Eric Cartman it's to show the technology dummy. they're a company that measure highly technical data and want to showcase what makes it possible. don't watch if you're so butthurt. it's not the same as smashing an iPhone...
I don’t think running shoe manufacturers should be punished for making something that is great. Likewise athletes should not be punished for wanting to utilise something that is great. Now that Nike have set the bar so high it is up to their competitors to make a shoe that is on par with or better than the Vaporfly. It would be counter productive to force manufacturers and athletes to make and use an inferior product. Better to buff than nerf!
people tend to forget a similar situation happening in swimming with the super-suits some years back, where it went so ridiculous swimmers wore two of them at the same time to get more buoyancy and it ended up all being about the suit and not the athlete. So they had to interviene and restrict/rule what the fabric is allowed to have and what not, which lead to a better/healthier competition and sport
@@MrPeter1337 that's the point! It should be the fight between athletes not technology. OK let the tech in, but it must not be a secret weapon! Want to see Tech supremacy over human? - see F1. Is Hamilton a worthy champion? - I don't know. He hasn't been put in a true test. I may call him a resident champ because all you need from him is to stay...
I think “great” in this circumstance is subjective. I think any technology that tries to give an energy return to the runners should be allowed because it’s running more efficiently. I do think if brands start coming up with shoes that replenish more energy to the runner than they exerted, at that point then technology has given too much of an advantage. But I do agree, just because the shoe is way better to the competition, doesn’t mean it should be banned
@@mikowhy9608 But we're always getting faster through technology. Be it nutrition, be it better sweat/heat transfer clothing, compression fabrics, be it track surfaces becoming rubberized, lightweight low profile near solid sprint spikes or whatever. You can't compare today's records to the records of 50 years ago because of the technological difference not only on the athlete but in the arenas they race in. To say F1 is tech supremacy over human is a stretch. That's like saying take the top constructor's car and give it to an F3 driver and he'll be top competition in F1 which is simply untrue. Also realize that in F1 being 2% off is huge. On a 2 minute course that means in 30 laps they're 72 seconds behind with no traffic or battling for position. Add that in you're probably lapped somewhere in 30-45 laps. So understand how tiny of a hair you're trying to split when comparing it to motorsport.
@@psycheout4733 Sure, innovation can't be stopped. Some thing will be bad and forgotten, some will bring a breakthrough and some will be called illegal. Life goes on - I am OK. F1 example - you got it wrong. The best car given to 2 drivers only shows who is the better from that pair! Make it 20! I don't want to see the same in running. I saw it in swimming and that was bad. All of a sudden an athlete didn't need to train so hard to break a record, he/she just needed a super suit! That was cheating.
the problem is when there are only a number of athletes that get "super tech gear" like in Rio 2016, when Kipchoge and 2-3 other runners were running prototypes that other Nike sponsored athletes could not use. as long as a shoe (or other tech) is only for a few people and not for the public to buy I think its OK to ban, but to ban because other brands cant keep up is just wierd.
Prototypes are now banned, so this isn't an issue. The issue, currently, lies in if we want to have the shoe help the runner as much as possible or if we want the runners to be on their own
yeah, there's really no way to measure how heart rate fluctuates depending on the shoe being worn. Heart rate monitoring for running is not accurate since there are so many factors that can affect it.
@@yellowplatypus2342 If you isolate all the other factors, then yeah, of course they can measure heart rate fluctuations depending on the shoe being used. Isolating variables is one of the foundations of scientific method
@@FabricioDestro Fair point - however we saw similar results when we tested the original Vaporfly against an Adios Boost, plus lower muscle activation with the Nike. If I were to re-run the test I'd run slower so I'm not so close to threshold; blame my lack of fitness for my HR staying pinned at 190+
Totally. They could’ve tested the shoe for a longer period of time, like a month, having him run the same distance at the same pace in the two shoes and on different days so he is not exhausted for the second pair. And then compare the average HR, cadence etc. of several runs. I’m kinda upset cause I would’ve been curious and they already cut the shoe in half 😅😅
This is not the first time shoe tech takes a great leap and drove an arms race between shoe makers. There wasn't any ban the last few times it happened, so why ban it now. World Athletics should really look at promoting the sports more than addressing 'shoe politics'...
people tend to forget a similar situation happening in swimming with the super-suits some years back, where it went so ridiculous swimmers wore two of them at the same time to get more buoyancy and it ended up all being about the suit and not the athlete. So they had to interviene and restrict/rule what the fabric is allowed to have and what not, which lead to a better/healthier competition and sport
I just kinda think it's a bit sad that they seem to have a lot of "normal" runners convinced that they need Carbon plate shoes to run fast, I've got the hoka Carbon x and it's super fast and fun but I'm quite aware and conscious of the fact that it's a luxury rather than a need, i comfortably ran my fastest half marathon in Cliftons and had a great time doing it. Also with every major brands seemingly introducing Carbon plate shoes in 2020 doesn't it level the playing field anyway?
@@RunnersWorld when they talk about the midsole length or should you also talk about the hoka? i know top comment talked about it but what about without it is a maximal shoe after all
@@nguye578 do we really care that casual runners are using vaporflys? It makes sense since casual runners really don't know much about running shoes. There's a lot of marketing on the vaporflys right now so I can see everyone from high school kids to soccer mom's wearing these shoes.
These shoes are very hard no ignore. I am becoming alot faster through my 5K to Half Marathons while my heart rate is slightly down. And my recovery is amazing as my legs dont feel like jelly afterwards. The hype is real and Nike is on top of the game. And everybody is catching up yet again.
The innovation in running shoes is just like the innovation in equipment in any other sport... it's just my opinion though. Would I spend $250+ on a pair of running shoes? No way! I'm not a professional and I'm not winning any races. I run because I enjoy it.
@@RunnersWorld Agreed! My thing is sports are always evolving. Spectators want to see athletes perform at their highest level and have events be more exciting. That's where this innovation comes from. Think about how baseball bats and hockey sticks have transformed over the years...
Sports gear company -"We make gear to improve performance" The world - "cool" Nike - "Vaporfly is proven to improve performance " The world - "THAT'S CHEATING. YOU SHOULD BE BANNED "
Really? I have many Nikes but I also think an absolute freedom is no good. I vote against a secret advantage that one athlete or team could use to claim victory. Whatever the cost! Olympics should be all about human spirit, not toys...
Miko 'Why' I think we draw the line at rocket propulsion or those little wheels hidden on little kids shoes. Until then you still need to run your heart out. As long as the technology is available to everyone then let’s run fast without jelly legs the next% day!!!
@@tmallisnyc this is it. Until it isn't a secret or/and superexpensive technology it's OK. But if the technology will make top runners faster by 10minutes who will admire such athlete? Not me.
Well it also depends on the person. It is pretty good cushion and I feel I won’t get injured as easily. Also this shoe is not suppose to be used for anything less than a half to a marathon.
