it is.
Good lord, look at this monstrosity.
They're just shoes, nobody cares.
Stop wasting all your time online obsessing about them.
These escalating shoe wars are such a bummer. Just look at how stupid those moon boot monstrosities LOOK. Look at them!
Is this what we want as a sport? Who can make the bounciest clown shoes?
At first I was hoping the claimed performance gains were hype, but now, sadly, it seems it's true--these darn shoes make a big difference. So now all the other manufacturers have to make their own bouncy clown shoes.
When I was competing seriously in the 1990s and early 2000s, the goal was was to make the shoes light, unobtrusive. Now the goal is to spring you forward. Why do we allow it--because it's Nike doing it?
Swimming crossed into the same level of absurdity with their super wetsuits in the early 2000s, radically changing their sport and record books. They were smart enough to realize the arms race was stupid, and changed course.
Will running also be smart enough to change course?
I'm not wearing such an ugly thing even if it helps me finally break 40 minutes in 10k!
The box includes a red rubber nose and an orange wig.
wejo wrote:
https://www.letsrun.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/IMG_0032.jpg
Location: HOKA HQ
Hoka Rep: "Hey guys, I brought in a case of 180 proof moonshine!"
**4 hours later**
Hoka Designer: *hiccup* "Swell....methinkz theez rrready." [Accidentally emails design to Nike]
[/scene]
World Athletics should start limiting the stack height for shoes. This is getting ridiculous. It’s getting close to moon shoes.
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/811x6E1vDzL._AC_SY450_.jpg
Boing boing!
aesthete, thinker wrote:
These escalating shoe wars are such a bummer. Just look at how stupid those moon boot monstrosities LOOK. Look at them!
Is this what we want as a sport? Who can make the bounciest clown shoes?
At first I was hoping the claimed performance gains were hype, but now, sadly, it seems it's true--these darn shoes make a big difference. So now all the other manufacturers have to make their own bouncy clown shoes.
When I was competing seriously in the 1990s and early 2000s, the goal was was to make the shoes light, unobtrusive. Now the goal is to spring you forward. Why do we allow it--because it's Nike doing it?
Swimming crossed into the same level of absurdity with their super wetsuits in the early 2000s, radically changing their sport and record books. They were smart enough to realize the arms race was stupid, and changed course.
Will running also be smart enough to change course?
Have you even examined the advances in shoe and equipment technology in the last 60+ years?
Hell, the spikes today and the "spikes" of the 1960s aren't even comparable. Nor are the trainers. Nor are the flats. You can toss the tracks and clothing in there too.
https://www.holabirdsports.com/blogs/news/the-evolution-of-track-spikesYou think any of you would be happy to freeze progress at the cost of being stuck in non-removable 1" spikes for every race?
The job of Nike and all the other shoe manufacturers is to make shoes that help the athlete. They make soles with better grips, reduce weight to increase efficiency, and make an absurd number of ridiculous modifications to heel drops, stack heights, and whatever else performance-crazed runners care about. Now, they improve efficiency.
The only ones angry about these shoes are largely the runners who are too old to still set their PRs in them. You take a look at high school and college runners and legions of them are investing in these "clown shoes". If you're angry at them for using the best shoes on the market, you may as well be angry at everyone who doesn't wear a set of Hokas double the weight of all their competitors.
LoneStarXC wrote:
World Athletics should start limiting the stack height for shoes. This is getting ridiculous. It’s getting close to moon shoes.
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/811x6E1vDzL._AC_SY450_.jpgBoing boing!
Yes! Those kiddie trampoline shoes were the exact mental image I was thinking of--great find. The new shoe tech, in it's most fundamental concept, is no different--"tall scaffold that allows room for bouncy BS inside" to spring you unnaturally high/forward.
It doesn't matter if the interior BS is a carbon fiber plate (or 3) surrounded by bouncy foam (Nike), a trampoline system (the kiddie toy shoes), or a mechanical spring (what were those running shoes that were banned--Spiva??). It doesn't matter--it's all BS.
