I don't get the problem. If the vaporfly gives unfair advantage, then make all the runners wear vaporfly, so the playing field is even again. I think a shoe that can actually make you run faster is cool.
@@OakenTome You are such a close minded person. Why could not they? Holy cow that was dumb. A top tier athlete can go to a store put down the cash and buy a pair of shoes just like a nornal runner. Nobody forces sponsorship on them. If they take the cash for wearing and promoting an inferior product that is their fault.
I recently bought a pair, completely unaware of this controversy. The shoes definitely gave me a huge boost. I could feel the shoes helping me spring forward somehow. It increased my stride length, and made it easier to make each stride. I would estimate that it gave me about a 10% increase in efficiency. It also seemed to help with turns which were a weak point for my running. Turns always slow my pace down, but with these I maintained the faster paces. All in all, I know the shoes helped me go faster and further and with greater ease. The shoes are incredibly light. Even the shoelaces are light and made to stay tied. The engineering and precision to details are incredible. Should they be banned or discouraged? I don't think so. They help, but no different than how a pair of shoes from 1950 might compare to a pair from 2015. They're just more advanced shoe technology. Part of the future, not the past.
The problem is that you can’t have a situation where some people have the shoes and others don’t. The race is supposed to be about a competition of runners, not shoes.
"At Nike, we do not intend to build a shoe that return more energy than the runner expends. We have a strict policy to follow the laws of thermodynamics at Nike."
I was wondering if anyone would catch that little gem. Though, they are being more than disingenuous because, based upon the structure shown, rather than protecting the foot and providing good contact with the road surface, this shoe reduces the energy required to accomplish motion...the shape and orientation of that carbon fiber plate isnt random. The effect of a faster time is created by the reduction in net energy required...you have more gas in the tank in the end. They have manufactured a shoe that no one else would because everyone else would correctly assume it could be banned. Personally, given Nikes business practices over the last 5 years...I suspect they hope it is banned for competitors because general consumer sales will explode.
You can not just ban a running shoe.. you either impose a standard shoe that all runners must wear in professional events or nothing at all. Banning particular running shoes just opens a can of worms and will never set a definitive standard that is consistent for runners to abide by.
"we don't create any running shoes that return more energy than the runner expends" So... Nike shoes doesn't break the laws of thermodynamics . Good to know .
Mukul Verma Nike is referencing the rules of competitive running set but the global governing body. What they mean is that none of their shoes are designed to propel runners through alternative means e.g. springs or motors
Average Joe springs do not store or create energy either. They just return the energy that the runner expends. That being said, a) the carbon plate and the foam are effectively springs and b) this rule is not sufficient on its own because it doesn’t ban bicycles or roller skates. We really have to think about what makes running running and how much mechanical assistance we’re willing to accept
@@404nobrakes My opinion is that shoes =/= doping. Runners should be allowed to utilize technology as long as this technology is widely available and does not drastically change the sport or effect integrity
@@404nobrakes if theyre allowed shoes at all then they should be allowed any shoes, however what is considered a shoe should also be more clearly defined
@@sto-humanfriendly but even with your example you have to agree that it’s still pretty absurd to compare shoes to oxygenating your blood artificially or ‘doping’.
@@sto-humanfriendly did you read what youve just wrote? You can compare doing drugs with what youve said. He said its absurd to compare drugs with running shoes
According to that guy... anything you do that will give you an advantage is cheating... Guess I shouldn’t go to the gym to get a conditioning and strength advantage... 🤷🏻♂️
@@mihnealazar7039 oh ok. so you say professional athletes that run at Olympics can't afford a $150 pair of shoes while they make huge salary's? yeah sure. 😂
Theoretically, any shoes can affect the way a runner runs - I don’t feel that a significant advancement in shoes should be blocked, as improvements have consistently occurred for the entire history of the sport.
Also, not discussed is how each runner technique differs and how Nike's shoe affects their technique. If you watch the runner in the demonstration he does a lot of heel striking and would receive more benefits by using Nike's shoe, whereas a runner who strikes closer to the toes would receive no benefit from using Nike's shoe.
I mean if you can put a spring in a running shoe then what if adidas comes out with some cartoon looking springy bois, everyone would agree that it's not okay, this one seems acceptable just because you don't see the spring.
Why is the only solution of a "level playing field" to ban the superior shoes instead of mandate them? Especially if the design provides more comfort and reduces chance of injury?
@@SimonWoodburyForget the key here is that athletes wear different sneakers. but we cannot eradicate all types of "inequalities" as it is inherent in some sports. if we made the effort to eradicate such "unfair advantage," we would have to swim indoors one by one, all at the same temperature, etc.
Nike: Innovates and breaks a barrier in running thought to be near impossible Committee: BANNED Nike: WHY Committee: The design threatens the integrity of the sport and is basically cheating Nike: We used a thin carbon fibre plate not a jet engine
In the video it said that "These shoes give runners an unfair advantage" well spike shoes give sprinters an advantage and now everyone uses them in track
They didn't innovate anything...this entire design has been made for years by other companies. Placing a shank, and the sole design are in quite a few ultra marathon shoes.
Rather than creating infinite energies, they're referring more to something like putting batteries in your shoes, which then apply some sort of actual force when you're running
How can a “shoe” be considered cheating? Every shoe is supposed to give an advantage to the runner by reducing the stress their body takes. Comparing a pair of shoes with “doping” is not very wise.
Aurtisan Miner it’s not SPORTS unless you’re getting HURT, unless it’s “doping” then you’re getting TOO hurt. Just watch football and don’t think about head trauma
@@andre9095 if u want pain...why even run with shoes...run naked...more pain...more game spirit ! We live in age where advance technology is called cheating...
That's what I was thinking too lol, they need to lay out what the criteria for an "unfair" advantage is, rather than just asserting that this is unfair because of the results
If you take away modern shoes and track surfaces, rolling back to the technology used when the first four minute mile was achieved, about 95% of athletes who hold that record would be unable to repeat the feat. Athletic tech inevitably advances alongside material science and it's always so arbitrary how they determine was is and isn't an unfair advantage. Now to be fair, if the whole track is a different surface, that means all the runners are literally on an equal playing field. Shoe technology unfortunately starts moving into a pay-to-play conundrum for each competitor, but one can't bemoan that aspect too much as it exists in literally any sport.
True but it's still cheating. All that will happen is we'll see EVERY runner switch to this brand of shoes (or we'll see one particular brand of shoes mandated for all runners), and that will remove the competitive advantage. That's the only way to maintain a level playing field.
As a 70 year old with over 40 years of distance running in legs, I find these shoes great for all round training as the combination of cushioning, stability and lightness reduce the chance of injury to my aged muscles and joints. The shoes give a nice feel of energy return to the stride, and if they increase my local parkrun pace to 9.30 min/miles from 10 min/miles, I can't imagine I'll be accused of having an unfair advantage on my feet..... :-)
Shaving off 30secs on average run time per km is no joke, grandpa. If it can be such a huge improvement to you then imagine the effect on professional athletes in their prime? The technology itself is not bad, but it's bad that it created imbalance on the playing field, thus action(s) must be done to level the playing field again.
This video seriously had no substance. I was looking for breakdown of the technology, but got nothing. They showed labs, and testing, and then it ends. I can't take it as anything other than just an 8 minute ad.
There is no way Nike got this much attention for free. I think some geniuses in Nikes marketing department pushed this hole "controversy" to this scale, maybe even started it in the first place.
Except some countries track teams actually require sponsorships to fund them, so if your countries team isn't sponsored by Nike, you are automatically at a disadvantage. Also athletics are about what the human body can do, not what technology can make them do.
Just like in auto racing, tire technology improves and the cars get faster and more efficient. Keep these shoes in the sport. The continual breaking of records is fine, and should be used as an example in the advancement in the human race not only how the human race has evolved but also how humans are able to manipulate inanimate object for advancement. To me if they ban a shoe for a running race, they must outlaw all shoes and should require runners to run barefoot if they truly want the most even playing field.
You do not have enough understanding of mechanical science, in short thru the compressive strength and structure of the sole, additional elastic force can be supplied to runner legs, thats what they mean they that statement
Imagine if people did this back in the 1930s when Jesse Owens won the gold in his spiked adidas shoes, some of the first of their kind, it’s almost like technology evolves over time to improve the sport
@Mike J There's a Ted Talk by David Epstein called "Are athletes realling getting faster, better, stronger?" regarding this phenomenon and how records being broken pretty much all correlated with technological advancements either in the gear worn or used or the terrain (such as how track material changed). With adjustments for track material improvements, Usain Bolt's WR 100 meter time would've only beaten Jesse Owens' by perhaps a few 100ths of a second. And rather than athletes competing in any sport, they tend to "specialize" and move into sports where they have the biggest advantage. For instances, basketball players being tall, shotput throwers being large, and gymnasts being shorter and more compact. It's a great talk. I recommend checking it out.
@@Minecraftmaster684 Or we just change the rulebooks. Then again, we'll probably end up with mechanical running shoes with full-on rebound springs like those sprint boots with spring feet
@@SomethingSeemsOff they only banned shoes with reflectives and shoes with sharp ends that might cause injuries and they mostly banned shoes because of their color as before the shoes have to match the uniform color but they lift that ban already.
I remember my friend introducing me to these shoes, i didn’t believe they would make a difference but my 1.5 mile run shed 1.5 mins. It helped me pass all my PT test. Ive had the same shoes for 5 years, only wear them once a year for my test.
wrong. it gives unfair advantage. how do you expect ugandans,somalians and kenyians to shelve 400 dollars for the shoes? unless companies can sponsor not even govt can get the shoes. well, they dont rely on shoes. they beat all the mofos with bare-foot. marathons are run on man made asphalt, that is why you need some sort of quality shoes but not 400 or 250 plus dollar shoes. come on now!