I not convinced banning tech is right Are we still using wooden tennis rackets? Cyclists cycle the most high tech bikes F1 drivers race the most high tech cars So why shouldn't runners run in the most high tech shoes?
Yep agree, but there are limitations. For example, F1 cars have specific things they're allowed to change only. Often they change things and have to revert back because the rules don't allow it. Just look at Ferrari's engine 2019 and 2020.
True True, in fact they should be allowed to use rocket propelled shoes with spring loaded hydraulic energy systems counterbalanced to mitigate energy losses and improve friction coefficient for body to ground kinetic transfer
Just like tennis from wooden, to metal, to graphite and to titanium racquets, the speed and power of each generation of players increase with the racquets technological advancement. A little bit of spring action in shoes I think is OK
its not spring..... its a higher shoe so it makes your strides bigger, it makes you run on your front so you have less ground contact, and the carbon plate centers the energy into the middle so you have more forward momentum and it stabilizes your foot..... this is great
Trevor. Not tying to be a Boy Scout. I work in construction and job site safety is always a concern with tools. In short shop safety 101 will always read ...... Do not wear gloves, loose clothing or jewelry while using revolving power tools. Tie back long hair or wear appropriate hair protection to prevent hair from getting caught in moving parts of equipment. Long story short is a small motor and a small piece of fabric is a lot stronger than say your finger or wrist if it was to catch that band saw blade it could in proven theory every day on some unfortunate job site or carpenter shop pull your hand into the machine and well you could imagine the rest. And last but not least all hail the NEXT %!!!!!
I love the vaporfly. I really like what it has done for the sport of long distance running and I am so happy that it wasn’t banned. As I see it, it is a shoe that can allow you to run the best that your body is capable of, not one that provides an unfair advantage against competitors.
@@waterproof4403 I don’t. I feel it gives a target for lone world record chasers when there is no equal competition. It does nothing to physically push the athletes harder, it’s just an indication of how fast they need to go
@@benanastasoff8980 it literally gives the athletes a mental advantage. Long distance running is also tactics. To be able to time yourself and run it a lot harder than people think. That light indicates them weather they should go fast or to slow down if they are actually going faster than they need too.
@@waterproof4403 what’s wrong with a mental advantage? A simpler version of pacing lights have been in use for a long time. If I am not mistaken, some records from the 90s were set by programming lights to illuminate along the track when the runner should be passing by them. It wasn’t a consistent LED strip like the wavelight is, but it told runners they were behind, on, or ahead of pace. While many records have been set with wavelight recently, there have been many instances when the runners fell short with the technology. If the athlete isn’t in shape to break the record, wavelight isn’t going to help at all. Things that are rightfully banned in the sport are interchangeable pacesetters (create a draft), PED’s, and shoes that give more energy back than the runner exerts. Things that help with an athlete’s mindset have never been and will never be bad. Saying an athlete can’t know where they are relative to a world record with wavelight would be similar to banning timers on the track, or coaches on the sidelines shouting encouragement, or screens on the side of the stadium allowing championship runners to know where their competition is. Receiving a mental boost is a good thing for the athletes which means it’s good for the sport as a whole.
@@benanastasoff8980 the lights you mentioned that were used way back, did you know they were prohibited 🚫? And just recently they got reinstated. Suddenly all records start to fall. Not a coincidence and it's nothing similar to a coach shouting lol. For example The 10000m and 5000m for both men and women stood for years and years before it got broken with the help of organized events specifically to target the records. All broken within a span of months. For Cheptegei’s 10,000-meter record (26:11.00), except for his final 1,000-meter stretch, every other 1,000-meter split was within a second of 2:37, a metronomic mark that would be difficult to replicate with just a watch. There's no way Cheptegei would have broken thar that nigh. He had Nike(NN) stage that event for him to target the records which had him at an advantage. Kenenisa just ran against the clock setting his own pace and set these records! Also kipchoges marathon under 2 hours isn't official. Should be the same with Cheptegei and all the other records that were obtained with the help of those lights. Or just make those records stand separate/unofficially. Also why don't you see the lights at the olympics or other major world championships?
Man, I love the idea of the 4% & the Next %. For me, I see it as the track spike for marathon runners. For most average runners like myself, shoes have always been, pick what you like and use that. Now we have a specific marathon shoe that is good for everyone.
I didn't buy the Next% because of the price and that it is primarily a racing shoe. But I did buy the Nike Zoom Fly 3 when it went on a clearance sale. It is a bit heavier than the Next% and maybe more of a training shoe. I only have a few runs in them, but there is no doubt there is a difference. I am approximately 15 seconds per mile faster with the same effort as I was in a a similar weighted training shoe on easy runs. I have mixed feelings about the legality of the shoes. The carbon fiber plate does provide more energy return than the EVA foam sole. However, as others have said, we still have to do the work and be in shape. I'm not sure where the line should be drawn. It is fun to go faster than I have in a few years as an older runner!
His movements on the treadmill reminded me to Ryan Hall's....great video!!! That was ALWAYS the purpose of any shoe to INFLUENCE performance, FINALLY we got there!!! I've got a pair!!!
I am personally okay with the advantages shoes bring. One could arguably say that shoes five years ago are light years ahead of shoes from twenty years ago, do you go back and reevaluate those records too? Where would the line be drawn. There will always be those that have access to better coaching and nutrition etc, that is an an advantage that pros and elites have over most people that are training on the side with a full time job. I say those pros and elites most likely earned their way to those positions and deserve the rewards that come with it. Generally speaking, those shoes are more readily available to most people than the other things I just mentioned also. It’s not like there are external power sources in play. It still requires personal effort and dedication. Let them push the bounds of what can be done in the most self propelled efficient manner possible.
I think a push for greater tech in shoes should happen. Improvement in training, shoe tech, methods, and everything only advances when there is competition to do so.
Golf: From wooden shafts and heads and leather balls to carbon fibre and titanium clubs and billion $ ball R&D Skiing: Same thing Hockey skates and sticks, pole vault, tartan track, running spikes, bicycle tech and aero, astroturf, etc etc. The perfect example was the Speedo controversy: Speedo didn't break any rules but they developed tech that nobody saw coming, so the regulations had to adapt to keep the sport fair. In my opinion, World Athletics has handled this perfectly (apart from taking so bloody long to address it). Until now there was no need for quantitative restrictions on stack height, plate tech etc, because nobody had actually succeeded in making shoes faster through huge midsoles and plates. I think the biggest leveller is that shoes have to be available to the public for 4 months before they can be used in competition. And having said all that, training, nutrition, pacing strategies, biokinetics and a host of other factors are all individually far more impactful than shoe tech.
I've had more than enough years of experience with many shoe brands to know that if any shoe dosn't come in at least a 2E width fitting then forget about it...my feet look very average in width but I need 2E for complete comfort.
