Lee Evans ran 43.29 seconds in Mexico and Tommy Smith ran 19.83 in Mexico (with an injured groin) just a short time after the South Lake Tahoe Trials. Both without the brush spikes, both faster times. I think the new track, the altitude, as well as the San Jose State coach Coach Bud Winter new training techniques added more to the fast times then the brush spikes. With all the shoe doping going on now it seems strange they continue to ban the brush.
The world record fell because of the track, allowing more grip than the dust one. Sprinters use this grip, and it is more effective on rubber track. The special spikes certainly improved this grip over this surface, so both could be considered adding to the redcords, but most of it comes from the track itself.
I attended the 1968 Olympic Trials at Echo Summit (yes, it's technically south of Lake Tahoe but also 1000 feet higher) for a day or two. I also ran high school track at this time. I had never seen an all-weather track, running on a variety of compressed dirt and clay-filled tracks. I varied my spike length depending on how soft or hard the surface was. Every sprinter running on dirt tracks slipped. Clay tracks had less slippage and were always faster. I finally ran on a crummy all-weather track in college and it really messed my up. I bounced a lot causing all sorts of issues running the high hurdles. We never practiced on an all-weather track so didn't know how to run on them. Now, just about every college and even high school track is all weather. The brush spikes helped provide grip, which lowered times as long as you were strong enough to benefit from them. Lee Evans and John Carlos were absolutely strong athletes, like Usain Bolt, but they also had to learn how to run on this new surface. Once they did, there was no slippage (or running backwards) with every stride so sprinters and hurdlers had to adjust to this very quickly. Today's new shoes with all the bounce in the soles is worse than the brush spikes. I hated cross country but we weren't allowed to use spikes in these meets, something that has changed. I honestly feel there should be two world records maintained in every event, one on dirt tracks and the other on all-weather tracks because all-weather tracks provide a much "faster" surface than dirt.
Athletic performance at high altitude is only improved in events requiring movements over a short period of time. Thus records were broken in the sprints and…….long jump. Not in the middle and long distance races.
I remember reading Alan Pascoe's autobiography when he told of the first time that he saw/ ran on an all weather rubberised track, it was at the world university games (I think) , at the Mexico stadium the year prior to the 68 Olympics. He took a knife from the food hall and cut a piece out to take home and show everyone what they would be running on.
It makes sense to not allow such rule changes shortly before the Olympics because it's possible that certain athletes wouldn't have access to the better equipment as quickly as others. But then one must consider that they introduced a radical new track surface for the Olympics. I think that was the origin of the problem. In any case, I don't see why the brush spike was banned thenceforth. It seems bit arbitrary. From what I understand, a similar thing happened in tennis. They restricted the number of crosses and mains that a racquet's string could form because of the amount of spin that could be applied to the ball with a racquet using a then-recently invented stringing technique, nicknamed the spaghetti racquet. Even though they banned that one racquet the technology of the sport was changing and continued to chance drastically over the next 25 years with the materials going from wood through fiberglass, aluminum, titanium, kevlar, and carbon fiber. The size of the racquet head increased. The string composition and shoe design also evolved. But they have kept the old ban on non-traditional racquet stringing. It also seems similar to the brush spikes in that the banned innovation was introduced by a smaller company and the innovations that were allowed were introduced by companies that were more established in the industry (the spaghetti racquet was introduced by an outsider to the tennis equipment industry).
I always wanted to run on one of those tracks. By the time they became popular in community parks, I was being paid to run so I kinda lost the enjoyment of running. Those tracks just look like pure pleasure to run on though. And those brush spikes!!! Nobody actually had track shoes in my school so I didn’t know any better. But those brush spikes seem to be more effective. If the rule makers don’t allow for technological advancement then people should be running in bare feet. This seems more about not wanting the records to be broken..
That's a pretty wild story that i was completely oblivious to. I had a pair of those Pumas. I picked them up (2nd, 3rd, 4th, whatever-hand) in the DDR in the late eighties when i was there for bobsleigh. Bobsleigh uses a very similar style of plate, but when i was involved they were only available from Adidas (so, their brush-spike had found a new home). I later transitioned to skeleton racing where we wore standard track-spikes. They didn't provide anywhere near the grip of the bob-shoes, but with a bit of work with the angle grinder, you could reshape the spikes into something more like a chisel which was an improvement. At some stage skeleton just gave up on the regular spikes which used to chew-up the ice at the start really badly, and moved to the bob-shoe. As to the question of whether there was any underhand dealings at play at the time of Mexico? Dunno, but my experience in international sport gives me no reasons to think there wouldn't possibly have been. Great vid - many thanks.