The cheating goes way further than the shoes, I heard some of these 'athletes' live indoors and don't even hunt their own meals. Sadly I fear we'll never again see a performance equal to that of the great Thag in 103,000BC
Thank you for reminding us all of the "Far Side" story of the thagomizer. "A thagomizer is the distinctive arrangement of four to ten spikes on the tails of stegosaurid dinosaurs." - Wikipedia
J R Just let adidas make as good a copy as they can of these shoes and then everyone is equal. Running shoes have innovated so much in the last 80 years. It’s a question of natural selection, adapt or die.
We should ban them. Running should be what the human can do. We can maximize training, get lightweight gear and get ultra flat ground to run on, but that is just restricting the human body as little as possible. These shoes add on to what a person can do, they go past the human body instead of getting as close as possible to just a person
@@notgray88 If long distance running is your profession then it doesn't matter the cost to you, you will pay for the advantage, if you run for fun why do you care about that extra 4% just have fun.
Yeah they need to be banned because they are good for the athletes that are sponsored by Nike, but what about the athletes that aren't sponsored by Nike???? To everyone saying that this is "stupid", I really wanna hear your super effective ideas to solve the problem.
@@neixen- do u watch F1. Do all teams have same engine manufacturers. Let's c Mercedes keeps on winning ban them. It's upto ferrari or the competitors to bring something unique on their own. Or take cricket do all batsman have bats made of similar material
@@Jamac007 bringing a calculator to the math test isn't "innovation" A math test is about your ability to do math, a marathon is about human endurance. Making it more than that turns it into a contest of how much we can artificially boost someone's skill, not who has the most skill.
This reminds me of when the new design of speed skates were introduced to speed skating in the winter Olympics. There was no debate about unfair advantage, they were just accepted as the next evolution of design.
Yeah this ban makes no sense. Anyone can buy these shoes. So it should be fine. This ban would only make sense if these shoes were like an invite only sale.
P. Spit the ban doesn't make any sense. the shoes are just mechanically good and people that are non-open-minded jerks will disagree. there is no logical reason to ban these. are you saying that we should not use good materials shoes ? it is not cheating because there is no automatic motor that is powering the shoes.
The problem really lies in the contracts some top runners have with Nike, and the contracts others have with Reebok or Adidas, so people who have signed with Nike have an unfair advantage using these shoes compared to other athletes that are signed with (and thereby obliged to use shoes from) the other companies which do not have this technology at their disposal
@@Duivenzijnfascisten but using that logic you could argue if you're a cyclist and your bike sponsor isn't the best in the world you should ban those bikes coz they're lighter and faster than yours. They shouldn't ban innovative designs just because some people won't use them
The plate just keeps the foam from collapsing on the forefoot. It would be a very uncomfortable ride if it weren't there. It isn't a spring - it's a support piece. The foam is what is incredible on the shoe. The current design of the shoe is probably not doing you any favors biomechanically speaking. It's a cast on your foot that isn't allowing your foot to flex naturally. Expect some injuries.
@@RagnarNomad Right, it's a compliant mechanism. But its flex is secondary to its stiffness. The shoe is shaped to roll - not flex. It does flex a bit like you said. But supercritical foams delaminate and behave poorly because of their inelastic nature and suspect bonding properties on textiles that are not also TPU-based.
I got your point: the plate acts like a support to stabilize the athlete feet because of all that thick foam underneath. But this made me think a bit more: the plate by itself is not thing much, only by combining with that thick foam that they together create a "spring" and that "spring" aids the wearer of the shoes. One example is the leaf spring in truck, the leaves have different length thus having different elasticity but they work together to create a more comfortable ride on the truck. TLDR: the plate by itself does little but with glue and foam, they together work wonder, don't you agree?
@@RagnarNomad exactly right. The system they created with that combination of materials combined with precise geometry (shape) revolutionized the category.
Blair Fraser ..... seems very obvious to me... add 3 inches to the legs by using 3 inches of a damping foam... use carbon fiber plate to stiffen the sole without adding weight..... presto - magic
Yeah like this dude writes his doctors degree on the vaporfly but does not know whats going on and just recommends a thickness limit. What about do it scientific. Give limit of damping and spring value
The carbon fiber plate works as a leaf-spring giving little bit of the step's energy back. It's works similarly to the spring leg for amputated leg, and is probably inspired by it. Foam is to cushion the impact.
They actually did ban certain tech suits for a little bit if I’m remembering correctly, there are regulations on what lengths they can be, but most people have the same ones, just different patterns
@@brinleybruening1344 Speedo, for example has introduced a lot of tech into their swimwear and it's fine. Not sure every swimmer is sponsored by Speedo.
If this was an issue of a private company having a proprietary shoe that only certain athletes have access to, then I could see the issue. However these are sold commercially, so I'm not understanding the controversy. Shoe technology will continue to change shoe design (lighter, better energy return), and as long as all runners have equal access to these shoes, then it's a non-issue.
its totally possible for a shoe to return more energy than expended using modern technology, the whole point of the statement is that they arent doing anything like that
I see it as a breakthrough, sprinting spikes have developed over time and have become very efficient in the energy return so why restrict that in long distance it just makes the runner more efficient jeez
Maxwell Morrison Because these guys don’t care. They want to stall Nike’s strangle-hold on it to give the other companies (that they indirectly work for I’m sure) a chance to catch up with the technology... then suddenly they’ll be like “oopsies, guess it wasn’t cheating, and now you should buy them from xyz company.” It’s all a scam.
Why not put tiny springs inside other shoes then? According to you, it is all the same, I call it cheating if the shoe can make you bounce. And I'm sure Nike will have nothing to say about that, right?
Hector G. Sure, how about little wheels so you can coast too? How about just be barefoot? Problem solved. Whiney cry-baby’s can shut up and everything works.... Oh, wait, you can’t make money off of being bare footed.
@@NPCSN I must have hit a nerve. Nike representative in the comments. lol BTW I was talking to Maxwell Morrison but you turned all hostile for no good reason.
Hector G. 🤦🏻♂️ please come back when you can learn to read... That “nerve” you hit must have been your optic nerve... maybe that’s why you can’t read. 🤷🏻♂️
I imagine you can't come in with a spring loaded pair of footwear; the issue seems to be that the shoe looks like a shoe and not some fancy obviously spring loaded gadgetry. I imagine this 'controversy' is a repeat of past 'controversies' involving new technology being used in sports.
I mean some shoes are definitely better to run with. You buy a more expensive light shoe it's better than cheap ones anyway.make everyone run on the same shoe ore barefoot else there will always be someone with disadvantage
It's not just a matter of current competitors but also past competitors and records. But as a former sprinter, I don't think that it really matters. Rubberized tracks are much faster than the cinder tracks that sprinters used to run on. In fact, many newer rubberized tracks are much faster than early rubberized tracks. Shoes are much better, training techniques and coaching are much better, etc. It's just not the first Olympic Games anymore, and it never will be again. Technology and techniques will continue to improve performance for the foreseeable future. And despite the suggestion of this video, technology significantly improved marathon performances long before these shoes.
Seems like the Vapor Fly would provide better injury protection, as well, so I am all for finding a way to get these into the sport so that knock-offs can filter down to us plebes.
@@rowanfitzgerald3250 Exactly. I looked them up immediately. Thought I'd try and buy a pair to help me on my next pt test. Not trying to break any records, just want an easier time while doing a 2 mile run.
There are 2 problems here: 1. Barefooting obviously doesn't work as it would be damaging to the athletes' feet in the long term 2. Athletes are sponsored by exclusive companies like Puma and Adidas, so they can't wear the Vaporfly now even if they want to (otherwise they lose the sponsorship money). If the Vaporfly is made compulsory it effectively puts all companies out of competition, and gives a huge unfair business advantage to Nike. It basically stifles further innovation in running shoe field as there would be no incentive for Nike to improve
@@AmanRai-rq3eg they chose the wrong lousy sponsorship company.😂 Losers are just trash at whatever they are competing. If they are really talented, NIKE will approach them automatically for a sponsorship. So we know the whining people are the real salty LOSER blaming everything and everyone but themselves.
@@tmuto5119 But... if you were to run in normal street shoes vs. any running shoe, the running shoe has an advantage. At the end the runner literally said it's nicer to run in Nike ones because they're comfier, so they should be banned?
@Eduardo Babyhands I would say that that is the case but so much data says differently. Like the general increase in fast times from these hyper shoes, and the VO2 max testing done on individual athletes in and out of the vapormax.
That's not cheating, that's innovation. If I run a 5k race with regular running shoes against an opponent with sandals, have I cheated, or did I just bring the right tool with me? It's not like doping. Let Nike keep their shoes. Eventually, other manufacturers will find ways to replicate the system and catch up. This is brilliant advertising for Nike.
@@DatGinnga if you look over a list of Olympic sports, most of them use equipment. Separating the innovation from these sports doesn't make much sense to me. For running, it could be standardized by having everyone run barefoot, but that's a bit ridiculous
@@drabadraba101 I actually work out barefooted myself but I agree lol, but I don’t think the innovation should be up to the athlete to acquire, as that’s not the spirit of the contest. maybe have a standardized Olympic board that chooses the best available gear, and issues it to all participants
@@DatGinnga that seems kinda fair to me. In this case, what about shoe size or arch support or whatever. A single shoe doesn't work, every athlete has a slightly different body which is optimized by different designs
In your analogy there was in what to run in but with these shoes you’re in a known distinct disadvantage. You’re running at 100% whilst they’re running at 104-105% if they wearing the shoes and you’re not
@@gabrielduarte3904 the point stands then... anyone NOT using the vapourfly's would be putting themselves at a distinct disadvantage. Precisely as inoita11 said.