---running on fibre track is fun. as there is already fibre there. shoes hardly matter. any good shoes will do. ---running on mud tracks --natural -- is super fun as long as you do not have too much pebbles. ---running cross country on natural terrain is also fantastic but you need flexible but rugged shoes. ---all of the above have no cushion issues. but shoes have to be sturdy at the bottom with medium rigidity. Now HUGE PROBLEM: running on road! -- i have no idea if there are any shoes out there with serious cushioning in-front and still be flexible. Even vaporfly is doubtful. need 30 cm thick( if you are above 35) and 25mm is fine if you are a young runner! --Road and concrete: you have to solve the issues as the pounding is as real as it gets in the front foot area. normally they have plenty of cushioning and pulp at the heels! BUT --when you land the toe, you need to feel the cushion. Otherwise the pain will directly transfer to the knees. ----now west folks suffer more with ANKLE ISSUES. hence they add more cushion on the heels. ankle issue is less of a problem in other parts of the world-non west. as i said they have more problem in the front of the foot! because in developed countries they use heels more as roads and pedestrian are well developed. In developing countries where you have everything a mess on road and pavements, you tend to walk with toes first( to reduce surface area to minimize damage, and you are always cagey). so different folks have different issues depending on age,gender, geography,running style, foot type, style of run and nature of run. so road and concrete are the tough parts. but their advantage is that due to smooth nature the track is covered fast! Jesus, i gave everything away. may be nike should hire me!
@ king_has_no_cloths kul such a great comment. Although for running on track and for cx you need a lightweight shoe, because heavy trainers slow you down alot. Also, traction is very necessary for cx races.
Interesting. The shoes seem to me make the leg a lot fresher because you maximize the stride and the feel when you contact the ground. So I don't think it's cheating as long as everyone has the same access to the shoe. At the end of the day, the athlete has to have the speed and the fitness to go faster. The shoe is just there to help keep their leg muscle fresher for a longer period of time. It's no different that wearing a skin suit in cycling or swimming. Just because you wear that shoe that doesn't mean everyone will break WR.
QUESTION(s) QUESTION(s): 1) MARATHON SHOES vs TRAINING SHOES im going into a military training program. they say we will run 16 miles a week for 5 months. i keep seeing on nike website that yes these X% shoes are good for running, but they are for "marathons", while the website lists similar shoes (w/ carbon plate) for "everyday training purposes". my question is: is there some disadvantage to getting the "marathon" shoe for someone in my situation. is there some kind of stress-factor that im not accounting for that the "everyday training shoe" will better avoid. 2) CURVED TOE AREA why are the 2020 X%s and some others sort of curved in the toe area. i've never had shoes like that, and am unsure if the transition to curved-toe shoes from a lifetime of pretty bland basic oval-shaped soled shoes will put me at a disadvantage during my 5 months of daily competition About Me: - i do sprints 3x a week - Saturdays i do 7-12 miles depending on location - i've been called a "heel striker" because i tore my lower back a decade ago and also have naturally weak/small glutes - 5'10. 180lbs. - at training i will be doing about 3 miles a day on mixed surfaces (road, track, grass).
Thanks for asking! The first difference you'll most likely encounter is that a "marathon" shoe, in this case, refers to a marathon racing shoe. Most likely it'll be more expensive, $250 for the Next%. And since the shoes are designed for race day, they'll likely be less durable. For everyday running, like your military program, you'll probably want a training shoe that's built to last more miles, and less about being as fast as possible. Also, a lot of more performance-oriented shoes tend to be more narrow. That might be the curve you're referring to. In terms of the shape of the shoe, the best thing is really to visit your local running store and try on a number of options, and see what's most comfortable. If it's not comfortable in the store, it won't be comfortable a few miles into a run! Hope this helps!
Doping is anything enhances performances AND harms people's health at the same time: these shoes do improve both performances and health of athletes (less strain, less heart stress). Ad meiora semper!
Thanks for the video, just thought you might want to know the music seems off balance here it’s just as load if not louder than the people speaking making it really hard to focus on what you’re saying.
These shoes are getting bigger and bigger. I foresee a type of future space/moonboot that completely hugs the the foot and the calves and maybe even above the knee. They're going to support, enhance and and provide whatever else I can't think of to help the runner go faster and stronger with less injury.
The carbon fiber plate is a spring. The spring absorbs energy as the foot rolls forward and releases the energy at toe off. Thus, the mechanical doping phrase. Nike has a pending patent applications for this “spring plate”. It is innovation, like fiberglass vaulting poles. All the records were broken, but everyone understood why. Aluminum baseball bats can hit further, but MLB doesn’t allow them. (There is a safety issue there too). Swimming banned high tech suits. Car racing restricts some technologies. All sports have equipment restrictions. I say no to the spring shoes regardless of who makes them.
Is it like tires where you have track that suck in rain and turning and street for real life situations. Or is it good for parkour or something like that as well?
when they talk about the midsole length or should you also talk about the hoka? i know top comment talked about it but what about without it is a maximal shoe after all
As far as the shoe dopng concern, it seems like the springy plate in the shoe is pushing that line. But then again, how is that any worse than using spikes on a track? Which we've been doing for decades now.
I don’t have a problem with making shoes high tech and better. The problem is when the prices of these shoes are not affordable for most people and only the rich. Over $200 for shoes is too expensive, maybe some knock off competition might help lower the price some.
but how will this shoe work for a slow runner and will there be benefts for someone who is heelstriking. Will the angle of the plate "work against" you if you are heelstriking, or how does is work?
jobbi925, While heal-striking in a carbon plate shoe like the vaporfly may not be as beneficial as mid-foot striking, it probably won’t work against you. But if you are over-striding, it would definitely be detrimental. Over-striding in any shoe decreases performance, but doing it in a carbon plate shoe would be like running into a wall.
One question ppl never can answer: when is it too much? How about in 2 yrs, theres a VF15% that cost 700$. How would that be fair in any way? How would a 15 yr old runner be able to afford and compete? Or a 22 yr old student? When do you draw the line of performance enhancement? Nobody have given me a satisfactory answer yet.
Blixten I don’t think that type of thing would get a shoe banned, although I’m no runner so I may be wrong, for biking, some bikes that are much faster cost over $10k and some cost only a few hundred dollars and are much slower, but yet they are still not banned. Idk how much stricter running is than biking tho so not sure on that
@@burino9162 Well, personally I think it's against the spirit of the sport. I prefer a sport where it's the physical performance that matters, not the gear.
Why is it that everytime I see these shoes being tested against others, the VF always goes first? Why not go last so that the runner is weaker with a higher heart rate? There are way too many variables to ever make a fair comparison. The human body is not a scientific tool to make measurements with. Day to day, minute to minute, the human body is constantly changing. Anyway.... No, new technology should not be banned as long as it's available for everybody. Nobody wanted to ban Adidas Boost when it revolutionized the running shoe.
The physiological tests and performance measures are flawed on many levels : confirmation bias, one measure per participant (1 rep per shoe), measures in only one participant, not randomising the order of the shoe reps, experimenter not blind to the condition nor during the experiment nor during the data analysis. Not much can be concluded from such tests...Would like to see how the actual tests were done with this shoe, I hope the real experiment was properly conducted, although if it was Nike proving that their shoe is the best, I can already sense some marketing based confirmation bias playing an important role in the effects observed... This is not to say that there are no difference between the shoes, but that there are critical flaws in the experimental science trying to measure such differences.