@@JumpersJunction The main reason that bob used them and skeleton didn't - they were both administered by the FIBT - was cost. Skeleton was viable for someone with 5 - 10 per-cent of the budget needed to be competitive in bob, and to maintain access and avoid an arms-race, skeleton used to keep a tight rein on the level of investment needed to compete. The shoes, which Adidas only produced in limited numbers and charged a fortune for, were one of many ways to keep skeleton costs from escalating. Track spikes also weren't flash for helping to overcome the inertia of a bob at the start - they took big chunks from the ice as they slipped, whereas the brush-shoes gave great grip and only really produced a powder.
I would imagine the synthetic surface alone helped those athletes run faster. We can see if the average of the non-brush shoe also went down. Also I believe training at high altitude improves athletic performance but not actually performing there. So setting a world record at high altitude is much more difficult.
For sprinters and jumpers altitude does improve performance because they experience less air resistance. Distance runners will find racing at altitude to be much harder though because there’s less oxygen in the air for them to breathe.
you are correct the first synthetic Olympic track was at Mexico City where the altitude also helped sprinters. there have been improvements in artfici9al tracks with limits on their construction, the track at Barcelona is at the limit and almost as hard as pavement
@@lestermount3287 There has been much debate whether running a 400m at high elevation is an advantage. Less wind resistance, yes. But, can you suck enough oxygen in-- very debatable!
The whole saga about two shoe companies ruled by brothers who hate each othet pulling illegal shananigans to screw the other company feel so funny for some reason
In the 70s Adidas came out with the "Adistar 2000" model that featured the standard number of spikes, but interchangeable spiked plastic collars that could be mounted as bases for the spikes. This was the prototype for modern golf "soft spikes".
You should do a video like this on Ryan Crouser at the World Championships in 2017. They were calling a foot foul for him for pushing off the back of the inner lip of the ring and eventually changed the rules just because of him. It's now allowed.
I am not trying to get views/likes or anything on mywebsite, but I wrote a post about it like 6 years ago when it happened. A lot of the content is deleted now. But might be able to find some stuff. Good luck@@JumpersJunction
great video, funny how the 200m and 400m records went but still nobody could beat Bob Hayes chewed up track with wrong size shoes 100m record, it took a new track surface and altitude to beat it although nobody has had Bob Hayes speed until Usain Bolt, his TWO relay splits of 8.5 - 8.8 seconds on cinder in 1964 are still unmatched to this day, never realized how long the spikes were for cinder
He was a beast. I always wander how some of the historic legends of the sport would perform today if they had the training, sports science, technology, etc we have today.
Ah, behold the infamous "Brush Spike" - the track shoes that dared to flirt with the boundaries of athletic innovation and got a stern rejection from the rulebook. These shoes were clearly designed by a mischievous fusion of a sneaker engineer and a paintbrush artist, resulting in a footwear masterpiece that not only promised lightning-fast sprints but also the ability to touch up the finish line if it looked a bit faded. Alas, the track and field authorities, perhaps fearing a sudden spike in race times and the potential for accidental track graffiti, promptly banned these audacious brush-adorned wonders. The Brush Spike left us with dreams of athletes sprinting into a vibrant future while simultaneously igniting debates about the fine line between innovation and outright artistic vandalism in the world of sports.
5:46 High altitude does not make you run faster 🤦🏼♂️ it puts more drain on the athlete's and makes the training tougher not easier! The gains are made when you return to sea level. 🤦🏼♂️
It is 8 in the front and 4 in the heel depending on the event you are doing like Sprint events up to 400 meter get the 8 in the front, then distance events get 6 or 8 in front depending on the if IAAF/World Athletics or NCAA that allows only 6 for all track running sprinting events so some use a blank spike or two for the Adidas models that had 7--8 spikes of the Addidas sponsored schools that had athletes use those spikes. The long Jumpers/triple and pole vault depending on surface can have 8 in front and if on grass 2 heel spikes. The high jump and javelin allow 12 spikes 8 in front and 4 in heel with javelin allowing the longest spikes you can use. Then Cross Country the IAAF/World Athletics allows for up to 8 in the front and only if really bad and needed 2 in the back. I have heard of athletes now in Sprint distance events mainly those who are hurdles specialist and 200 meter under using a legal for other events jumper spike from some companies due to how behind they are on current Nike tech though some like Adidas, Asics, or a few others have started to catch up to Nike by using the Carbon fiber in the spike. Those that are sponsored by Shoe companies or run for schools that use a shoe sponsor.