It's just banned in competitions, you can still wear them for ur own satisfaction. You gotta respect the people from 40-50 years ago that didnt have that same advantage
@@amirgreene4930 Why? Literally none of the athletes 40-50 years ago have the same technological advantages they have today. Are we supposed to do away with sports science?
Amir Greene why would anyone wear them for their own satisfaction if they are not competing ? The selling point of this shoe was that it gives an advantage to the athlete and that would be the hype , everyone wants that shoe that makes people run faster ! Now that they banned pros from wearing them , it’s meh , just another shoe . Nobody is going to be like “ oh i can run quicker to get the groceries “ and buys them
@@amirgreene4930 Your comment is just dumb. If a design is bad and we know a better one, then stop making bad products on purpose. 50 years ago people did not had smart phones. Should you respect them by useung cable phone only?
@@theshanamaster that's honestly not a good comparison. The shoe and the steaks are the variables. A baby literally can't eat a steak, but all the runners can wear the vaporflys. It's more like people eating soup faster with a soup spoon vs people eating soup with a teaspoon, because the people are the constants, and the spoons are the variables, but they can still pick their own spoon.
I disagree with the limitations. EVERY SINGLE running shoe, before and after the vaporflies, from one or two centuries ago, you name it, has been designed to offer an advantage; to improve our running prowess. The vaporflies just happen to be the first to manage to give such a performance boost but they will not be the only ones to achieve it. This is just the beginning.
Agreed. Anything beyond bare feet is technically a mechanical advantage. As Nike said, the shoe does not input more energy into the system, it makes more efficient use of existing energy.
@@StarComet7 It already is all about money maybe not to most of the athletes who put in the work but to everyone else sports are nothing but money, It hasn't been about pushing what is humanly possible for long time.
2:28 We don't want to normalize doping because it's terrible for the athlete. Going on steroids, for instance, comes with all sorts of side effects. If we had a substance that increased strength/muscle gain and was completely safe, every sporting body would allow it. Spolier alert: It exists and is called creatine. The vaporfly is just a really good running shoe. It doesn't hurt the athlete (AFAIK). There may be an argument that these shoes are expensive and so may price a runner out of the sport, but the comparison to doping is just dumb.
@@hebson21 cycling is pretty even, at least in grand tours and other uci regulated races, mostly because of weight limits and lack of aero advancement significant within uci limits.
This objective unbiased news video is sponsored by Nike. While these shoes are banned from professional sports they will have windfall commercial success. Excellent marketing strategy
They are direct descendants of the original humans.. the adam(u)..built with a far superior respiratory system...they arent faster, they endure longer.
This is absurd. This like trying to insist that “real” golf clubs are made only of wood. Banning a smarter shoe design doesn’t preserve the purity of the sport. It’s progress. The idea to limit thickness is dumb too, because there is already a natural limit in the form of weight and size. The shoe stays, other shoe companies will compete. And athletes will choose the footwear they prefer. This is a non-issue.
@@donutello_ They prob can but idk if they have patents for shoe design anyways lets say they can make something similar. Why haven't they done it yet? If a shoe is that good wouldn't you want to have your athlete do his best so that if they win with your shoes the athlete and his/her shoes are on the spotlight.
Well, its the olympics, its meant to test your body, not your shoes. Its to show the world you are a beast at a given sport. So imo vaporflies have no place in the olympics.
As someone that actually does track and field i can say that it's a fair advantage, because at the ends of the day you're the one wearing them, it's not like wearing them will magically turn you into an olympic gold medallist
gina x the only adavantage of the vaporflys is the firm planting of the foot into the foam. The carbon fiber supports that. The problem is many runners wear different shoes and these vaporflys are fit to a specific running style.
Any kind of shoe would provide advantages to certain running styles and disadvantages to some others, but yeah this is the best way to make it a 'level playing field', Whatever that may be.
The same thing happened to the vehicle: Dodge Demon. It was so fast that it was banned in most drag strips and tracks, but it's also a production car you can get right off the lot
Advances in the impact absorbing of road shock should be allowed as should advances in healthy care for athletes bodies. Otherwise running becomes more obviously like the damaging of our health for no practical gain that many sports truly are
Excellent marketing for Nike. They benefitted so much from the ban on Jordan’s earliest use of the Air Jordan. Everyone wants to use the BANNED sneaker. The only thing that seems different is that the Vaporfly might actually back up the marketing that it helps you run faster.
I just checked Nike.com - the shoe retails for $250 and it’s selling like hotcakes. Out of stock in multiple sizes and styles. Amazing marketing right here.
None of this makes sense because that’s like telling a 100m sprinter he isn’t allowed to wear sprint spikes because they make him run faster....smh🤦🏾♂️
Ikr, imagine if spikes weren't invented until all of a sudden Nike releases them in 2020. I'm pretty sure there'd be this petty outrage. PS: I hate Nike but c'mon guys, like really? As much as I'd hate to say this, Nike is in the clear xD
100% agree this is so dumb, it you really want "fair" then force everyone to wear the same clothes, same shoes, etc. However, that's not what this is about. People are just salty
They have a carbon plate in them which functions essentially as the springy legs amputee runners use... I'm not sure why this was not more thoroughly addressed here....
@@kalecardenas9645 Even a fool is thought wise if he keeps silent, and discerning if he holds his tongue. www.ancient.eu/article/20/ancient-greek-clothing/#:~:text=The%20Greeks%20were%20not%20particularly,barefoot%20for%20his%20entire%20life. Greeks rarely wore shoes. If they did it was sandals or boots, which usually don't count as shoes.
@@kalecardenas9645 while the ancient Greeks did have clothing and sandals they weren't used in Olympic competition. Kind of like we have semiautomatic rifles but don't use them for biathlon competition.
I use them as well, and not to improve my amazingly slow times, but because I think it's better for my knees, which were always hurting after a run in other shoes.
I agree - see my comment above. These shoes may take a few crucial seconds off the times of world class runners, but they also have the capability of reducing the chance of injury in ageing slow joggers like myself. Worth paying the premium price for in my opinion.
IMO, it would be a bad decision to ban them. Imagine if tennis banned aluminum racquets and stayed with wooden ones because the newer ones are "unfair" Other shoe companies should step up and copy the model, so that everyone has the better tools for running. It's the future
Exactly. They would have to standardize on a single shoe for any foot racing or distance running. That will never happen. What happens when special socks give a . 7563% advantage because of unique microcellular foam? Banning this is bad precedent.
@@asandax6 that's sort of missing the point and won't ever happen. Think of sponsorships and bias and all that. There will be imitations that will make enough changes to skirt patent/trademark laws while providing similar end results. That's how the free market of competition works.
Inky Kitsune No one’s claiming other companies can’t make better shoes, but it’s a question of competition legality. An athlete’s performance in Tokyo 2020 shouldn’t be determined by what shoes they can afford or who their sponsor is. Competition sports should pit human vs human, not shoe vs shoe. And no, you shouldn’t just hand Nike a contract to supply the whole grid. How will smaller players like Puma or Saucony compete with Nike’s R&D budget for future releases if it’s all Vaporfly now?
Strand then isn’t those company’s fault for not progressing? Wouldn’t it be also said that puma and adidas are not assisting running but hurting it by not adapting.
Moral of the story "we're not sure how they even work, but we're pretty sure it's cheating because winning runners wear them". Terribly uninformative video, looks more like Nike marketing
Is it that hard to say They improve efficiency by reducing the biomechanical load at the big toe and ankle joint due to the spoon shaped plate. That’s the mechanical doping part. That’s where previous and current competitors haven’t figured out how to stop ankle trouble. Combined with 31mm of the best foam in the world, you get 5% over the adios boost or zoom streak 6 which Kipchoge could only run 2:03 in.
If you want a “Level playing field” and “Person against person” then you might as well make everyone wear the same shoes. Or take away shoes altogether. His logic is absurd.
“With the Tokyo olympics around the corner this summer” that statement didn’t age well
😭
SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO SAD!!!
And this wasn't posted that long ago. Man can things change!
I scrolled for this comment
r/agedlikemilk
Imagine making a shoe so good it's considered cheating.
carbon plate acts like a spring.... so all the records obtained with vapourfly should really be wiped.
@@anomad6314 so is the shoe not good? 😂
@@anomad6314 shut up you Adidas shill
@@anomad6314 Or maybe other brands should step their game up?
I don't get the problem. If the vaporfly gives unfair advantage, then make all the runners wear vaporfly, so the playing field is even again. I think a shoe that can actually make you run faster is cool.
If wearing a specified shoe for running makes the run illegitimate then we should just ignore any record unless it's done naked.
I mean by their logic you should also run on just dirt because track also gives you an unnatural advantage.
DragonProductions Everyone’s running on the same track, not everyone can obtain these shoes.
@@OakenTome dirt track fields exsist
@@OakenTome You are such a close minded person. Why could not they? Holy cow that was dumb.
A top tier athlete can go to a store put down the cash and buy a pair of shoes just like a nornal runner.
Nobody forces sponsorship on them. If they take the cash for wearing and promoting an inferior product that is their fault.
Back to the original Olympics!
I recently bought a pair, completely unaware of this controversy.
The shoes definitely gave me a huge boost.
I could feel the shoes helping me spring forward somehow.
It increased my stride length, and made it easier to make each stride.
I would estimate that it gave me about a 10% increase in efficiency.
It also seemed to help with turns which were a weak point for my running.
Turns always slow my pace down, but with these I maintained the faster paces.
All in all, I know the shoes helped me go faster and further and with greater ease.
The shoes are incredibly light. Even the shoelaces are light and made to stay tied.
The engineering and precision to details are incredible.
Should they be banned or discouraged? I don't think so.