The argument is the same as that against amputee Pistorious and his blades attempting to compete against open competition. And now that we've placed carbon fiber blades inside a tall stack of bouncy foam it's all ok? No, it's BS.
I agree with you a good solution is to limit stack height, and specify that the foam is for protection from the ground, not to aid in forward propulsion. If we're not going to limit this insanity, the future will look like these things:
https://www.amazon.com/Kangoo-Jumps-Special-Black-X-Small/dp/B00FLM6KSI/ref=asc_df_B00FLM6KSI/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=312070217648&hvpos=1o2&hvnetw=g&hvrand=17625506661306177443&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9032014&hvtargid=pla-569351123641&psc=1&tag=&ref=&adgrpid=62425944432&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvadid=312070217648&hvpos=1o2&hvnetw=g&hvrand=17625506661306177443&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9032014&hvtargid=pla-569351123641aesthete, thinker wrote:
LoneStarXC wrote:
World Athletics should start limiting the stack height for shoes. This is getting ridiculous. It’s getting close to moon shoes.
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/811x6E1vDzL._AC_SY450_.jpgBoing boing!
Yes! Those kiddie trampoline shoes were the exact mental image I was thinking of--great find. The new shoe tech, in it's most fundamental concept, is no different--"tall scaffold that allows room for bouncy BS inside" to spring you unnaturally high/forward.
It doesn't matter if the interior BS is a carbon fiber plate (or 3) surrounded by bouncy foam (Nike), a trampoline system (the kiddie toy shoes), or a mechanical spring (what were those running shoes that were banned--Spiva??). It doesn't matter--it's all BS.
The argument is the same as that against amputee Pistorious and his blades attempting to compete against open competition. And now that we've placed carbon fiber blades inside a tall stack of bouncy foam it's all ok? No, it's BS.
I agree with you a good solution is to limit stack height, and specify that the foam is for protection from the ground, not to aid in forward propulsion. If we're not going to limit this insanity, the future will look like these things:
https://www.amazon.com/Kangoo-Jumps-Special-Black-X-Small/dp/B00FLM6KSI/ref=asc_df_B00FLM6KSI/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=312070217648&hvpos=1o2&hvnetw=g&hvrand=17625506661306177443&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9032014&hvtargid=pla-569351123641&psc=1&tag=&ref=&adgrpid=62425944432&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvadid=312070217648&hvpos=1o2&hvnetw=g&hvrand=17625506661306177443&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9032014&hvtargid=pla-569351123641
Well at least the price is staying at $250.
aesthete, thinker wrote:
LoneStarXC wrote:
World Athletics should start limiting the stack height for shoes. This is getting ridiculous. It’s getting close to moon shoes.
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/811x6E1vDzL._AC_SY450_.jpgBoing boing!
Yes! Those kiddie trampoline shoes were the exact mental image I was thinking of--great find. The new shoe tech, in it's most fundamental concept, is no different--"tall scaffold that allows room for bouncy BS inside" to spring you unnaturally high/forward.
It doesn't matter if the interior BS is a carbon fiber plate (or 3) surrounded by bouncy foam (Nike), a trampoline system (the kiddie toy shoes), or a mechanical spring (what were those running shoes that were banned--Spiva??). It doesn't matter--it's all BS.
The argument is the same as that against amputee Pistorious and his blades attempting to compete against open competition. And now that we've placed carbon fiber blades inside a tall stack of bouncy foam it's all ok? No, it's BS.
I agree with you a good solution is to limit stack height, and specify that the foam is for protection from the ground, not to aid in forward propulsion. If we're not going to limit this insanity, the future will look like these things:
https://www.amazon.com/Kangoo-Jumps-Special-Black-X-Small/dp/B00FLM6KSI/ref=asc_df_B00FLM6KSI/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=312070217648&hvpos=1o2&hvnetw=g&hvrand=17625506661306177443&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9032014&hvtargid=pla-569351123641&psc=1&tag=&ref=&adgrpid=62425944432&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvadid=312070217648&hvpos=1o2&hvnetw=g&hvrand=17625506661306177443&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9032014&hvtargid=pla-569351123641
NO ONE CARES (except brojos and their 10 person incel army)
Golly gee whiz! Goodness gracious! Holy moly!
