My favorite Jonathan Gault article of the year: How Shoes Will Affect the US Olympic Marathon Trials

bruhh wrote:

You think Nike cares enough about what people on letsrun think to pay people to try to change their opinions? That’s pretty delusional. Nike is going to make money with or without the support of the people on these boards.

Also wouldn’t it make more sense for Nike to pay people to hype up the shoe even more? Doesn’t make sense to pay people to say yours shoes aren’t as good as you claim

+1

Interesting to hear Derrick and some of the others question the Alphafly. I thought it was strange that Rupp did his tune up half marathon in the Next%. Surely he has access to the Alphafly, and I would think you’d want to tune up in the same show you would race the Trials in. Maybe he too has decided to forgo the Alphafly?

A little more complex than this. I cant speak on the tour, but such a large jump in tech (as seen with these shoes) is wild to the point that we no longer know whether the "best athlete on a given day" is winning. Can't predict how much benefit each runner will get from the shoes (biomechanical/anatomical differences) but we do know that everyone gets better in them. No shoe studied thus far has seen such massive economy improvements. The boost shoes worn by Kimetto were shown to improve economy by 1 maybe 2%, which is inside the daily variation we'd expect to see if testing someone under the exact same conditions day after day after day making the benefit almost meaningless. The nike shoes are improving RE by anywhere from something like 2-8%. If you have two athletes, same physiology, within 20-30 seconds of each other before the shoes vying for the same spot, there is a large chance that whether or not they are wearing this specific shoe determines the outcome of the race. Maybe that's okay with some, but it defeats the purpose of the event for many.

Complex wrote:

The boost shoes worn by Kimetto were shown to improve economy by 1 maybe 2%, which is inside the daily variation we'd expect to see if testing someone under the exact same conditions day after day after day making the benefit almost meaningless..

Of all the points being made, I find this one made by Tucker as well one of the most asinine. Just because the benefit isn’t as pronounced doesn’t mean it’s meaningless. It just means it’s not obvious every time out there. If the numbers are to be believed take Kimetto out of boosts and on his good day maybe he runs 2:03:30 in some old-school flats. Not outlandish but important in the context of discussing shoe tech.

KraftMacAndCheese wrote:

profound stupidity wrote:

This is now officially the message board for the almost rans.... the talentless runners with marginal success who feel they should be the best, but we’re denied success by conspiracy theory type thoughts. Losers. Hard core losers. This article and those who like it are paranoid delusional losers. Pathetic.

Ah yes, more Nike shilling. I see they are paying you to shill on letsrun since all the factories are shutting down due to the coronavirus and you can’t make the sweatshop shoes.

Would you kindly mix up your word usages a bit? Using “shill” or some derivative over and over in your posts all the time bugs the śhit out of me.

ok shilly

See my comment above for how ridiculous you are

bruhh wrote:

You think Nike cares enough about what people on letsrun think to pay people to try to change their opinions? That’s pretty delusional. Nike is going to make money with or without the support of the people on these boards.

Also wouldn’t it make more sense for Nike to pay people to hype up the shoe even more? Doesn’t make sense to pay people to say yours shoes aren’t as good as you claim

This. Speaking personally, it's been decades since I've given Nike a red cent, I think their product is junk as a rule and dislike their labor practices, plus all that follows with Armstrong, Kobe, NOP. If anything, the constant reaction against the shoes in articles and threads started on this site keeps the shoes in front of people's eyes far exponentially more than the reaction within threads. No press is bad press, right? The JoBros and their ilk are acting as guerilla marketers for Nike and Next%/Alphafly, since the shoes aren't banned and won't be going away anytime soon, certainly not based on any conjecture on this site. These articles and threads serve chiefly to continue to make impressions on site visitors that the shoes are helpful to a level worth spending money on. Sorry to rain on your delusional parade. Well, not really.

The shoes make a difference in performance. You can deny it all you want, but you probably also think the world is flat and coronavirus is a biological weapon made by the Chinese.

This article is on-point and acknowledges the decisions athletes need to make to maximize their performance/result. This race is 100% about place. If (and I personally believe its not IF, but rather its fact) the shoe makes a 1 minute, 2 minute, or even bigger difference, then you HAVE to wear them or something in same vein to be on a level playing field.

For competition sake, I don't mind the shoes - if everyone has access, then have at it. What does concern me is the obliteration of history. I think these shoes are not unlike a PED. All these results need an asterisk just like the steroid era of baseball. Bonds, McGuire, and Sosa all have fraudulent credentials and ruined history.

I don't deny it, in fact.

just another has been never was wrote:

For competition sake, I don't mind the shoes - if everyone has access, then have at it. What does concern me is the obliteration of history. I think these shoes are not unlike a PED. All these results need an asterisk just like the steroid era of baseball. Bonds, McGuire, and Sosa all have fraudulent credentials and ruined history.

Every generation should theoretically be faster than the past. Track, if anything, has more on-the-books world records than it probably should due to doping in the 80s etc. It doesn't obliterate history if you judge people in their time and not solely by the clock. Nobody thinks Charlie Grice is a better 1500 runner than John Walker for example despite superior PBs. Development in track spikes, the track itself (Mondo), the nature of events (Monaco as PB factory etc. etc.). This change is coming to the marathon through superior equipment, but it's not like the great runners of the past's times were holding up before this anyway.

Thoughtsleader - totally agree with your points. That was the big contention of Bob Schul running on cinders and not all-weather. For me, shoes went from diffusing pounding to stay healthy, to an obvious performance enhancer. I can't explain why this is different for me, but it is.

?????

Did qualifiers pick up their free pair of Alphaflys in Atlanta yet?

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

Complex wrote:

The boost shoes worn by Kimetto were shown to improve economy by 1 maybe 2%, which is inside the daily variation we'd expect to see if testing someone under the exact same conditions day after day after day making the benefit almost meaningless..

Of all the points being made, I find this one made by Tucker as well one of the most asinine. Just because the benefit isn’t as pronounced doesn’t mean it’s meaningless. It just means it’s not obvious every time out there. If the numbers are to be believed take Kimetto out of boosts and on his good day maybe he runs 2:03:30 in some old-school flats. Not outlandish but important in the context of discussing shoe tech.

I probably should not have used the term "meaningless" (although, as you mentioned, this is what RT argues). I agree, that a 1-2% improvement COULD be something that ultimately influences performance, however, the fact that it is within that 1-2% range doesn't alter the game much (if any) seeing how RE can fluctuate this much day to day under controlled conditions. 4-8% improvements aren't going to happen on a day to day basis without assistance whereas a 1-2% change isn't out of the realm of possibility. Been a while since I've read the Adidas boost study, but I don't remember it being a particular large sample and as far as know, it hasn't been repeated. There are at least 3-4 trials with the vaporfly showing the same thing., albeit, all smallish samples as well.

I've got a question, does Reed Fischer just train with Tinman as an unattached/unofficial athlete? Always thought he was attached and got confused when I saw him in Nikes

just peachy wrote:

https://twitter.com/RunPR/status/1232732170193702913

Since deleted. What did it say?