They help, but no different than how a pair of shoes from 1950 might compare to a pair from 2015.
They're just more advanced shoe technology.
Part of the future, not the past.
I remember I used New Balance 15 years ago and it helped me in Cross Country running or Mercurial Vapor soccer cleats that helped me run faster.
“We want better shoes for running”
*Nike makes better shoes for running*
“Wait no that’s illegal”
exactly. absurd much ain't it? eeesh
I got rollerskates- I mean shoes with wheels under them! Run twice as fast!
The problem is that you can’t have a situation where some people have the shoes and others don’t. The race is supposed to be about a competition of runners, not shoes.
@@GratiaCountryman Buy the shoes then. Simple as.
@@Albus_Rex or just have Nike provide every runner in the Olympics with free shoes...best advertising ever
"At Nike, we do not intend to build a shoe that return more energy than the runner expends. We have a strict policy to follow the laws of thermodynamics at Nike."
hahaha I was thinking exactly this, then was like unless they stuck some rockets on there or some sort of battery powered bounce haha
"We at Nike can say with 100% certainty that this shoe does not contain or came into any contact with the substance known as flubber."
Sebastian Gorka oh hey! A reference I get! Lol
I was wondering if anyone would catch that little gem. Though, they are being more than disingenuous because, based upon the structure shown, rather than protecting the foot and providing good contact with the road surface, this shoe reduces the energy required to accomplish motion...the shape and orientation of that carbon fiber plate isnt random. The effect of a faster time is created by the reduction in net energy required...you have more gas in the tank in the end.
They have manufactured a shoe that no one else would because everyone else would correctly assume it could be banned. Personally, given Nikes business practices over the last 5 years...I suspect they hope it is banned for competitors because general consumer sales will explode.
hahah that's too funny, bet that was written by engineers having a big laugh
To level the playing field, everyone should wear Crocs.
Now that's racing!
It wouldn't be fair, sport mode gives you +100 speed
@@aeta7978 agreed, crocs are overpowered. Nerf it
How about just running barefoot? 🙂
Don't forget to use the ankle strap
You can not just ban a running shoe.. you either impose a standard shoe that all runners must wear in professional events or nothing at all. Banning particular running shoes just opens a can of worms and will never set a definitive standard that is consistent for runners to abide by.
Can of words?
@@sandybakers690 Yeah, can of words. A.k.a., alphabet soup 🍲
Absolutely agree with this! fake advertisement
@@sandybakers690 In other words, fool me once shame on me, eh, fool me twice shame on eh.....you won't be fooling me again. George Bush hahahahahaha.
standard shoe is not it
When companies finally makes a product that does as advertised
" We can't allow that."
I wouldn't be surprised if Nike's rivals are behind the banning campaign.
Sounds like F1 racing haha
@@JohnSmith-cj9cx since it's expensive innovate, let's ban those who do, so we don't have to.
folks can use the shoe... but not for competitions.
@@robywankenobi32 I immediately thought of the fan car and how it was instabanned.
All I learned from this video is that I want the new Nike Vaporflys.
Daniel Chen Same. Shameless plug but effective.
Exactly !!!!!!
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is what I called a successful marketing
Me too
Another great commercial by Nikes.
"we don't create any running shoes that return more energy than the runner expends"
So... Nike shoes doesn't break the laws of thermodynamics . Good to know .
Mukul Verma Nike is referencing the rules of competitive running set but the global governing body. What they mean is that none of their shoes are designed to propel runners through alternative means e.g. springs or motors
Average Joe springs do not store or create energy either. They just return the energy that the runner expends. That being said, a) the carbon plate and the foam are effectively springs and b) this rule is not sufficient on its own because it doesn’t ban bicycles or roller skates. We really have to think about what makes running running and how much mechanical assistance we’re willing to accept
@@404nobrakes My opinion is that shoes =/= doping. Runners should be allowed to utilize technology as long as this technology is widely available and does not drastically change the sport or effect integrity
This is very true and if the shoe is available to everyone why ban it plus it would make running more competitive
@@404nobrakes if theyre allowed shoes at all then they should be allowed any shoes, however what is considered a shoe should also be more clearly defined
This man really compares wearing Vaporfly’s to doing drugs...
Doping is not doing drugs sometimes. It can refer to taking out your blood, oxygenating it, then returning it later
@@sto-humanfriendly but even with your example you have to agree that it’s still pretty absurd to compare shoes to oxygenating your blood artificially or ‘doping’.
@@kys9611 they say you gain a 4per cent advantage with the vapor fly so why do you still consider that absurd?
@@sto-humanfriendly did you read what youve just wrote? You can compare doing drugs with what youve said. He said its absurd to compare drugs with running shoes
@@sarahmacleod2008 4% of what? You are literally the person who is doing drugs right now
*man invents the first shoe*
runners: this destroys the sport of running, running should only be done barefoot so it's an even playing field.
Exactly just the shoe of the sport evolving
You have different foot compared to mine. It's unfair.
LokKsiders__ you're simply a better athlete than me... UNFAIR
To be fair, this *was* the agreed upon position of the ancient Olympics. Barefoot is pure.
According to that guy... anything you do that will give you an advantage is cheating...
Guess I shouldn’t go to the gym to get a conditioning and strength advantage... 🤷🏻♂️
I never thought I would click an 8 minutes Nike ad by myself
That's what they want, and seeing the comments everyone fell for it.
Yeah lol people going in like this isn’t a commercial
I don’t even run and I want these shoes
Classic example of how smart people entrap the dumb ones
I was thinking this exact same thing a minute in lol
The fact that they’re actually relieving physical stress on the body is reason enough to use them!
Reason enough to ban everything else.
I have terrible knees so I’m game for those bad boys
lets introduce bionic suits to weightlifting since it relieve stress on the muscles!!
Cool but not all can afford these shoes. Let’s offer them for free to every team from every country and then make them legal at marathons!
@@mihnealazar7039 oh ok. so you say professional athletes that run at Olympics can't afford a $150 pair of shoes while they make huge salary's? yeah sure. 😂
Theoretically, any shoes can affect the way a runner runs - I don’t feel that a significant advancement in shoes should be blocked, as improvements have consistently occurred for the entire history of the sport.
This.
Fine first principle thinking
Also, not discussed is how each runner technique differs and how Nike's shoe affects their technique. If you watch the runner in the demonstration he does a lot of heel striking and would receive more benefits by using Nike's shoe, whereas a runner who strikes closer to the toes would receive no benefit from using Nike's shoe.
I mean if you can put a spring in a running shoe then what if adidas comes out with some cartoon looking springy bois, everyone would agree that it's not okay, this one seems acceptable just because you don't see the spring.
Why is the only solution of a "level playing field" to ban the superior shoes instead of mandate them? Especially if the design provides more comfort and reduces chance of injury?
Exactly its dumb
Dont even need to mandate them. Just make it an option available to all competitors
Ireland exactly!
My thoughts during the whole video.
Because some competitors can not afford some shoes if they are made very expensive. If Nike made a cheaper version, it wouldn’t be an issue
This is one of the longest Nike ads I have ever seen.
KNP TENNIS exactly 😂
all these "journalistic" documentary styled reports are just ads for nerds.
agree
That's exactly what I said. I bet Nike paid this journalist or the Wall Street Journal to make this piece
Exactly. I'm not into running shoes and I'm sold on this.
if they ban them I already see the new slogan: "illegally fast"
This is GREAT advertising for the shoes 😂
Watch cause your slogan might get stolen
Illegally
@Random Autonomous Drone Pilot yes you can? Nike already has a patent on the "just do it" phrase
Random Autonomous Drone Pilot trade marking a phrase is a thing, look it up
@@HurrahAbyeh that was literally his entire point "it's called trademark not patent"
If they are gonna try and ban a pair of shoes, they should require that all world records must be attempted completely naked.
didn't the original Olympians compete naked?
@@ColinRowat0 yea, some say that it was done to prevent women from competing
@@SimonWoodburyForget the key here is that athletes wear different sneakers. but we cannot eradicate all types of "inequalities" as it is inherent in some sports. if we made the effort to eradicate such "unfair advantage," we would have to swim indoors one by one, all at the same temperature, etc.
The NBA bans certain shoes because they improve your vertical too much. Honestly banning shoes sometimes is ok
@@SimonWoodburyForget by that same logic, we shoudlnt use goggles in swimming, helmets in open-cockpit racing, etc.
There hasn't been significant innovation in running shoes in 50 years. Then when the innovation comes you want to ban it?
Thor Odinson Bruh
Yes, of course, it improves the performance of people of African descent and this channel is after all, the wall street journal
@Thor Odinson yeah, we should stay with sandals, right?
Same thing happened with the speedo bodysuits in competitive swimming.
The only thing I have against it is, not everyone can be sponsored by Nike and therefore it will cause monetary problems.
Nike: Innovates and breaks a barrier in running thought to be near impossible
Committee: BANNED
Nike: WHY
Committee: The design threatens the integrity of the sport and is basically cheating
Nike: We used a thin carbon fibre plate not a jet engine
They might as well make them run with just socks on or even barefoot
Sprinter's have spikes on their shoes but no one complained🤔
In the video it said that "These shoes give runners an unfair advantage" well spike shoes give sprinters an advantage and now everyone uses them in track
You Don't know me so everyone should use vaporflys lol
They didn't innovate anything...this entire design has been made for years by other companies. Placing a shank, and the sole design are in quite a few ultra marathon shoes.
"The need for a level playing field is exemplified."
Then have them run barefoot.
Or make them all wear Vaporfly's.
but what if someone "injures" themselves and gets surgery on their feet that makes them more aerodynamic :^)
Have them all have the same coach, the same food, the same training 😂
You, my friend, are on to something
There will always be a ‘best’ shoe. Why does it matter? Its just that this shoe is easily noticeable
"We do not create any running shows that return more energy than the runner expends"
Well at least they aren't breaking the laws of physics I guess.