Hey, I like your videos, but, just as an advice, could please low down the background music, it is very hateful for listen the undergoing conversation.
Money money more money , Cheating is about money, America is about money Money is all that’s important God is money Peoples feelings don’t matter People don’t matter Just show me the 💰
It’s impossible to deny that these shoes give you an advantage, but in a few years time every major brand will have their own version of this shoe that will once again level the playing field.
Everyone is acting like it was absurd to have a discussion. There has to be a discussion with these things so that there is some sort of precedent. Tech is getting better and better, so we'll be having these discussions more and more.
these tests cannot be analyzed as evidence of any particular benefits. since the duration is 5 minutes, it is not even close to the shortest race, for example 5 km (about 15 minutes), and even more so for the analysis of a half marathon or marathon (about 1 hour and about 2 hours)
Pb approx 19.30 5k 1.27 HM, 3.34 marathon. I think vaporfly is worth 90 seconds on 5 km, 5 mins half, 10 mins full against an asics gt2000. Incredible how much better the shoe is for every ability. In fact I think it makes more difference the worse you are
What is the longevity of this shoe I wish you would have mentioned that in your video. How many miles are you expected to get out of one of these pairs. For me the technology of the shoe. that's a double-edged sword. I kind of feel sad for all of the runners that have set records in the past on regular shoes. And now we have shoes that will change the record book. Not necessarily the runner. I would love to get a faster time when I'm running. But is it me or is it the shoe. I'm not sure they didn't address about injuries would you be more likely to get injured with these or less likely. If it is less injuries I'm all for that.
As long as the show is widely available I don't think it's unfair. The point of shoes is to provide a technological advantage, which is why you don't see many people reaching barefoot.
i mean the real question here is whether or not that carbon fiber plate is producing any spring. Cause if it does you could categorically call it cheating, regardless of whether it's been cleared or not
All top sports in the world are dictated by technology and its advancement. Cycling, football, swimming, running, baseball etc. People are just bitter that their sponsors have not developed a shoe as good as this. Nike have set the benchmark, and now the rest have to catch up. To the people stating Nike should be made to reveal their designs and secrets, wake up. Do F1 teams reveal all their designs and technological designs?
Someday we will be spectators of a virtual race of avatars. Each runner will stay in the gim running on treadmill. No ugly wind, rain, turns, hills... All drinks, doctors, friends, pacemakers naerby. So what about that marathon? I'm sure I will hear again "well, the runner still needs to use his own muscles. Why banning it?!" Absurd idea? No, a future record breaking attempt.
My question is this, "If you're running faster because of a shoe, not because of your training, nutrition, hydration, race plan, etc. Are you a better runner?" For me, the answer is NO! You just ran in a great shoe…big deal. Anyway, I don't wear carbon fibre shoes and I've never been beaten by anyone wearing them who I would consider a comparable runner to myself…why? Because I train harder, longer and better…that's the difference that should be measured…not how much impact the shoe had!
Comparing apples to apples, the PGA regulates clubs and most designs aren’t accepted. Otherwise it would be who can afford the best cheat gear. So that approach should be used across the board with all sports and equipment. Start regulations ASAP.
Bought vaporfly, got home from work 5 minutes early, discovered neighbour with wife, now divorced, thanks nike!
Thank you random internet stranger, you made me laugh today
Kkkkkkkkkkkk
All part of the plan
😂😂😂
😂😂😂
I’m so tired of seeing people cut shoes I can’t afford in half.
I agree it’s like the iPhone drop test
But there cheep tf lol
Eric Cartman it's to show the technology dummy. they're a company that measure highly technical data and want to showcase what makes it possible. don't watch if you're so butthurt. it's not the same as smashing an iPhone...
I can’t couldn’t afford to buy even one shoe even if it was cut in half
Stop watching youtube videos of "people cut shoes I can’t afford in half" then, simples.
I don’t think running shoe manufacturers should be punished for making something that is great. Likewise athletes should not be punished for wanting to utilise something that is great. Now that Nike have set the bar so high it is up to their competitors to make a shoe that is on par with or better than the Vaporfly. It would be counter productive to force manufacturers and athletes to make and use an inferior product. Better to buff than nerf!
people tend to forget a similar situation happening in swimming with the super-suits some years back, where it went so ridiculous swimmers wore two of them at the same time to get more buoyancy and it ended up all being about the suit and not the athlete. So they had to interviene and restrict/rule what the fabric is allowed to have and what not, which lead to a better/healthier competition and sport
@@MrPeter1337 that's the point!
It should be the fight between athletes not technology.
OK let the tech in, but it must not be a secret weapon!
Want to see Tech supremacy over human? - see F1.
Is Hamilton a worthy champion? - I don't know. He hasn't been put in a true test. I may call him a resident champ because all you need from him is to stay...
I think “great” in this circumstance is subjective. I think any technology that tries to give an energy return to the runners should be allowed because it’s running more efficiently. I do think if brands start coming up with shoes that replenish more energy to the runner than they exerted, at that point then technology has given too much of an advantage. But I do agree, just because the shoe is way better to the competition, doesn’t mean it should be banned
@@mikowhy9608 But we're always getting faster through technology. Be it nutrition, be it better sweat/heat transfer clothing, compression fabrics, be it track surfaces becoming rubberized, lightweight low profile near solid sprint spikes or whatever. You can't compare today's records to the records of 50 years ago because of the technological difference not only on the athlete but in the arenas they race in.
To say F1 is tech supremacy over human is a stretch. That's like saying take the top constructor's car and give it to an F3 driver and he'll be top competition in F1 which is simply untrue. Also realize that in F1 being 2% off is huge. On a 2 minute course that means in 30 laps they're 72 seconds behind with no traffic or battling for position. Add that in you're probably lapped somewhere in 30-45 laps. So understand how tiny of a hair you're trying to split when comparing it to motorsport.
@@psycheout4733 Sure, innovation can't be stopped. Some thing will be bad and forgotten, some will bring a breakthrough and some will be called illegal. Life goes on - I am OK.
F1 example - you got it wrong. The best car given to 2 drivers only shows who is the better from that pair!
Make it 20!
I don't want to see the same in running.
I saw it in swimming and that was bad.
All of a sudden an athlete didn't need to train so hard to break a record, he/she just needed a super suit!
That was cheating.
the problem is when there are only a number of athletes that get "super tech gear" like in Rio 2016, when Kipchoge and 2-3 other runners were running prototypes that other Nike sponsored athletes could not use. as long as a shoe (or other tech) is only for a few people and not for the public to buy I think its OK to ban, but to ban because other brands cant keep up is just wierd.
I think this is meant to be so that the shoe doesn't help you. Because if Nike says that you go 4% faster than it means it does helps you a bit...
blaz grabnar It’s not 4% faster it is 4% more efficient
nothing wierd, think about Formula One and you will know why
@@connor7568 the same way as those swimsuit that were banned.