We sometimes see athletes finishing middle/long distance races with a stream of blood on their shin from connecting with a fellow athlete's spike. Can't imagine what it would be like getting the same from a 68-spike shoe! Are there any details on how the spikes sat in the plate - I guess there weren't screwed - were they glued in, or constructed as part of the spike plate itself (you couldn't replace if you lost some of the 68 pins?)
I was asked to try these spikes for pole vault in 1968, during one of my jumps because of Velcro closers no laces I left the shoe on the runway during take off. I told them not good for pole vault.
Performing at high altitude does not increase performance. At high altitude there is less oxygen in the air, so after prolonged time spent in that environment your body produces extra red blood cells in order to carry more of the oxygen that is available. When an athlete trains at high altitude their bodies undergo this adaptation, and they can perform better for a short time after returning to lower altitude due to having a temporarily enhanced ability to carry increased oxygen to the muscles
Competing at higher altitudes universally yields slower results. Their times would have been faster if they competed at sea level, but trained at a higher altitude. Traveling to a higher altitude for competition will always yield slower results because there is less oxygen at higher altitudes. The changes in the track itself is the main contributor to the records being broken. Dirt tracks absorb more impact, meaning it takes more energy to run on dirt than a compacted rubber track. This is not a mystery. And the spikes are a tiny piece of the picture.
I was so confused why he kept saying that performance was better at altitude. I'm no athlete, but I do know my cars. The same car will always perform worse at altitude. Obviously we aren't internally combusting, but oxygen is important for performance.
sounds like some of these rules are hurting performance and development of better shoes. very similar to NASCAR with their rules, which killed the development .
Im waiting on someone like the Saudis to come up with a rival athletic body and throw serious money behind it (like what they did with golf). But just allow everything thats not a safety issue without even needing prior approval. I want to see all that mad science can do in athletics and other sports like cycling and swimming
Ya If you watch it back, I have an Asterisk at the bottom that mentions that at 03:45 . But I will say that training at altitude does provide added benefits for endurance athletes who then travel to sea level to compete.
A few other events have a “foul line” but as far as shot put specifically, @bowmanthrows has some good content about it. But I cover the history of it abit in my video on cartwheel shotput technique
For jumps, throws and sprints, competing at altitude increases performance. These are anaerobic events. It does not improve performance for long sprints and endurance events.
When they stopped running on dirt and actually ran on a smooth surface with some grip of course the record would fall. The brush spikes just supplied a nice grip to the track. The brush spike just got a bad rap for nothing really.
Funny how you explain the brand name ADIDAS comes from the name Adolf (ADI) Dasler (DAS), pronuncing it totally correct there, but immediately switch back to the hilariously wrong american pronounciation "a-DI-das"...
I also thought this was amusing. He teaches the audience how it's pronounced, but pronounces it completely different for the entire video. Maybe some kind of syndrome? Anyway, he just laughed at you.
@@ExpertCriticismJesus, he was obviously being self-effacing. Habits die hard, not worth getting so worked up over to the point you're implying mental deficiency.
That’s true for distance running but the air resistance is also decreased due to less dense air at altitude which aids performance in shorter anaerobic events
@@lemao_squash4486 cyclists are moving way faster. Air resistance makes a very bid difference in the sport, that's why they curl up.running is a LOT slower
since the beginning of track there have been rules about shoes. Spikes have been regulates as to how many, their length, shape, and size. The brush spikes were worn but illegal at the time and a few records were not allowed because the runner was wearing these spikes
I do find it funny that you’re still getting the pronunciation if adidas wrong, even when the evidence (his name) is right there in front of you. ADI. DAS(sler). The name of the company/brand is pronounced exactly like his name, minus the ‘sler’ at the end. Adi (rhymes with daddy) das (rhymes with pass). NOT A-dee-dus.