I thought so aswell, or they're putting engines of some kind in their shoes.
Rather than creating infinite energies, they're referring more to something like putting batteries in your shoes, which then apply some sort of actual force when you're running
Now we need to see the compressed gas nitrous powered showed
They are talking about giving energy from another source like batteries or some chemical reactions maybe 😅
not sure if dumb, or making an obvious joke
Its fake. Everyone knows that running in crocs gives you the most advantage
Jamil Khan súper versatile shoe, the cruise mode and the sport mode
Crogtech
I am speed
Bro there’s actually these kids that run a 5k near my area every year in crocs, and one of them is like 12 and can go sub 18 it’s insane
And blisters...
Item: Vaporfly (Legendary)
Type: Shoes
Attribute: +4% speed
That stats is quite low for a legendary item dont you think
@@ProjectPsyche devs are planning on removing it next patch. too OP
@@ProjectPsyche not if all other shoes have lower stats
Or they'll put out a f2p version and nerf it next season.....
Dev will nerf this shoes in the next update
Nike finally accomplishes their goal of creating the ultimate running shoe
Shoe gets banned
That's how you know the shoes good and that's how Nike knows they did a good job
Sad, just sad!
How about everyone uses the shoe and we see who wins?!
Benard Kadima then adidas and other sneakers company will be bankrupted.
Nike has gone through this before. It won’t last
How can a “shoe” be considered cheating?
Every shoe is supposed to give an advantage to the runner by reducing the stress their body takes.
Comparing a pair of shoes with “doping” is not very wise.
Bingo
Shoes that’ll help protect runners from the continuous pounding motion that wears out their joints? Cant have that!
Aurtisan Miner it’s not SPORTS unless you’re getting HURT, unless it’s “doping” then you’re getting TOO hurt.
Just watch football and don’t think about head trauma
Andrew Batz there’s a huge difference between feeling pain on a run/during a workout and getting an injury
@@andre9095 if u want pain...why even run with shoes...run naked...more pain...more game spirit !
We live in age where advance technology is called cheating...
@@yeapthatsme2982 People who think like you truly dustgust me.
I only use sticks and stones as tools. Also, I only wear animal skin and eat raw meat.
@@roberth4395 yep...boomers will NVR let the world change....
You'd think all running shoes were meant to improve running
That's what I was thinking too lol, they need to lay out what the criteria for an "unfair" advantage is, rather than just asserting that this is unfair because of the results
I feel like ”doesn't exert more energy than the runner puts in” is pretty straightforward.
@@subspacesausage5918 these don't magically add energy it conserves energy making the runner more efficent
If you take away modern shoes and track surfaces, rolling back to the technology used when the first four minute mile was achieved, about 95% of athletes who hold that record would be unable to repeat the feat. Athletic tech inevitably advances alongside material science and it's always so arbitrary how they determine was is and isn't an unfair advantage. Now to be fair, if the whole track is a different surface, that means all the runners are literally on an equal playing field. Shoe technology unfortunately starts moving into a pay-to-play conundrum for each competitor, but one can't bemoan that aspect too much as it exists in literally any sport.
Adidas ultraboost is best
"The Tokyo olympics around the corner this summer"
Uh oh he didn’t know
at least it around this year summer
@@elslord16 Not trying to depress you but IDK about that one chief...
Big corner
@@venkateshsrinivasan8457 how
@@willreilly7120 the algorithm specifically requested it
“Doing something to deliberately gain an unfair advantage” like wearing shoes rather than barefoot? Cool story
While wearing my vaporflys, I watched this 8 minute video in 6 minutes.
Wrong it would be around 7.68 min coz.. vaporflys reduces only 4 percent of time Lol!! 😂😂🤣🤣🤣
I was only wearing one Vaporfly and one Danish Clog. I broke an ankle. You'll never guess which one.
@@JoeShopper i will never know because you didn't specify you wore which shoe on which foot
@@zafrylaiman8695 Here's the thing, I was wearing them on my hands.
@@JoeShopper hahahahahahahahahaha
This is the greatest Nike ad I've seen. Running shoes so good they might get banned? Deal me in
Yup, gonna order mine. Lol. I have plantar fasciitis so this is an incredible breakthrough for us flat-footers. hahahahahahhaha
Nike has been doing stuff like this for years. Same thing with the "Banned" Air Jordan 1 and Airship
Exactly how Jordans became known, right? MJ wasn’t supposed to wear them due to a ban and did anyway...boom. A legendary shoe is born.
I already own 2 pairs will order another next month. A bit expensive tho at £250 a pop but it’s worth it
Ur right. When something is banned it adds more to the shoe's prestige. Nike is still making money off the Air Jordan 1 being 'banned.'
changing the physiology of your body and wearing very well designed shoes are completely different things
Yeah, you’re cheating in both though.
Cheating like taking steroids to make you stronger and faster. It's just a freaking innovative shoe!!
True but it's still cheating. All that will happen is we'll see EVERY runner switch to this brand of shoes (or we'll see one particular brand of shoes mandated for all runners), and that will remove the competitive advantage. That's the only way to maintain a level playing field.
Then what about the hardwork and innovation done by nike, isn't it unfair for them
How is it cheating when all companies have the opportunity to make a better shoe 🤨
As a 70 year old with over 40 years of distance running in legs, I find these shoes great for all round training as the combination of cushioning, stability and lightness reduce the chance of injury to my aged muscles and joints. The shoes give a nice feel of energy return to the stride, and if they increase my local parkrun pace to 9.30 min/miles from 10 min/miles, I can't imagine I'll be accused of having an unfair advantage on my feet..... :-)
Shaving off 30secs on average run time per km is no joke, grandpa. If it can be such a huge improvement to you then imagine the effect on professional athletes in their prime?
The technology itself is not bad, but it's bad that it created imbalance on the playing field, thus action(s) must be done to level the playing field again.
This is the longest Nike ad I've ever seen.
They are literally talking about the DISADVANTAGES of the shoes. Did you even watch the video?
@@ferretworld4031 No, they are saying the shoe is so good that people want to buy it. Are you stupid?
@@turborooster8548 yeah they "want to bad it", are YOU stupid?
@@ferretworld4031 When in the video did they ever say they "want to bad it"?
@@turborooster8548 No, that's what YOU said in your first comment! Might wanna go check that buddy.
*MAN THE INSANE FREE ADVERTISEMENT THT NIKE GETS, ITS SO EFFECTIVE TO THE POINT EVERYONE WANTS A PAIR OF VAPORFLYS.*
teddy tatyo I don't even run and I want a pair
teddy tatyo, I immediately went to Amazon to see how much a pair cost! 😄
This video seriously had no substance. I was looking for breakdown of the technology, but got nothing. They showed labs, and testing, and then it ends. I can't take it as anything other than just an 8 minute ad.
this isnt free lol
There is no way Nike got this much attention for free. I think some geniuses in Nikes marketing department pushed this hole "controversy" to this scale, maybe even started it in the first place.
Imagine stopping innovation because a committee doesn't like better timing.
Oh wait.
Lightbulb!
he cannot run anymore, that's his issue
What? Technology can make you go faster!? Time to allow bicycles and cars to improve times!
Stopping innovation? They’re just not allowing it in their sporting events ..
Except some countries track teams actually require sponsorships to fund them, so if your countries team isn't sponsored by Nike, you are automatically at a disadvantage.
Also athletics are about what the human body can do, not what technology can make them do.
Just like in auto racing, tire technology improves and the cars get faster and more efficient. Keep these shoes in the sport. The continual breaking of records is fine, and should be used as an example in the advancement in the human race not only how the human race has evolved but also how humans are able to manipulate inanimate object for advancement.
To me if they ban a shoe for a running race, they must outlaw all shoes and should require runners to run barefoot if they truly want the most even playing field.
"Running shoes that return more energy than the runner expends"
law of thermodynamics left the chat
battery powered device has entered the chat.
Timestamp?
1:52
You do not have enough understanding of mechanical science, in short thru the compressive strength and structure of the sole, additional elastic force can be supplied to runner legs, thats what they mean they that statement
Ground force
Imagine if people did this back in the 1930s when Jesse Owens won the gold in his spiked adidas shoes, some of the first of their kind, it’s almost like technology evolves over time to improve the sport
@Fun Builder yeah nah
Fun Builder are you high
Yeah, if want a total "fair", runner shouldnt wear any shoes
@Mike J There's a Ted Talk by David Epstein called "Are athletes realling getting faster, better, stronger?" regarding this phenomenon and how records being broken pretty much all correlated with technological advancements either in the gear worn or used or the terrain (such as how track material changed). With adjustments for track material improvements, Usain Bolt's WR 100 meter time would've only beaten Jesse Owens' by perhaps a few 100ths of a second. And rather than athletes competing in any sport, they tend to "specialize" and move into sports where they have the biggest advantage. For instances, basketball players being tall, shotput throwers being large, and gymnasts being shorter and more compact. It's a great talk. I recommend checking it out.
And steroid too. And drugs to hide usage of steroids
The first time a shoe company delivers on its promises, it gets banned
This is correct, we probably won’t see innovation like this anymore because shoe companies don’t want their shoes banned
@@Minecraftmaster684 Or we just change the rulebooks. Then again, we'll probably end up with mechanical running shoes with full-on rebound springs like those sprint boots with spring feet
The NBA has had to ban multiple shoes from the league due to significant unfair advantage/increased danger to player.
All basketball shoes increase danger to players as the narrow your base of support and increase stress on medial ligaments of the knee
@@SomethingSeemsOff they only banned shoes with reflectives and shoes with sharp ends that might cause injuries and they mostly banned shoes because of their color as before the shoes have to match the uniform color but they lift that ban already.