Prototypes are now banned, so this isn't an issue. The issue, currently, lies in if we want to have the shoe help the runner as much as possible or if we want the runners to be on their own
Bruh his heart rate is lower when he’s running in the vaporfly because it’s the first rep.
yeah, there's really no way to measure how heart rate fluctuates depending on the shoe being worn. Heart rate monitoring for running is not accurate since there are so many factors that can affect it.
@@yellowplatypus2342 If you isolate all the other factors, then yeah, of course they can measure heart rate fluctuations depending on the shoe being used. Isolating variables is one of the foundations of scientific method
@@FabricioDestro Fair point - however we saw similar results when we tested the original Vaporfly against an Adios Boost, plus lower muscle activation with the Nike. If I were to re-run the test I'd run slower so I'm not so close to threshold; blame my lack of fitness for my HR staying pinned at 190+
Exactly. It's so obvious. If he repeats the test inverting the order he's gonna have the lowest heart rate in the New Balance.
Totally. They could’ve tested the shoe for a longer period of time, like a month, having him run the same distance at the same pace in the two shoes and on different days so he is not exhausted for the second pair. And then compare the average HR, cadence etc. of several runs. I’m kinda upset cause I would’ve been curious and they already cut the shoe in half 😅😅
This is not the first time shoe tech takes a great leap and drove an arms race between shoe makers. There wasn't any ban the last few times it happened, so why ban it now. World Athletics should really look at promoting the sports more than addressing 'shoe politics'...
People seem to forget that shoes themselves once represented a great leap forward.
Mindy Macready The rules previous to the Vaporfly said that the shoes must not give the wearer a mechanical advantage
@@McFly50 you don't understand physics.
people tend to forget a similar situation happening in swimming with the super-suits some years back, where it went so ridiculous swimmers wore two of them at the same time to get more buoyancy and it ended up all being about the suit and not the athlete. So they had to interviene and restrict/rule what the fabric is allowed to have and what not, which lead to a better/healthier competition and sport
Puma brush shoe *cough *
I just kinda think it's a bit sad that they seem to have a lot of "normal" runners convinced that they need Carbon plate shoes to run fast, I've got the hoka Carbon x and it's super fast and fun but I'm quite aware and conscious of the fact that it's a luxury rather than a need, i comfortably ran my fastest half marathon in Cliftons and had a great time doing it.
Also with every major brands seemingly introducing Carbon plate shoes in 2020 doesn't it level the playing field anyway?
It does seem like the rule is allowing those brands to release their shoes by April 30th and play catch up!
@@RunnersWorld when they talk about the midsole length or should you also talk about the hoka? i know top comment talked about it but what about without it is a maximal shoe after all
I get that people are free to do whatever they want with their money. But I have definitely seen casual joggers wearing 4%'s and I just facepalm.
@@nguye578 exactly!
@@nguye578 do we really care that casual runners are using vaporflys? It makes sense since casual runners really don't know much about running shoes. There's a lot of marketing on the vaporflys right now so I can see everyone from high school kids to soccer mom's wearing these shoes.
I would love to see all these nay sayers run Kipchoge’s pace for a marathon. Shoes don’t build the aerobic engine, training does.
give Kipchoge a pair of gum boots and see how that works out lol
@@giannig8579 this had me cracking up 😂
@@giannig8579 he can better than anyone while barfoot
Agreed, but equipment can most definitely help
These shoes are very hard no ignore. I am becoming alot faster through my 5K to Half Marathons while my heart rate is slightly down. And my recovery is amazing as my legs dont feel like jelly afterwards. The hype is real and Nike is on top of the game. And everybody is catching up yet again.
The innovation in running shoes is just like the innovation in equipment in any other sport... it's just my opinion though. Would I spend $250+ on a pair of running shoes? No way! I'm not a professional and I'm not winning any races. I run because I enjoy it.
Good point! Not everyone needs shoes like these to have a great time running.
@@RunnersWorld Agreed! My thing is sports are always evolving. Spectators want to see athletes perform at their highest level and have events be more exciting. That's where this innovation comes from. Think about how baseball bats and hockey sticks have transformed over the years...
ScootsRuns same here 😂
VEGAN FOODIE COOKS I just enjoy running to run! Haha.
@@ScootsRuns Baseball players have to use wooden bats. Vaporfly are metal bats.
Sports gear company -"We make gear to improve performance"
The world - "cool"
Nike - "Vaporfly is proven to improve performance "
The world - "THAT'S CHEATING. YOU SHOULD BE BANNED "
Zeus Sylvester not the world just Nike haters.
Really? I have many Nikes but I also think an absolute freedom is no good.
I vote against a secret advantage that one athlete or team could use to claim victory. Whatever the cost!
Olympics should be all about human spirit, not toys...
Miko 'Why' I think we draw the line at rocket propulsion or those little wheels hidden on little kids shoes. Until then you still need to run your heart out.
As long as the technology is available to everyone then let’s run fast without jelly legs the next% day!!!
@@tmallisnyc this is it. Until it isn't a secret or/and superexpensive technology it's OK.
But if the technology will make top runners faster by 10minutes who will admire such athlete? Not me.
@@mikowhy9608 ya because Kenyans didn't start winning until the vapour fly came along
Saw somebody with this shoe on in a local 5k trail race. Didn’t even place lol
You still need athleticism to properly use equipment & be top at your game.
Bin Weezy very true but I wouldn’t think that this shoe would really work on rocky, rooty trail.
Saw some VF users walking halfway at a marathon lol
You sounds suprised. Just because someone is wearing these shoes doesn't mean they are a good runner.
Well it also depends on the person. It is pretty good cushion and I feel I won’t get injured as easily. Also this shoe is not suppose to be used for anything less than a half to a marathon.
I not convinced banning tech is right
Are we still using wooden tennis rackets?
Cyclists cycle the most high tech bikes
F1 drivers race the most high tech cars
So why shouldn't runners run in the most high tech shoes?
bcuz competitor companies couldnt keep up..
Because when you have two runners of equal abilities racing against each other, the one wearing vaporfly next% will beat the one not wearing them
Yep agree, but there are limitations. For example, F1 cars have specific things they're allowed to change only. Often they change things and have to revert back because the rules don't allow it. Just look at Ferrari's engine 2019 and 2020.
True True, in fact they should be allowed to use rocket propelled shoes with spring loaded hydraulic energy systems counterbalanced to mitigate energy losses and improve friction coefficient for body to ground kinetic transfer
Let everyone use it and it's fair and we can see new all new levels in racing
Just like tennis from wooden, to metal, to graphite and to titanium racquets, the speed and power of each generation of players increase with the racquets technological advancement. A little bit of spring action in shoes I think is OK
its not spring..... its a higher shoe so it makes your strides bigger, it makes you run on your front so you have less ground contact, and the carbon plate centers the energy into the middle so you have more forward momentum and it stabilizes your foot..... this is great
Those milliseconds of less ground contact time make a HUGE difference when you run a 110,637 steps long race.