😂😂😂 do your homework bro. High elevation does not help athletes during competition I can diminish them. It only helps athletes IF they train in high elevation.
Lee Evans ran 43.29 seconds in Mexico and Tommy Smith ran 19.83 in Mexico (with an injured groin) just a short time after the South Lake Tahoe Trials. Both without the brush spikes, both faster times. I think the new track, the altitude, as well as the San Jose State coach Coach Bud Winter new training techniques added more to the fast times then the brush spikes. With all the shoe doping going on now it seems strange they continue to ban the brush.
Great point about coach Winters
Lee Evans ran 43.86 in Mexico.
Thanks for the correction. 43.29 was Butch Reynolds time when Lee's record went down 20 years later.@@hotrock388
43.29 was Butch Reynolds' record when he beat Evans' mark.
The world record fell because of the track, allowing more grip than the dust one. Sprinters use this grip, and it is more effective on rubber track. The special spikes certainly improved this grip over this surface, so both could be considered adding to the redcords, but most of it comes from the track itself.
I attended the 1968 Olympic Trials at Echo Summit (yes, it's technically south of Lake Tahoe but also 1000 feet higher) for a day or two. I also ran high school track at this time. I had never seen an all-weather track, running on a variety of compressed dirt and clay-filled tracks. I varied my spike length depending on how soft or hard the surface was. Every sprinter running on dirt tracks slipped. Clay tracks had less slippage and were always faster. I finally ran on a crummy all-weather track in college and it really messed my up. I bounced a lot causing all sorts of issues running the high hurdles. We never practiced on an all-weather track so didn't know how to run on them. Now, just about every college and even high school track is all weather. The brush spikes helped provide grip, which lowered times as long as you were strong enough to benefit from them. Lee Evans and John Carlos were absolutely strong athletes, like Usain Bolt, but they also had to learn how to run on this new surface. Once they did, there was no slippage (or running backwards) with every stride so sprinters and hurdlers had to adjust to this very quickly. Today's new shoes with all the bounce in the soles is worse than the brush spikes. I hated cross country but we weren't allowed to use spikes in these meets, something that has changed. I honestly feel there should be two world records maintained in every event, one on dirt tracks and the other on all-weather tracks because all-weather tracks provide a much "faster" surface than dirt.
Thank you for sharing and that’s awesome that you were there! Ya that’s a interesting idea about records being split.
Athletic performance at high altitude is only improved in events requiring movements over a short period of time. Thus records were broken in the sprints and…….long jump. Not in the middle and long distance races.
I remember reading Alan Pascoe's autobiography when he told of the first time that he saw/ ran on an all weather rubberised track, it was at the world university games (I think) , at the Mexico stadium the year prior to the 68 Olympics. He took a knife from the food hall and cut a piece out to take home and show everyone what they would be running on.
These videos are so fascinating and well made, I watched a bunch of them in a row and immediately subscribed because of how interesting they are.
Thank you for the support! Glad you enjoyed them
I never even did or followed track & field but these videos interest the heck outta me
It makes sense to not allow such rule changes shortly before the Olympics because it's possible that certain athletes wouldn't have access to the better equipment as quickly as others. But then one must consider that they introduced a radical new track surface for the Olympics. I think that was the origin of the problem. In any case, I don't see why the brush spike was banned thenceforth. It seems bit arbitrary.
From what I understand, a similar thing happened in tennis. They restricted the number of crosses and mains that a racquet's string could form because of the amount of spin that could be applied to the ball with a racquet using a then-recently invented stringing technique, nicknamed the spaghetti racquet. Even though they banned that one racquet the technology of the sport was changing and continued to chance drastically over the next 25 years with the materials going from wood through fiberglass, aluminum, titanium, kevlar, and carbon fiber. The size of the racquet head increased. The string composition and shoe design also evolved. But they have kept the old ban on non-traditional racquet stringing. It also seems similar to the brush spikes in that the banned innovation was introduced by a smaller company and the innovations that were allowed were introduced by companies that were more established in the industry (the spaghetti racquet was introduced by an outsider to the tennis equipment industry).
I always wanted to run on one of those tracks. By the time they became popular in community parks, I was being paid to run so I kinda lost the enjoyment of running.
Those tracks just look like pure pleasure to run on though.