I remember my friend introducing me to these shoes, i didn’t believe they would make a difference but my 1.5 mile run shed 1.5 mins. It helped me pass all my PT test. Ive had the same shoes for 5 years, only wear them once a year for my test.
They’re just shoes man it’s not a drug, it’s like banning leggings because they run better than pants
BAN LEGGING! oh oh time to stop commenting
But by that logic people could be running with springs strapped to their feet, even though that's not really fair either.
Or tight short short
Leggings are banned in swimming.
wrong. it gives unfair advantage. how do you expect ugandans,somalians and kenyians to shelve 400 dollars for the shoes? unless companies can sponsor not even govt can get the shoes. well, they dont rely on shoes. they beat all the mofos with bare-foot. marathons are run on man made asphalt, that is why you need some sort of quality shoes but not 400 or 250 plus dollar shoes. come on now!
The cheating goes way further than the shoes, I heard some of these 'athletes' live indoors and don't even hunt their own meals.
Sadly I fear we'll never again see a performance equal to that of the great Thag in 103,000BC
LOLOLOL
The late Thag Simmons?
Victor Meas That’s the fella. A true legend in his own bath time.
Thank you for reminding us all of the "Far Side" story of the thagomizer. "A thagomizer is the distinctive arrangement of four to ten spikes on the tails of stegosaurid dinosaurs." - Wikipedia
🤣🤣🤣
I don’t think we should ban them it’s like saying no to innovation
putting some carbon fibre into a shoe omG thAt Is So INnoVaTiVe
@@stevenr3544 then why didn't you do it 10 years ago and beat nike to the punch?
fine, but the world records can’t stand otherwise just let non Nike athletes blood dope
J R Just let adidas make as good a copy as they can of these shoes and then everyone is equal. Running shoes have innovated so much in the last 80 years. It’s a question of natural selection, adapt or die.
We should ban them. Running should be what the human can do. We can maximize training, get lightweight gear and get ultra flat ground to run on, but that is just restricting the human body as little as possible. These shoes add on to what a person can do, they go past the human body instead of getting as close as possible to just a person
Eliud kipchoge had alphaflys on , and I don’t get how it’s an advantage if it’s available to everyone
But it isn't available to everyone. The shoe costs well over $200. Not everyone can justify spending that much on a pair of shoes.
@@notgray88 If long distance running is your profession then it doesn't matter the cost to you, you will pay for the advantage, if you run for fun why do you care about that extra 4% just have fun.
"Shoes so good they're banned in competitive running" - Nike 2020
Alertacobra 12 copied
Yeah they need to be banned because they are good for the athletes that are sponsored by Nike, but what about the athletes that aren't sponsored by Nike????
To everyone saying that this is "stupid", I really wanna hear your super effective ideas to solve the problem.
"Comments so good I copy them from other people for likes" - Alertacobra 12
@@neixen- other companys make there own sci fi shoes so there athletes have a better chance
@@neixen- do u watch F1. Do all teams have same engine manufacturers. Let's c Mercedes keeps on winning ban them. It's upto ferrari or the competitors to bring something unique on their own. Or take cricket do all batsman have bats made of similar material
This is like a teacher finding mistakes in your exam when you got a perfect score.
Lezz zz lol
By cheating
@@ashishsaimon6511 cheating and innovation are 2 deferent things
Jamac007 wearing any type of shoes by definition is cheating. Nature hardened your heals by design. All shoes should be banned.
@@Jamac007 bringing a calculator to the math test isn't "innovation"
A math test is about your ability to do math, a marathon is about human endurance. Making it more than that turns it into a contest of how much we can artificially boost someone's skill, not who has the most skill.
This reminds me of when the new design of speed skates were introduced to speed skating in the winter Olympics. There was no debate about unfair advantage, they were just accepted as the next evolution of design.
Yeah this ban makes no sense. Anyone can buy these shoes. So it should be fine. This ban would only make sense if these shoes were like an invite only sale.
P. Spit the ban doesn't make any sense. the shoes are just mechanically good and people that are non-open-minded jerks will disagree. there is no logical reason to ban these. are you saying that we should not use good materials shoes ? it is not cheating because there is no automatic motor that is powering the shoes.
The problem really lies in the contracts some top runners have with Nike, and the contracts others have with Reebok or Adidas, so people who have signed with Nike have an unfair advantage using these shoes compared to other athletes that are signed with (and thereby obliged to use shoes from) the other companies which do not have this technology at their disposal
@@Duivenzijnfascisten that's just nike being better than the rest.
@@Duivenzijnfascisten but using that logic you could argue if you're a cyclist and your bike sponsor isn't the best in the world you should ban those bikes coz they're lighter and faster than yours. They shouldn't ban innovative designs just because some people won't use them
The plate just keeps the foam from collapsing on the forefoot. It would be a very uncomfortable ride if it weren't there. It isn't a spring - it's a support piece. The foam is what is incredible on the shoe. The current design of the shoe is probably not doing you any favors biomechanically speaking. It's a cast on your foot that isn't allowing your foot to flex naturally. Expect some injuries.
Nah, that plate can flex and return to its original shape: that is the definition of a spring. A spring does not always have to be a coil.
@@RagnarNomad Right, it's a compliant mechanism. But its flex is secondary to its stiffness. The shoe is shaped to roll - not flex. It does flex a bit like you said. But supercritical foams delaminate and behave poorly because of their inelastic nature and suspect bonding properties on textiles that are not also TPU-based.
I got your point: the plate acts like a support to stabilize the athlete feet because of all that thick foam underneath.
But this made me think a bit more: the plate by itself is not thing much, only by combining with that thick foam that they together create a "spring" and that "spring" aids the wearer of the shoes.
One example is the leaf spring in truck, the leaves have different length thus having different elasticity but they work together to create a more comfortable ride on the truck.
TLDR: the plate by itself does little but with glue and foam, they together work wonder, don't you agree?
@@RagnarNomad exactly right. The system they created with that combination of materials combined with precise geometry (shape) revolutionized the category.
I cannot tell if this is here to promote the shoe, or if it's actually a news piece.
*Buys shoe*
🤣🤣 I had a similar reaction. 😭🤣
Same, and I don’t run. Figure I’ll be able to increase my couch potato efficiency by at least 3%
“Quick, buy ‘em before they’re banned!”
@@diversionmary AT LEAST 3%!
Pricing shoe now...
“We’re going to cut open a vapor fly to show you just how it works!”...20 seconds later...”we’re not sure how it works”
Blair Fraser ..... seems very obvious to me... add 3 inches to the legs by using 3 inches of a damping foam... use carbon fiber plate to stiffen the sole without adding weight..... presto - magic
Yeah like this dude writes his doctors degree on the vaporfly but does not know whats going on and just recommends a thickness limit.
What about do it scientific. Give limit of damping and spring value
@@tmwall25 I think the carbon plate functions as a flat spring that helps the foot bounce of the ground giving some energy back.
The carbon fiber plate works as a leaf-spring giving little bit of the step's energy back. It's works similarly to the spring leg for amputated leg, and is probably inspired by it. Foam is to cushion the impact.
LOL.
Surely if they give you a 4% advantage......everyone will wear them. Swimmers have had better swimsuits over time which make them faster.
Fire Up that was my thought, it’s like banning tech suits
Unless you can’t bc of sponsorships
They have banned certain materials in swimsuits because they give an “unfair” advantage
They actually did ban certain tech suits for a little bit if I’m remembering correctly, there are regulations on what lengths they can be, but most people have the same ones, just different patterns
@@brinleybruening1344 Speedo, for example has introduced a lot of tech into their swimwear and it's fine. Not sure every swimmer is sponsored by Speedo.
If this was an issue of a private company having a proprietary shoe that only certain athletes have access to, then I could see the issue. However these are sold commercially, so I'm not understanding the controversy. Shoe technology will continue to change shoe design (lighter, better energy return), and as long as all runners have equal access to these shoes, then it's a non-issue.
Too bad for those sponsored by other shoe companies.
“ doesn’t return more energy than the runner expends “. Well thanks for not breaking the laws of physics at least.
Lol I thought the same thing.
Right.. By the logic one could jump to the moon after several hops..
I bet some materials scientist got a kick out of writing that to their boss.
its totally possible for a shoe to return more energy than expended using modern technology, the whole point of the statement is that they arent doing anything like that
@@elliotdeclet594 How would that work? Stationary asphalt doesn't generate energy. Where would the energy come from?
I see it as a breakthrough, sprinting spikes have developed over time and have become very efficient in the energy return so why restrict that in long distance it just makes the runner more efficient jeez
Maxwell Morrison
Because these guys don’t care. They want to stall Nike’s strangle-hold on it to give the other companies (that they indirectly work for I’m sure) a chance to catch up with the technology... then suddenly they’ll be like “oopsies, guess it wasn’t cheating, and now you should buy them from xyz company.” It’s all a scam.
Why not put tiny springs inside other shoes then? According to you, it is all the same, I call it cheating if the shoe can make you bounce. And I'm sure Nike will have nothing to say about that, right?
Hector G.
Sure, how about little wheels so you can coast too?
How about just be barefoot? Problem solved. Whiney cry-baby’s can shut up and everything works....
Oh, wait, you can’t make money off of being bare footed.
@@NPCSN I must have hit a nerve. Nike representative in the comments. lol
BTW I was talking to Maxwell Morrison but you turned all hostile for no good reason.
Hector G.
🤦🏻♂️ please come back when you can learn to read...