OKAY ZOOMER 😂😂
ScootsRuns You can laugh now you fiend but, when someone with these runs past by you, don’t start crying.
OKAY DARTHMAUL I was laughing because I know what you mean about how shoes can make a difference.
ScootsRuns OH 💀
OKAY DARTHMAUL no worries! Happy Sunday!
Don’t use gloves when running power tools it’s a quick way to loose a finger or hand.
Todd Mallis how?
Trevor. Not tying to be a Boy Scout. I work in construction and job site safety is always a concern with tools.
In short shop safety 101 will always read ...... Do not wear gloves, loose clothing or jewelry while using revolving power tools. Tie back long hair or wear appropriate hair protection to prevent hair from getting caught in moving parts of equipment.
Long story short is a small motor and a small piece of fabric is a lot stronger than say your finger or wrist if it was to catch that band saw blade it could in proven theory every day on some unfortunate job site or carpenter shop pull your hand into the machine and well you could imagine the rest.
And last but not least all hail the
NEXT %!!!!!
that's interesting
I love the vaporfly. I really like what it has done for the sport of long distance running and I am so happy that it wasn’t banned. As I see it, it is a shoe that can allow you to run the best that your body is capable of, not one that provides an unfair advantage against competitors.
I do have a problem with the wave light pace system on the track tho
@@waterproof4403 I don’t. I feel it gives a target for lone world record chasers when there is no equal competition. It does nothing to physically push the athletes harder, it’s just an indication of how fast they need to go
@@benanastasoff8980 it literally gives the athletes a mental advantage. Long distance running is also tactics. To be able to time yourself and run it a lot harder than people think. That light indicates them weather they should go fast or to slow down if they are actually going faster than they need too.
@@waterproof4403 what’s wrong with a mental advantage? A simpler version of pacing lights have been in use for a long time. If I am not mistaken, some records from the 90s were set by programming lights to illuminate along the track when the runner should be passing by them. It wasn’t a consistent LED strip like the wavelight is, but it told runners they were behind, on, or ahead of pace. While many records have been set with wavelight recently, there have been many instances when the runners fell short with the technology. If the athlete isn’t in shape to break the record, wavelight isn’t going to help at all. Things that are rightfully banned in the sport are interchangeable pacesetters (create a draft), PED’s, and shoes that give more energy back than the runner exerts. Things that help with an athlete’s mindset have never been and will never be bad. Saying an athlete can’t know where they are relative to a world record with wavelight would be similar to banning timers on the track, or coaches on the sidelines shouting encouragement, or screens on the side of the stadium allowing championship runners to know where their competition is. Receiving a mental boost is a good thing for the athletes which means it’s good for the sport as a whole.
@@benanastasoff8980 the lights you mentioned that were used way back, did you know they were prohibited 🚫? And just recently they got reinstated. Suddenly all records start to fall. Not a coincidence and it's nothing similar to a coach shouting lol. For example The 10000m and 5000m for both men and women stood for years and years before it got broken with the help of organized events specifically to target the records. All broken within a span of months.
For Cheptegei’s 10,000-meter record (26:11.00), except for his final 1,000-meter stretch, every other 1,000-meter split was within a second of 2:37, a metronomic mark that would be difficult to replicate with just a watch. There's no way Cheptegei would have broken thar that nigh. He had Nike(NN) stage that event for him to target the records which had him at an advantage. Kenenisa just ran against the clock setting his own pace and set these records!
Also kipchoges marathon under 2 hours isn't official. Should be the same with Cheptegei and all the other records that were obtained with the help of those lights. Or just make those records stand separate/unofficially. Also why don't you see the lights at the olympics or other major world championships?
Dont mind the extra boost in performance with new technology. But i do mind having to spend $250 just to get on par with others on race day
6:17 that’s one of the best instrumentals I’ve heard 🔥🔥
Man, I love the idea of the 4% & the Next %. For me, I see it as the track spike for marathon runners. For most average runners like myself, shoes have always been, pick what you like and use that. Now we have a specific marathon shoe that is good for everyone.
I didn't buy the Next% because of the price and that it is primarily a racing shoe. But I did buy the Nike Zoom Fly 3 when it went on a clearance sale. It is a bit heavier than the Next% and maybe more of a training shoe. I only have a few runs in them, but there is no doubt there is a difference. I am approximately 15 seconds per mile faster with the same effort as I was in a a similar weighted training shoe on easy runs. I have mixed feelings about the legality of the shoes. The carbon fiber plate does provide more energy return than the EVA foam sole. However, as others have said, we still have to do the work and be in shape. I'm not sure where the line should be drawn. It is fun to go faster than I have in a few years as an older runner!
His movements on the treadmill reminded me to Ryan Hall's....great video!!! That was ALWAYS the purpose of any shoe to INFLUENCE performance, FINALLY we got there!!! I've got a pair!!!
What I was wondering
When training with shoes like the next% does it not have a greater training effect on your muscles like the flats?
I am personally okay with the advantages shoes bring. One could arguably say that shoes five years ago are light years ahead of shoes from twenty years ago, do you go back and reevaluate those records too?
Where would the line be drawn. There will always be those that have access to better coaching and nutrition etc, that is an an advantage that pros and elites have over most people that are training on the side with a full time job. I say those pros and elites most likely earned their way to those positions and deserve the rewards that come with it. Generally speaking, those shoes are more readily available to most people than the other things I just mentioned also.
It’s not like there are external power sources in play. It still requires personal effort and dedication. Let them push the bounds of what can be done in the most self propelled efficient manner possible.
Best shoes ever.
My wallet: Cool story bro
I think a push for greater tech in shoes should happen. Improvement in training, shoe tech, methods, and everything only advances when there is competition to do so.
If they want it to be fair just make every go barefoot lol
Golf: From wooden shafts and heads and leather balls to carbon fibre and titanium clubs and billion $ ball R&D
Skiing: Same thing
Hockey skates and sticks, pole vault, tartan track, running spikes, bicycle tech and aero, astroturf, etc etc.
The perfect example was the Speedo controversy: Speedo didn't break any rules but they developed tech that nobody saw coming, so the regulations had to adapt to keep the sport fair.
In my opinion, World Athletics has handled this perfectly (apart from taking so bloody long to address it). Until now there was no need for quantitative restrictions on stack height, plate tech etc, because nobody had actually succeeded in making shoes faster through huge midsoles and plates.
I think the biggest leveller is that shoes have to be available to the public for 4 months before they can be used in competition.
And having said all that, training, nutrition, pacing strategies, biokinetics and a host of other factors are all individually far more impactful than shoe tech.
I've had more than enough years of experience with many shoe brands to know that if any shoe dosn't come in at least a 2E width fitting then forget about it...my feet look very average in width but I need 2E for complete comfort.
---running on fibre track is fun. as there is already fibre there. shoes hardly matter. any good shoes will do.