And those brush spikes!!! Nobody actually had track shoes in my school so I didn’t know any better. But those brush spikes seem to be more effective.
If the rule makers don’t allow for technological advancement then people should be running in bare feet. This seems more about not wanting the records to be broken..
That's a pretty wild story that i was completely oblivious to. I had a pair of those Pumas. I picked them up (2nd, 3rd, 4th, whatever-hand) in the DDR in the late eighties when i was there for bobsleigh. Bobsleigh uses a very similar style of plate, but when i was involved they were only available from Adidas (so, their brush-spike had found a new home). I later transitioned to skeleton racing where we wore standard track-spikes. They didn't provide anywhere near the grip of the bob-shoes, but with a bit of work with the angle grinder, you could reshape the spikes into something more like a chisel which was an improvement. At some stage skeleton just gave up on the regular spikes which used to chew-up the ice at the start really badly, and moved to the bob-shoe. As to the question of whether there was any underhand dealings at play at the time of Mexico? Dunno, but my experience in international sport gives me no reasons to think there wouldn't possibly have been. Great vid - many thanks.
I wish I could edit the video because I would love to include a few comments about the bobsleigh shoes. Thanks for sharing!
@@JumpersJunction The main reason that bob used them and skeleton didn't - they were both administered by the FIBT - was cost. Skeleton was viable for someone with 5 - 10 per-cent of the budget needed to be competitive in bob, and to maintain access and avoid an arms-race, skeleton used to keep a tight rein on the level of investment needed to compete. The shoes, which Adidas only produced in limited numbers and charged a fortune for, were one of many ways to keep skeleton costs from escalating. Track spikes also weren't flash for helping to overcome the inertia of a bob at the start - they took big chunks from the ice as they slipped, whereas the brush-shoes gave great grip and only really produced a powder.
I would imagine the synthetic surface alone helped those athletes run faster. We can see if the average of the non-brush shoe also went down.
Also I believe training at high altitude improves athletic performance but not actually performing there. So setting a world record at high altitude is much more difficult.
For sprinters and jumpers altitude does improve performance because they experience less air resistance. Distance runners will find racing at altitude to be much harder though because there’s less oxygen in the air for them to breathe.
you are correct the first synthetic Olympic track was at Mexico City where the altitude also helped sprinters. there have been improvements in artfici9al tracks with limits on their construction, the track at Barcelona is at the limit and almost as hard as pavement
@@lestermount3287 There has been much debate whether running a 400m at high elevation is an advantage. Less wind resistance, yes. But, can you suck enough oxygen in-- very debatable!
@@barrychambers4047 In that short amount of time sprinting, the oxygen level isn't as much a hindrance versus anything long distance...
Great report. Thanks for upload.
Thanks for the support!
The whole saga about two shoe companies ruled by brothers who hate each othet pulling illegal shananigans to screw the other company feel so funny for some reason
Used to work at Puma, shoulda grabbed the pair of brush spikes they had there
In the 70s Adidas came out with the "Adistar 2000" model that featured the standard number of spikes, but interchangeable spiked plastic collars that could be mounted as bases for the spikes. This was the prototype for modern golf "soft spikes".
You should do a video like this on Ryan Crouser at the World Championships in 2017. They were calling a foot foul for him for pushing off the back of the inner lip of the ring and eventually changed the rules just because of him. It's now allowed.
Awesome recommendation! You may have given me a new video topic. Thank you!
I am not trying to get views/likes or anything on mywebsite, but I wrote a post about it like 6 years ago when it happened. A lot of the content is deleted now. But might be able to find some stuff. Good luck@@JumpersJunction
@@JumpersJunctionplease write about this! It's a big change
great video, funny how the 200m and 400m records went but still nobody could beat Bob Hayes chewed up track with wrong size shoes 100m record, it took a new track surface and altitude to beat it although nobody has had Bob Hayes speed until Usain Bolt, his TWO relay splits of 8.5 - 8.8 seconds on cinder in 1964 are still unmatched to this day, never realized how long the spikes were for cinder
He was a beast. I always wander how some of the historic legends of the sport would perform today if they had the training, sports science, technology, etc we have today.
Yeah, but steriods were allowed back then so it's not that surprising
Bullet Bob Hayes was amazing!