Runners are becoming as bad as cyclists, IMHO.
Cyclist 1. - "Hey! Brand X developed a new road bike with perfect aero tube shapes and a more slack geometry that will improve performance by 5%, give better ride quality, and be far more forgiving to your back. It is UCI compliant and will change bike design forever!"
Cyclist 2 - "Meh! It's butt ugly so, I won't ride it. I'd rather lose by huge margins but look more aesthetically pleasing while losing on a proper classic steel frame."
Seyta,
I can appreciate the advancement in materials--thank you for the link. But the nike victorys from 2010, and the adidas melbourne from 1965, and my ventulus and jasaris from 2000 were all more alike than they are different--they all had the same goal: be as light as possible, and get out of the way and let me perform to my best, while protecting my feet with a thin sole (as opposed to going barefoot).
Can you appreciate the view that these new vaporfly shoes are fundamentally different in that they are more like a DEVICE to artificially aid performance, rather than just an improvement in materials?
If two years from now, someone makes a more runnable version of the kangaroo shoes I linked from amazon above, that will be ok with you, in the name of innovation? Competitors pogo-ing down the road, their feet 20 inches off the pavement at footstrike?
Can you see how that is different?
To take the track analogy you bring up: we all agree that modern rubber tracks are faster then old cinder tracks. But if someone developed a track that used a trampoline effect to actively launch the runner forward with each step, you're practicing a different activity. It's not simply an advancement in materials.
aesthete, thinker wrote:
Seyta,
I can appreciate the advancement in materials--thank you for the link. But the nike victorys from 2010, and the adidas melbourne from 1965, and my ventulus and jasaris from 2000 were all more alike than they are different--they all had the same goal: be as light as possible, and get out of the way and let me perform to my best, while protecting my feet with a thin sole (as opposed to going barefoot).
Can you appreciate the view that these new vaporfly shoes are fundamentally different in that they are more like a DEVICE to artificially aid performance, rather than just an improvement in materials?
If two years from now, someone makes a more runnable version of the kangaroo shoes I linked from amazon above, that will be ok with you, in the name of innovation? Competitors pogo-ing down the road, their feet 20 inches off the pavement at footstrike?
Can you see how that is different?
To take the track analogy you bring up: we all agree that modern rubber tracks are faster then old cinder tracks. But if someone developed a track that used a trampoline effect to actively launch the runner forward with each step, you're practicing a different activity. It's not simply an advancement in materials.
Except that is exactly what modern tracks do, to the point that they quantify this property of launch and limit it to a factor of 0.7.
And regardless of what you or others say, there is nothing active about tracks or Vaporfly shoes. Everything is passive.
Same ol' strawman.
Ya'll calling them clown shoes. Have you seen the shoes kids wear today? They make the Alphaflys look subtle. And they wear them as a fashion statement. At least Nikes clown shoes provide a performance boost
Wildhorse wrote:
From the Berlin puctures, Kipchoge ran his WR in a 4% Flyknit upper on top of a Next % tooling.
The Next % wasn't available yet, so it can be cosidered a prototype.
And yes, he's been getting the shoes before everyone else since the first time he broke 2:04. Think of that, Weldon - - Kipchoge was a 2:04 guy without the different Vaporfly prototypes.
The secret of his longevity and why he's getting faster with age? As good as Patrick Sang may be, Kipchoge's been getting faster shoes every year. Everyone else too, only well after him.
Kipchoge is a great marathoner, but his dominance has a lot to do with shoe advantage ever since he first broke 2:04.
To me, it's not better than doping. To me, he hasn't bettered Kimetto's WR legitimately. I know it's an unpopular opinion, but there it is.
Kipchoge having the newest prototypes is for sure messed up. I can get behind the shoes as long as all the athletes have access to them. Who knows perhaps he would have been beaten.
