Wow: Did World Athletics new shoe rules combined with a Nikes patent just give Nike a 20-year unbeatable advantage?

Fairness is all athletes able to run in the same shoe. It has nothing to do with every athletes sponsor making an equivalent shoe.

How many years since the first vaporfly? And in all that time what have the other shoe companies been doing? Clearly they didn’t see the money in getting something out.

There was a time in tennis where a pro player used another brands racket because their sponser didn’t have a similar racket ready. They removed the brand name etc. and yes the company of that tennis racket did take out an add showing the player of the competing brand playing with their racket. You know what? Life went on, they had a racket from their sponser by the next major.

I just hope they have pink Alphaflys. The pink Vaporflys are so pretty.

Does the official ruling state that a shoe cannot have more than one carbon fiber plate? If so, can another shoe company combine, say, one carbon fiber plate with multiple other plates of different materials? Like plastic?

UK pathetics wrote:

People are saying 'its fine others will catch up' but if you look at innovation in race shoes, take Carlos Lopez shoe, the Spiridon in 84. Now take Sami Wanjirus shoe in Beijing or Kiprotichs shoe in London, that's almost 30 years. Nylon upper, check, Eva midsole, check, air bag, check. Almost nothing changed. Shoes for racing have always been designed for lightness and comfort. Take a look at the Reebok Runfast Pro, that's a race shoe, it uses the same foam as the Vaporfly, but it's not trying to be anything but a shoe. It's not a spring, it's not 'equipment'....technology aside, in a sport of simplicity of it doesn't even look like a shoe it's not a shoe. This doesn't stifle innovation, the best innovation comes within strict perameters and IAAF killed that.

This says it pretty well (although the Spiridon wasn't an air shoe). We probably can't and shouldn't limit all developments in racing shoes. As someone who's been running for 40+ years and loves the feel of a light racing shoe, I've always presumed that the day would come when manufacturers would find a way to design a protective, one-ounce shoe. Somehow, that wouldn't have seemed to be letting technology disproportionately impact performance. But extreme stack heights and carbon fiber plates does. Is it not unreasonable to limit shoes to foam and a limited stack height? And it still leaves plenty of room for innovation, because we're a really long way from a soft (if you want it), sufficiently protective (if you want it), 1-ounce racing shoe.

You are shockingly stupid. Companies are forced to license a patent if contributing to a standard.

If every company were forced to license a patent to their competition in the name of "fairness" there would be no innovation. Build a better mousetrap? Nah, I'll just wait until my competition figures it out and license it from them.

Seriously, why should Nike give up their R&D brilliance to their competition? In the name of fairness?

Seriously, how do you brush your teeth? or tie your shoes?

WOW: DID ROJO MAKE ANOTHER THREAD CRYING ABOUT THE VAPORFLY/NIKE/ALPHAFLY?