Ah, behold the infamous "Brush Spike" - the track shoes that dared to flirt with the boundaries of athletic innovation and got a stern rejection from the rulebook. These shoes were clearly designed by a mischievous fusion of a sneaker engineer and a paintbrush artist, resulting in a footwear masterpiece that not only promised lightning-fast sprints but also the ability to touch up the finish line if it looked a bit faded.
Alas, the track and field authorities, perhaps fearing a sudden spike in race times and the potential for accidental track graffiti, promptly banned these audacious brush-adorned wonders. The Brush Spike left us with dreams of athletes sprinting into a vibrant future while simultaneously igniting debates about the fine line between innovation and outright artistic vandalism in the world of sports.
Very interesting! Great vid!
5:46 High altitude does not make you run faster 🤦🏼♂️ it puts more drain on the athlete's and makes the training tougher not easier!
The gains are made when you return to sea level. 🤦🏼♂️
For sprinting it does. Long distance, you’re correct.
Great content! Great history. Sibling rivalry. Were they so focused on one another that NIKE swooped in?
😲 sports officials that are corrupt? Never heard that before!
Should just make them run barefoot, that way everyone has access to the same equipment.
It is 8 in the front and 4 in the heel depending on the event you are doing like Sprint events up to 400 meter get the 8 in the front, then distance events get 6 or 8 in front depending on the if IAAF/World Athletics or NCAA that allows only 6 for all track running sprinting events so some use a blank spike or two for the Adidas models that had 7--8 spikes of the Addidas sponsored schools that had athletes use those spikes. The long Jumpers/triple and pole vault depending on surface can have 8 in front and if on grass 2 heel spikes. The high jump and javelin allow 12 spikes 8 in front and 4 in heel with javelin allowing the longest spikes you can use. Then Cross Country the IAAF/World Athletics allows for up to 8 in the front and only if really bad and needed 2 in the back. I
have heard of athletes now in Sprint distance events mainly those who are hurdles specialist and 200 meter under using a legal for other events jumper spike from some companies due to how behind they are on current Nike tech though some like Adidas, Asics, or a few others have started to catch up to Nike by using the Carbon fiber in the spike. Those that are sponsored by Shoe companies or run for schools that use a shoe sponsor.
I think it's a fine balance. The footwear can make all the difference. And you dont want others having an unfair advantage.
The track has vastly more effect on performance than the shoes.
All Day I Dream About.... SCANDAL!
Brush spikes made a difference on cinder ..and old tracks ...
Various and interesting topic I used to say what it would have been but I'm sure the running surface would have taken a beating.
the history lesson was very cool
Thanks for watching
2:36 underrated.
But for sure Rudolph Dad was a Rude Ass. Because a few seconds later he named his company poo ma
Same shoes that looked like the shoes that ones Bob sledges use
Oh wow, I wish I had put that as a reference. Yes they are just like bobsleigh shoes
@@JumpersJunction And it was Adidas that became the universal supplier to bobsleigh teams, at least from the eighties when i got involved.
Thats past (bobslighting still use brushshoes). Tell about the shoe Performance with Carbon inlets model 2023
We sometimes see athletes finishing middle/long distance races with a stream of blood on their shin from connecting with a fellow athlete's spike. Can't imagine what it would be like getting the same from a 68-spike shoe! Are there any details on how the spikes sat in the plate - I guess there weren't screwed - were they glued in, or constructed as part of the spike plate itself (you couldn't replace if you lost some of the 68 pins?)
I was asked to try these spikes for pole vault in 1968, during one of my jumps because of Velcro closers no laces I left the shoe on the runway during take off. I told them not good for pole vault.
kinda makes me wonder why no animal ever evolved spikes on its feet
Performing at high altitude does not increase performance. At high altitude there is less oxygen in the air, so after prolonged time spent in that environment your body produces extra red blood cells in order to carry more of the oxygen that is available. When an athlete trains at high altitude their bodies undergo this adaptation, and they can perform better for a short time after returning to lower altitude due to having a temporarily enhanced ability to carry increased oxygen to the muscles
Those big spikes would take chunks out of the plastic idk how that is allowed
Not sure what part of “no more than 8 spikes” was confusing anyone.