---running on mud tracks --natural -- is super fun as long as you do not have too much pebbles. ---running cross country on natural terrain is also fantastic but you need flexible but rugged shoes.
---all of the above have no cushion issues. but shoes have to be sturdy at the bottom with medium rigidity.
Now HUGE PROBLEM: running on road!
-- i have no idea if there are any shoes out there with serious cushioning in-front and still be flexible. Even vaporfly is doubtful. need 30 cm thick( if you are above 35) and 25mm is fine if you are a young runner!
--Road and concrete: you have to solve the issues as the pounding is as real as it gets in the front foot area. normally they have plenty of cushioning and pulp at the heels!
BUT
--when you land the toe, you need to feel the cushion. Otherwise the pain will directly transfer to the knees.
----now west folks suffer more with ANKLE ISSUES. hence they add more cushion on the heels. ankle issue is less of a problem in other parts of the world-non west. as i said they have more problem in the front of the foot! because in developed countries they use heels more as roads and pedestrian are well developed. In developing countries where you have everything a mess on road and pavements, you tend to walk with toes first( to reduce surface area to minimize damage, and you are always cagey).
so different folks have different issues depending on age,gender, geography,running style, foot type, style of run and nature of run.
so road and concrete are the tough parts. but their advantage is that due to smooth nature the track is covered fast!
Jesus, i gave everything away. may be nike should hire me!
@
king_has_no_cloths kul such a great comment. Although for running on track and for cx you need a lightweight shoe, because heavy trainers slow you down alot. Also, traction is very necessary for cx races.
The Nike Vaporfly Next% are just so well built that everytime i watch a video about them it looks like an advertisement! gg Nike.
Interesting. The shoes seem to me make the leg a lot fresher because you maximize the stride and the feel when you contact the ground. So I don't think it's cheating as long as everyone has the same access to the shoe. At the end of the day, the athlete has to have the speed and the fitness to go faster. The shoe is just there to help keep their leg muscle fresher for a longer period of time. It's no different that wearing a skin suit in cycling or swimming. Just because you wear that shoe that doesn't mean everyone will break WR.
QUESTION(s)
QUESTION(s):
1) MARATHON SHOES vs TRAINING SHOES
im going into a military training program. they say we will run 16 miles a week for 5 months. i keep seeing on nike website that yes these X% shoes are good for running, but they are for "marathons", while the website lists similar shoes (w/ carbon plate) for "everyday training purposes". my question is: is there some disadvantage to getting the "marathon" shoe for someone in my situation. is there some kind of stress-factor that im not accounting for that the "everyday training shoe" will better avoid.
2) CURVED TOE AREA
why are the 2020 X%s and some others sort of curved in the toe area. i've never had shoes like that, and am unsure if the transition to curved-toe shoes from a lifetime of pretty bland basic oval-shaped soled shoes will put me at a disadvantage during my 5 months of daily competition
About Me:
- i do sprints 3x a week
- Saturdays i do 7-12 miles depending on location
- i've been called a "heel striker" because i tore my lower back a decade ago and also have naturally weak/small glutes
- 5'10. 180lbs.
- at training i will be doing about 3 miles a day on mixed surfaces (road, track, grass).
Thanks for asking! The first difference you'll most likely encounter is that a "marathon" shoe, in this case, refers to a marathon racing shoe. Most likely it'll be more expensive, $250 for the Next%. And since the shoes are designed for race day, they'll likely be less durable. For everyday running, like your military program, you'll probably want a training shoe that's built to last more miles, and less about being as fast as possible.
Also, a lot of more performance-oriented shoes tend to be more narrow. That might be the curve you're referring to. In terms of the shape of the shoe, the best thing is really to visit your local running store and try on a number of options, and see what's most comfortable. If it's not comfortable in the store, it won't be comfortable a few miles into a run! Hope this helps!
Doping is anything enhances performances AND harms people's health at the same time: these shoes do improve both performances and health of athletes (less strain, less heart stress).
Ad meiora semper!
The plate probably acts as a spring with the foam to reduce muscle fatigue/use
Thanks for the video, just thought you might want to know the music seems off balance here it’s just as load if not louder than the people speaking making it really hard to focus on what you’re saying.
This analysis just confirmed what I thought: the carbon plate is a factor just because of the midsole foam. Nike nailed racing shoes with ZoomX
0:25 that one dude wearing hoka shoes.
Okay but what was his recovery time? Would that affect his bpm on succeeding trials? I feel you would need several runs, mixing up the order.
When they started cutting the shoe, i almost passed out.... I was like NOOOOOO...!!!
These shoes are getting bigger and bigger. I foresee a type of future space/moonboot that completely hugs the the foot and the calves and maybe even above the knee. They're going to support, enhance and and provide whatever else I can't think of to help the runner go faster and stronger with less injury.
The carbon fiber plate is a spring. The spring absorbs energy as the foot rolls forward and releases the energy at toe off. Thus, the mechanical doping phrase. Nike has a pending patent applications for this “spring plate”. It is innovation, like fiberglass vaulting poles. All the records were broken, but everyone understood why. Aluminum baseball bats can hit further, but MLB doesn’t allow them. (There is a safety issue there too). Swimming banned high tech suits. Car racing restricts some technologies. All sports have equipment restrictions. I say no to the spring shoes regardless of who makes them.
Is it like tires where you have track that suck in rain and turning and street for real life situations. Or is it good for parkour or something like that as well?
when they talk about the midsole length or should you also talk about the hoka? i know top comment talked about it but what about without it is a maximal shoe after all
As far as the shoe dopng concern, it seems like the springy plate in the shoe is pushing that line. But then again, how is that any worse than using spikes on a track? Which we've been doing for decades now.
I don’t have a problem with making shoes high tech and better. The problem is when the prices of these shoes are not affordable for most people and only the rich. Over $200 for shoes is too expensive, maybe some knock off competition might help lower the price some.
I think that older shoes sacrificed cushioning for a lighter race shoe but as technology is advancing, cushioning is returning.
Basically is sprint spikes for Running. The full length stiff plate.
but how will this shoe work for a slow runner and will there be benefts for someone who is heelstriking. Will the angle of the plate "work against" you if you are heelstriking, or how does is work?
jobbi925, While heal-striking in a carbon plate shoe like the vaporfly may not be as beneficial as mid-foot striking, it probably won’t work against you. But if you are over-striding, it would definitely be detrimental. Over-striding in any shoe decreases performance, but doing it in a carbon plate shoe would be like running into a wall.
One question ppl never can answer: when is it too much? How about in 2 yrs, theres a VF15% that cost 700$. How would that be fair in any way? How would a 15 yr old runner be able to afford and compete? Or a 22 yr old student? When do you draw the line of performance enhancement? Nobody have given me a satisfactory answer yet.
Blixten I don’t think that type of thing would get a shoe banned, although I’m no runner so I may be wrong, for biking, some bikes that are much faster cost over $10k and some cost only a few hundred dollars and are much slower, but yet they are still not banned. Idk how much stricter running is than biking tho so not sure on that
@@burino9162 Well, personally I think it's against the spirit of the sport. I prefer a sport where it's the physical performance that matters, not the gear.