That “nerve” you hit must have been your optic nerve... maybe that’s why you can’t read. 🤷🏻♂️
If all of them are wearing them then who cares this just makes other companies step up. If you want a truly level field then ban shoes
I imagine you can't come in with a spring loaded pair of footwear;
the issue seems to be that the shoe looks like a shoe and not some fancy obviously spring loaded gadgetry.
I imagine this 'controversy' is a repeat of past 'controversies' involving new technology being used in sports.
Exactly
I mean some shoes are definitely better to run with. You buy a more expensive light shoe it's better than cheap ones anyway.make everyone run on the same shoe ore barefoot else there will always be someone with disadvantage
@@mortensgard6142 That what be providing more energy than the runner expends. These shoes do not do that.
It's not just a matter of current competitors but also past competitors and records. But as a former sprinter, I don't think that it really matters. Rubberized tracks are much faster than the cinder tracks that sprinters used to run on. In fact, many newer rubberized tracks are much faster than early rubberized tracks. Shoes are much better, training techniques and coaching are much better, etc. It's just not the first Olympic Games anymore, and it never will be again. Technology and techniques will continue to improve performance for the foreseeable future.
And despite the suggestion of this video, technology significantly improved marathon performances long before these shoes.
Seems like the Vapor Fly would provide better injury protection, as well, so I am all for finding a way to get these into the sport so that knock-offs can filter down to us plebes.
Give everyone vapor flys so everyone has the same "advantage".
solved case
Athletes are sponsored by different companies they... Just can't wear any shoes
The thing not mentioned in this video is that they cost 250$ and not everyone can afford this :)
yes because $250 is not affordable for elite athletes that compete for money
Give? You mean give away new shoes for free?
@@rowanfitzgerald3250 Exactly. I looked them up immediately. Thought I'd try and buy a pair to help me on my next pt test. Not trying to break any records, just want an easier time while doing a 2 mile run.
Solution:
1. Make people run barefooted.
2. Make every athlete wear Nike vaporfly.
3. Regulate the equipment like every other sport, so companies can still make improvements without taking away the achievements of the athletes
There are 2 problems here:
1. Barefooting obviously doesn't work as it would be damaging to the athletes' feet in the long term
2. Athletes are sponsored by exclusive companies like Puma and Adidas, so they can't wear the Vaporfly now even if they want to (otherwise they lose the sponsorship money). If the Vaporfly is made compulsory it effectively puts all companies out of competition, and gives a huge unfair business advantage to Nike. It basically stifles further innovation in running shoe field as there would be no incentive for Nike to improve
@@AmanRai-rq3eg they chose the wrong lousy sponsorship company.😂
Losers are just trash at whatever they are competing. If they are really talented, NIKE will approach them automatically for a sponsorship. So we know the whining people are the real salty LOSER blaming everything and everyone but themselves.
@@AmanRai-rq3eg you must be fun at parties mr. explanation
@@SugarKalamay If only we had parties now :P
When you're so good they call you a cheater. Adorable.
Alborn Messchussets fr
you didn't watch the video.
@@genki2705 but............ I did
@@kenanbegic5862 bc its not the person thats good. Obvs they are but the shoes give them a big advantage
@@tmuto5119 But... if you were to run in normal street shoes vs. any running shoe, the running shoe has an advantage. At the end the runner literally said it's nicer to run in Nike ones because they're comfier, so they should be banned?
Every shoe gives some advantage, otherwise people would run barefoot. It's arbitrary what you define as an unfair advantage.
This is the most intelligent advertisement I've ever seen.
Good job wsj
What are you on about it's barely even veiled
Agree
@@PolKsio exactly
Engineering a shoe so well that wearing it is considered cheating. Incredible. That's an amazing feat
Props to Nike.
*amazing feet
Great ad as well
@Eduardo Babyhands I would say that that is the case but so much data says differently. Like the general increase in fast times from these hyper shoes, and the VO2 max testing done on individual athletes in and out of the vapormax.
Nike Stonks 📈📈
That's not cheating, that's innovation. If I run a 5k race with regular running shoes against an opponent with sandals, have I cheated, or did I just bring the right tool with me? It's not like doping. Let Nike keep their shoes. Eventually, other manufacturers will find ways to replicate the system and catch up. This is brilliant advertising for Nike.
Now the question is, is an Olympic race a contest of innovation, or of the human body and will
@@DatGinnga if you look over a list of Olympic sports, most of them use equipment. Separating the innovation from these sports doesn't make much sense to me. For running, it could be standardized by having everyone run barefoot, but that's a bit ridiculous
@@drabadraba101 I actually work out barefooted myself but I agree lol, but I don’t think the innovation should be up to the athlete to acquire, as that’s not the spirit of the contest. maybe have a standardized Olympic board that chooses the best available gear, and issues it to all participants
@@DatGinnga that seems kinda fair to me. In this case, what about shoe size or arch support or whatever. A single shoe doesn't work, every athlete has a slightly different body which is optimized by different designs
In your analogy there was in what to run in but with these shoes you’re in a known distinct disadvantage. You’re running at 100% whilst they’re running at 104-105% if they wearing the shoes and you’re not
We basically just watched a 8min Nike ad.
I'm sorry: but is a shoe is classified as "doping" then so is healthy diet and training. I mean honestly. This is rediculous
Ridiculous*
If they want pure person to person competition they should all receive the same training, the same food, the same coach, it's rediculous alright
Not it’s not.
no, its purpleous
To be fair, doping has been accessible to top level for a long time. If it aint broke, dont fix it /s
I'm gonna run the Boston Marathon in steel toe boots, anyone that wears anything better than those I will consider cheaters.
you nailed it, it doesn't really make sence. Shoes are always getting better
@@user-ii3kn8zz1k yes, but no.. because he would be putting himself willingly in disadvantage
@@gabrielduarte3904 the point stands then... anyone NOT using the vapourfly's would be putting themselves at a distinct disadvantage. Precisely as inoita11 said.
nobody:
caveman boomer be like: "you use shoe, i barefoot. You CHEAT!!"
Solution! It's required for _everyone_ to wear them! Boom chakalaka
“There hasn’t been a profound technological advancement in the past 40 to 50 years.”
Vaporfly: gets banned
It's just banned in competitions, you can still wear them for ur own satisfaction. You gotta respect the people from 40-50 years ago that didnt have that same advantage
@@amirgreene4930 Why? Literally none of the athletes 40-50 years ago have the same technological advantages they have today. Are we supposed to do away with sports science?
Amir Greene why would anyone wear them for their own satisfaction if they are not competing ? The selling point of this shoe was that it gives an advantage to the athlete and that would be the hype , everyone wants that shoe that makes people run faster ! Now that they banned pros from wearing them , it’s meh , just another shoe . Nobody is going to be like “ oh i can run quicker to get the groceries “ and buys them
Om B underrated comment
@@amirgreene4930 Your comment is just dumb. If a design is bad and we know a better one, then stop making bad products on purpose.
50 years ago people did not had smart phones. Should you respect them by useung cable phone only?
It seems to me like the vaporflys would reduce the impact and injury lots of running has on your body so I think thats a good thing
Unless you’re going to make everyone wear the same shoe brand and model, it makes no sense to ban one.
Might as well force everyone to run barefoot and have them separated into different categories based on foot arch.
It's just like not letting anyone have steak because a baby cant eat it
or force all to run barefoot
@@theshanamaster that's honestly not a good comparison. The shoe and the steaks are the variables. A baby literally can't eat a steak, but all the runners can wear the vaporflys.
It's more like people eating soup faster with a soup spoon vs people eating soup with a teaspoon, because the people are the constants, and the spoons are the variables, but they can still pick their own spoon.
@@shayslay3416 wow, no one cares
“Unfair” would mean that other runners can’t obtain them. So, case settled... everyone gets Nike Fly Neon Shoes
Nike approves this message.
T. W Na they are illegal in the states, buying shoes not so much.
T. W yeah, but would that damage there health. Biological alteration is different then wardrobe.
@Sebastian Remi they should've picked Nike then
I thought the same thing, but I think the issue is that sponsorships come into play.
I disagree with the limitations. EVERY SINGLE running shoe, before and after the vaporflies, from one or two centuries ago, you name it, has been designed to offer an advantage; to improve our running prowess. The vaporflies just happen to be the first to manage to give such a performance boost but they will not be the only ones to achieve it. This is just the beginning.
They put a literal leaf spring in them...
Agreed. Anything beyond bare feet is technically a mechanical advantage. As Nike said, the shoe does not input more energy into the system, it makes more efficient use of existing energy.
what leaf spring
i run at a national level, and if shoes goes to a certain level it will be an equipment sport and just be a money sport.
@@StarComet7 It already is all about money maybe not to most of the athletes who put in the work but to everyone else sports are nothing but money, It hasn't been about pushing what is humanly possible for long time.
2:28 We don't want to normalize doping because it's terrible for the athlete. Going on steroids, for instance, comes with all sorts of side effects. If we had a substance that increased strength/muscle gain and was completely safe, every sporting body would allow it. Spolier alert: It exists and is called creatine.
The vaporfly is just a really good running shoe. It doesn't hurt the athlete (AFAIK). There may be an argument that these shoes are expensive and so may price a runner out of the sport, but the comparison to doping is just dumb.
I wouldn't be surprised that this whole "controversy" was manufactured by Nike's marketing team.
This is not the first time something like this happens. The Olympics Comite is stupid.
Remember, its all about the equipment, not the athlete. Goes the same for golf, cycling, and any other premium sport...
You're catching on.
@@hebson21 cycling is pretty even, at least in grand tours and other uci regulated races, mostly because of weight limits and lack of aero advancement significant within uci limits.
Bingo
This objective unbiased news video is sponsored by Nike. While these shoes are banned from professional sports they will have windfall commercial success.
Excellent marketing strategy
not my type of sneaker or i just too old to wear this keep of looking shoe,...