Competing at higher altitudes universally yields slower results. Their times would have been faster if they competed at sea level, but trained at a higher altitude. Traveling to a higher altitude for competition will always yield slower results because there is less oxygen at higher altitudes. The changes in the track itself is the main contributor to the records being broken. Dirt tracks absorb more impact, meaning it takes more energy to run on dirt than a compacted rubber track. This is not a mystery. And the spikes are a tiny piece of the picture.
Only true for aerobic events
I was so confused why he kept saying that performance was better at altitude. I'm no athlete, but I do know my cars. The same car will always perform worse at altitude. Obviously we aren't internally combusting, but oxygen is important for performance.
Throwing and jumping events are easier at altitude.
Can I purchase this shoe from anywhere ?
sounds like some of these rules are hurting performance and development of better shoes. very similar to NASCAR with their rules, which killed the development .
i think that all track events should be run barefoot to even out the playing field and make the race about the athlete and not the equipment.
I thought high elevation hurt athletes performance as the air is thinner .
Im waiting on someone like the Saudis to come up with a rival athletic body and throw serious money behind it (like what they did with golf). But just allow everything thats not a safety issue without even needing prior approval. I want to see all that mad science can do in athletics and other sports like cycling and swimming
Altitude improves performance? Said no endurance athlete, ever.
Ya If you watch it back, I have an Asterisk at the bottom that mentions that at 03:45 . But I will say that training at altitude does provide added benefits for endurance athletes who then travel to sea level to compete.
Why only the shot put has a toe board? Actually, when did the shot put start having a toe board?
A few other events have a “foul line” but as far as shot put specifically, @bowmanthrows has some good content about it. But I cover the history of it abit in my video on cartwheel shotput technique
No metal spikes , too dangerous to the athletes.....when incidents occur.
im sure it had something to do with the shoes and not that the world record was broken by a coloured person
Why does high elevation add to the performance of athletes
Running at altitude improves athletic performance? What are you on about.
For jumps, throws and sprints, competing at altitude increases performance. These are anaerobic events. It does not improve performance for long sprints and endurance events.
And training at altitude can improve athletic performance upon return to lower altitudes in aerobic disciplines too.
When they stopped running on dirt and actually ran on a smooth surface with some grip of course the record would fall. The brush spikes just supplied a nice grip to the track. The brush spike just got a bad rap for nothing really.
Animals should not be allowed to compete.
❤❤❤❤❤
Funny how you explain the brand name ADIDAS comes from the name Adolf (ADI) Dasler (DAS), pronuncing it totally correct there, but immediately switch back to the hilariously wrong american pronounciation "a-DI-das"...
Haha 😂
I also thought this was amusing. He teaches the audience how it's pronounced, but pronounces it completely different for the entire video. Maybe some kind of syndrome? Anyway, he just laughed at you.
@@ExpertCriticismJesus, he was obviously being self-effacing. Habits die hard, not worth getting so worked up over to the point you're implying mental deficiency.
It's just my opinion bro. There's no need to get agressive and curse. @@Noordledoordle
Altitude actually decreases performance due to there being less oxygen in the air and less oxygen gets to your muscles
That’s true for distance running but the air resistance is also decreased due to less dense air at altitude which aids performance in shorter anaerobic events
For short distance races, Statistics says otherwise.
The lower air pressure is more significant. Take a look at which velodromes most cycling records are made.
@@lemao_squash4486 cyclists are moving way faster. Air resistance makes a very bid difference in the sport, that's why they curl up.running is a LOT slower
High altitude decreases performance for distance runners. But for sprinters, high altitute results in faster times.
since the beginning of track there have been rules about shoes. Spikes have been regulates as to how many, their length, shape, and size. The brush spikes were worn but illegal at the time and a few records were not allowed because the runner was wearing these spikes
I do find it funny that you’re still getting the pronunciation if adidas wrong, even when the evidence (his name) is right there in front of you.
ADI. DAS(sler).
The name of the company/brand is pronounced exactly like his name, minus the ‘sler’ at the end.
Adi (rhymes with daddy) das (rhymes with pass).
NOT A-dee-dus.
I got it right one time when breaking the name down and then immediately went back to the way I have always heard it. Hard to break that habit.
😂😂😂 do your homework bro. High elevation does not help athletes during competition I can diminish them. It only helps athletes IF they train in high elevation.
That is correct for endurance athletes. But for anaerobic events it’s the opposite! Altitude improves performance.