When he shows the vaporflies cadence in the treadmill he slows it down, doesn't not fare
And Ir isn't a good comparison
I wonder if this shoe is also highly beneficial for walking long distances in. For speed and comfort/reduced fatigue?
It’s called innovative. Every new marathon shoe tries to be better than the last.
Running on the treadmill is nothing like actual running on road.
Why is it that everytime I see these shoes being tested against others, the VF always goes first? Why not go last so that the runner is weaker with a higher heart rate? There are way too many variables to ever make a fair comparison. The human body is not a scientific tool to make measurements with. Day to day, minute to minute, the human body is constantly changing. Anyway.... No, new technology should not be banned as long as it's available for everybody. Nobody wanted to ban Adidas Boost when it revolutionized the running shoe.
The physiological tests and performance measures are flawed on many levels : confirmation bias, one measure per participant (1 rep per shoe), measures in only one participant, not randomising the order of the shoe reps, experimenter not blind to the condition nor during the experiment nor during the data analysis.
Not much can be concluded from such tests...Would like to see how the actual tests were done with this shoe, I hope the real experiment was properly conducted, although if it was Nike proving that their shoe is the best, I can already sense some marketing based confirmation bias playing an important role in the effects observed...
This is not to say that there are no difference between the shoes, but that there are critical flaws in the experimental science trying to measure such differences.
running should not be about kit or tech. make it simpler!
Hey, I like your videos, but, just as an advice, could please low down the background music, it is very hateful for listen the undergoing conversation.
Money money more money ,
Cheating is about money,
America is about money
Money is all that’s important
God is money
Peoples feelings don’t matter
People don’t matter
Just show me the 💰
Sea Fish Amen, nobody has a soul anymore.
Background music is too high.
This is more the effect of you doing the nike test first rather than the effect of the show itself
It’s impossible to deny that these shoes give you an advantage, but in a few years time every major brand will have their own version of this shoe that will once again level the playing field.
Everyone is acting like it was absurd to have a discussion. There has to be a discussion with these things so that there is some sort of precedent. Tech is getting better and better, so we'll be having these discussions more and more.
does anyone know what kind of socks those are?
I'm here wearing the same shoes I've been wearing for 2 years.
People or to be specific, companies are too worried of the advancements.
these tests cannot be analyzed as evidence of any particular benefits. since the duration is 5 minutes, it is not even close to the shortest race, for example 5 km (about 15 minutes), and even more so for the analysis of a half marathon or marathon (about 1 hour and about 2 hours)
Sir how to relief in spin split pain
shoe: if i'm so fucking special to you you won't saw me in half
Pb approx 19.30 5k 1.27 HM, 3.34 marathon. I think vaporfly is worth 90 seconds on 5 km, 5 mins half, 10 mins full against an asics gt2000. Incredible how much better the shoe is for every ability. In fact I think it makes more difference the worse you are
What is the longevity of this shoe I wish you would have mentioned that in your video. How many miles are you expected to get out of one of these pairs. For me the technology of the shoe. that's a double-edged sword. I kind of feel sad for all of the runners that have set records in the past on regular shoes. And now we have shoes that will change the record book. Not necessarily the runner. I would love to get a faster time when I'm running. But is it me or is it the shoe. I'm not sure they didn't address about injuries would you be more likely to get injured with these or less likely. If it is less injuries I'm all for that.
But shoes have been constantly evolving over time. You want to run in the same shoe that was in the first marathon record?
With or without the shoes he was going to break the record. He worked hard for it without the shoes
how about alphafly from Nike?
The question is: Are they competing against each other or against history? A lot of sports have gone through this issue. Most have decided history.
As long as the show is widely available I don't think it's unfair. The point of shoes is to provide a technological advantage, which is why you don't see many people reaching barefoot.
i mean the real question here is whether or not that carbon fiber plate is producing any spring. Cause if it does you could categorically call it cheating, regardless of whether it's been cleared or not
it just bassically makes the shoe stiffer although there is enough foam for comfort
The shoes he threw behind the chair are the new Brooks and New Balance shoes with carbon fiber plates 8:15
Probably couldn't show them in the video for too long.
After watching the video I still miss the answer to the question in the title.
"Shoe doping" 😆😆😆
If everybody use them why are they banned?
8:12 New Balance Fuelcell Racer 😉
All top sports in the world are dictated by technology and its advancement. Cycling, football, swimming, running, baseball etc. People are just bitter that their sponsors have not developed a shoe as good as this. Nike have set the benchmark, and now the rest have to catch up. To the people stating Nike should be made to reveal their designs and secrets, wake up. Do F1 teams reveal all their designs and technological designs?
Someday we will be spectators of a virtual race of avatars. Each runner will stay in the gim running on treadmill.
No ugly wind, rain, turns, hills...
All drinks, doctors, friends, pacemakers naerby.
So what about that marathon?
I'm sure I will hear again "well, the runner still needs to use his own muscles. Why banning it?!"
Absurd idea? No, a future record breaking attempt.
Why ppl are neglecting the fact that. Its about the person running . With the stamina and lungs he or she is putting into for marathon.
WARNING! SHOES WERE HARMED DURING THE MAKING OF THIS VIDEO!
Always go after the big brands, but no one reported that both hoka and sketchers have a carbon plate shoe.
We cut the carbon plate out of the Carbon X back in May. Check it out! th-cam.com/video/RD3BIMQtDQ8/w-d-xo.html
Cause Nike is a Marketing machine. They sponsor and pay salaries.
Nick Symonds also did this
Carbon fibre is stiffer and stronger than most materials!
My question is this, "If you're running faster because of a shoe, not because of your training, nutrition, hydration, race plan, etc. Are you a better runner?" For me, the answer is NO! You just ran in a great shoe…big deal. Anyway, I don't wear carbon fibre shoes and I've never been beaten by anyone wearing them who I would consider a comparable runner to myself…why? Because I train harder, longer and better…that's the difference that should be measured…not how much impact the shoe had!
Simply the advancement of technology, equal opportunity based on your ability to pay.
Every time you make a cut to the shoes like that, it's like you cut my lung with a saw! 😉😊
The latest episode of THE CUT UP is live: th-cam.com/video/Do24FLbA8uY/w-d-xo.html
Excited AF
Innovation is important, it could make life easier.
Nike has Vaporfly, what are the other manufactures responses in this "cold shoe war"
Comparing apples to apples, the PGA regulates clubs and most designs aren’t accepted. Otherwise it would be who can afford the best cheat gear. So that approach should be used across the board with all sports and equipment. Start regulations ASAP.
Jimmy Smith on the other hand, golf is really, really, really boring to watch.
Can I get one vapourfly for running.Plzzz
It's not cheating if everyone wears it, right?
Just make it standard
How does a shoe become fast?
8:14 Brooks Hyperion Elite 😉