Shut up egg
Penalising success is the SOCIALIST way!!!!
Do you have evidence of your claim?
How’s that surprising? Any Marketting is good Marketting
So, you’re telling me I should buy “Nike Vaporflys?”
DENVERxBRONCOx4xLIFE so true
YES mrs Cathy Newman
hahaha I thought the same thing. This is clearly a publicity for nike.
I guarantee you won’t beat a Kenyan or Ethiopian distance runner
Broncos for life!!!
A bunch of extra layers of cloth is called "mechanical" doping? Seems like a smear campaign by Nikes competitors who got caught completely off guard.
What I got from this video:
Ethopia and Kenya runners are fast bois
Big Chungus Yessir
they train with the cheetahs.
They are direct descendants of the original humans.. the adam(u)..built with a far superior respiratory system...they arent faster, they endure longer.
JP Adajar something about being in the food chain makes you move your azz faster. Americans will lose some weight once AI robots start hunting them.
@@tedcarl5382 bruh Africa has cities it's not just a dessert lol
This is absurd. This like trying to insist that “real” golf clubs are made only of wood. Banning a smarter shoe design doesn’t preserve the purity of the sport. It’s progress. The idea to limit thickness is dumb too, because there is already a natural limit in the form of weight and size. The shoe stays, other shoe companies will compete. And athletes will choose the footwear they prefer. This is a non-issue.
The only issue is sponsors.
If an althelete is sponsored by addidas I can guarantee they ain't wearing Vapors for running.
But I agree shoes stay.
@@Ainzel_Klien the sponsorship angle is self-correcting.
@@Ainzel_Klien I don't know much about shoe brands but can't adidas just make their own version of vaporfly?
@@donutello_ They prob can but idk if they have patents for shoe design anyways lets say they can make something similar.
Why haven't they done it yet?
If a shoe is that good wouldn't you want to have your athlete do his best so that if they win with your shoes the athlete and his/her shoes are on the spotlight.
Well, its the olympics, its meant to test your body, not your shoes. Its to show the world you are a beast at a given sport.
So imo vaporflies have no place in the olympics.
"THEY SHOULD BAN THAT SHOE..."
- Adidas probably, 2020
Pft,I bet Adidas wished one of their shoes were banned...
This is only going to increase sales on these things
Look at the Jordan 1
"They should be banned, they are too amazing " -Nike now get this to WSJ so they can run a full scale advertisement
j ery 🤣🤣🤣
😂
As someone that actually does track and field i can say that it's a fair advantage, because at the ends of the day you're the one wearing them, it's not like wearing them will magically turn you into an olympic gold medallist
The only way to have an “even” playing field is to require a certain make of shoe to be worn. Other shoes can provide advantages & disadvantages
gina x the only adavantage of the vaporflys is the firm planting of the foot into the foam. The carbon fiber supports that. The problem is many runners wear different shoes and these vaporflys are fit to a specific running style.
Sak 20012019 yea I just think the whole thing is bs all together. Like a commenter said, imagine making a shoe so good that it gets banned 😂
gina x ya
Yeah, no. Not everyone has the same stride or foot shape.
Any kind of shoe would provide advantages to certain running styles and disadvantages to some others, but yeah this is the best way to make it a 'level playing field',
Whatever that may be.
publicity stunt . nike did a smart move investing on P.R
vai negi science disagrees
vai negi never heard of these or seen them.
They look descent, might buy some
I might too try them in stores
it's such a good ad, made me want to buy a pair for a moment
those shoes actually make you faster apparently
Imagine designing such a good shoe they say it's cheating
God be like; *W H Y*
The same thing happened to the vehicle: Dodge Demon. It was so fast that it was banned in most drag strips and tracks, but it's also a production car you can get right off the lot
@@GigglyDucky thanks for the info!! I only vaguely remembered the video
The single best marketing ever
Advances in the impact absorbing of road shock should be allowed as should advances in healthy care for athletes bodies. Otherwise running becomes more obviously like the damaging of our health for no practical gain that many sports truly are
No different than using “running shoes” vs Converse All-Stars. I definitely run better and faster with shoes designed for running.
Hah I was going to use Chucks vs running shoes, too! 🤦🏾♂️😄✌🏿🙏🏾
Excellent marketing for Nike. They benefitted so much from the ban on Jordan’s earliest use of the Air Jordan. Everyone wants to use the BANNED sneaker.
The only thing that seems different is that the Vaporfly might actually back up the marketing that it helps you run faster.
I just checked Nike.com - the shoe retails for $250 and it’s selling like hotcakes. Out of stock in multiple sizes and styles. Amazing marketing right here.
@@RossCampoli boom brilliant marketing
tfw when people where Jordan's for non-basketball things 20 years after he retired
history repeating itself again
Joe Blow it depends on the shoe jordan has a new performance model each year but the retros are just usually for aesthetics.
Those shoes are "meta" in the current running patch
Bruh
@Adil Zinoune woah internet dude, chill
Adil Zinoune I don’t think you’re tall enough to reach his face kid.
already tiered!
metarun
The ads are evolving
innit
None of this makes sense because that’s like telling a 100m sprinter he isn’t allowed to wear sprint spikes because they make him run faster....smh🤦🏾♂️
Stupid ahh video
Exactly - if you follow the videos logic, competitive marathons should only be ran barefoot
Ikr, imagine if spikes weren't invented until all of a sudden Nike releases them in 2020. I'm pretty sure there'd be this petty outrage.
PS: I hate Nike but c'mon guys, like really? As much as I'd hate to say this, Nike is in the clear xD
when theyre like if its supposed to be a competition with human vs human so they should be banned. well why aren't they running barefoot then?
100% agree this is so dumb, it you really want "fair" then force everyone to wear the same clothes, same shoes, etc. However, that's not what this is about. People are just salty
3 minutes in and they still haven’t explained HOW the shoes give anyone an advantage
This annoyed me as well.
A bit about the foam they use in planes
B O U N C Y
Andrzej Supermocny you can see the jiggle in the steps ;)
They have a carbon plate in them which functions essentially as the springy legs amputee runners use... I'm not sure why this was not more thoroughly addressed here....
Using this logic, i guess the only "fair" way to compete would be barefoot and naked?
Like the Greeks did it back in the ancient olympics
@@kalecardenas9645
Even a fool is thought wise if he keeps silent, and discerning if he holds his tongue.
www.ancient.eu/article/20/ancient-greek-clothing/#:~:text=The%20Greeks%20were%20not%20particularly,barefoot%20for%20his%20entire%20life.
Greeks rarely wore shoes. If they did it was sandals or boots, which usually don't count as shoes.
I don't remember seeing any depictions of ancient Greeks wearing shoes... And I doubt they ran in sandals
@@kalecardenas9645 while the ancient Greeks did have clothing and sandals they weren't used in Olympic competition. Kind of like we have semiautomatic rifles but don't use them for biathlon competition.
@@warlordnipple they never had “shoes” but they did where foot wear
I use them as well, and not to improve my amazingly slow times, but because I think it's better for my knees, which were always hurting after a run in other shoes.
I agree - see my comment above. These shoes may take a few crucial seconds off the times of world class runners, but they also have the capability of reducing the chance of injury in ageing slow joggers like myself. Worth paying the premium price for in my opinion.
IMO, it would be a bad decision to ban them.
Imagine if tennis banned aluminum racquets and stayed with wooden ones because the newer ones are "unfair"
Other shoe companies should step up and copy the model, so that everyone has the better tools for running. It's the future
While i agree with you, those pesky copyright laws may get in the way of that lol
@@evan1238 China: hold my beer.
or everyone can just buy them no need to copy
Exactly. They would have to standardize on a single shoe for any foot racing or distance running. That will never happen.
What happens when special socks give a . 7563% advantage because of unique microcellular foam?
Banning this is bad precedent.
@@asandax6 that's sort of missing the point and won't ever happen. Think of sponsorships and bias and all that. There will be imitations that will make enough changes to skirt patent/trademark laws while providing similar end results. That's how the free market of competition works.
What’s keeping other brands from making better shoes and better shoe tech?
Apparently runners
This nerd is butthurt then he runs at a competitive level, not good enough for Nike team though lol
Inky Kitsune No one’s claiming other companies can’t make better shoes, but it’s a question of competition legality. An athlete’s performance in Tokyo 2020 shouldn’t be determined by what shoes they can afford or who their sponsor is. Competition sports should pit human vs human, not shoe vs shoe. And no, you shouldn’t just hand Nike a contract to supply the whole grid. How will smaller players like Puma or Saucony compete with Nike’s R&D budget for future releases if it’s all Vaporfly now?
@@Strand0410 olympic athletes can literally afford any shoe.
Strand then isn’t those company’s fault for not progressing? Wouldn’t it be also said that puma and adidas are not assisting running but hurting it by not adapting.
Strand I guess we have to run barefoot, any kind of shoe gives people unfair advantages!
Moral of the story "we're not sure how they even work, but we're pretty sure it's cheating because winning runners wear them". Terribly uninformative video, looks more like Nike marketing
I felt the same way. I doubt its just the bouncy sole like this video implies.
thank you. what a waste of time.
They didn't show or discuss any of the data he collected, what a disappointment.
Knights Of Ni dang I gotta get a pair in that case
Is it that hard to say They improve efficiency by reducing the biomechanical load at the big toe and ankle joint due to the spoon shaped plate. That’s the mechanical doping part. That’s where previous and current competitors haven’t figured out how to stop ankle trouble. Combined with 31mm of the best foam in the world, you get 5% over the adios boost or zoom streak 6 which Kipchoge could only run 2:03 in.
If you want a “Level playing field” and “Person against person” then you might as well make everyone wear the same shoes. Or take away shoes altogether. His logic is absurd.