Nice.

My Next% Ekiden just came in the mail today - they look fast AF...

---

https://www.strava.com/...tes/zachary_mckinney

Best colorway in the market. Enjoy!

Someone already posted the original guardian report here but I guess we didn't already have enough vaporfly threads.



No matter what the IAAF decides, we, the 99% of amateur/recreational runners will continue to be able to run in whatever shoes we want so the Alphafly may yet come out for us if there even was a plan to release them.

---

808 > NYC > PDX > YVR
2024 Races: Taupo

It stated that they were going to continue to investigate the vaporfly....I think they got the wrong shoe. They already did that and found it doesn't return more than 100% of the energy the runner put in it....in other words it's not a spring. I think they meant the Alpha fly which remains to be seen.

No shoe can return more than 100% of the energy you put into it. Nor can a spring. Nor can something like, say, a non-motorized bicycle.

If something is "returning" more energy than you put in, it means it has another power source. Like batteries, or a gasoline tank.

A cop out. IAAF simply frightened of a legal action by Nike. Entirely wrong decision and clearly the shoes break the current rules about unfair advantage and being reasonably available to all. They do give an advantage (look at the reviews) and it’s unfair because not everyone can afford the 250 dollar price tag. Triathlon is increasingly becoming a middle class sport/sport for the wealthy. If you can’t afford it you can’t compete. Back to basics please.
Sport for all not the wealthy few.

Also it appears allowing these but banning all new technology until after Tokyo prevents any competition shoe manufacturers from making something similar and closing that performance advantage gap. Nike huge winners, others losers, and athletes with other company sponsorship screwed for Tokyo now.

The argument these are problematic because of price is asinine. I didn’t realize you HAD to have $250 shoes to be competitive.

Might as well ban deep carbon wheels. Integrated cockpits are out. Carbon frames are out. Speed suits with aero fabric - out. They all give advantages and not everyone can afford them, right?

I agree barrier of entry to triathlon is too high, but that has nothing to do with the Vaporfly. You can do a tri in swim trunks, $50 garage sale huffy, and Walmart running shoes and do just fine. And if you have a good engine can still beat the hell out of the tubby dentist who has a $10k bike and $300 shoes.

+1
not just that. I am thinking about the triathletes compiting in Tokyo that have a deal with other companies....If there is an "doubtful advantage" with those trainers...what is going to happen? will they change to nike just to compete in the same conditions and spit on their sponsors´ hands meanwhile? IMO, wrong decission. 3-4% of advantage in times or recovery means half a minute at least for the 10k (rough calculation)...in this case, there should be always better go on a conservative approach to take a decission. When the studies are finished and well- contrasted, then, go ahead...but Tokyo is just round the corner.

---

Spaniard. Sorry for my english for the sensitive ones :P

I think you misunderstand the process used. The working group that is working on the outcome is made up of academics, engineers and ethicists. If this is the outcome, it is one taken on balance by well-qualified individuals spread across multiple disciplines. Your criticisms are reasonable but are not as clearcut as you suggest them to be.




(Note: Nike have already 'won' from the exposure of this case alone. The shoes have sold out and are in high demand.)

And that is the allegation for banning the shoe in the first place. You just said it more straight forward than I did....thanks

Actual equipment you show up with on raceday is the least expensive part about this sport no matter what you roll in on! Time has a cost, and if we all took our training regimes and cut out 10 hours a week, replacing that with a modest $15/hr job we're talking about $7,800/year. If you assume an average of 12 hours training a week, 800 calories burned per hour, and multiply by 52 weeks a year, we burn around 500,000 extra calories just training. Even if you replaced all those calories with the super-cheap banana option, you're looking at a $650 yearly banana bill! And if you're really concerned about people being able to "buy" performance, you have to figure in the cost of a coach. Say $300/mo for a year, that's another $3600. Just from those three things you're looking at $12,050 and we still haven't covered the race entry fee, travel costs associated with your race, transportation to/from your swimming location, pool fees if you don't have a free lake/pond nearby, bike maintenance costs, shoes you train in and wear out, other misc training gear, doctors bills, etc.

This is an exercise I could probably continue on for a long long time, but the long and short of my point is, the cost just to show up to the start line of a triathlon and be anywhere closely approaching the point where a $250 shoe makes the difference so vastly outweighs the training costs that your raceday equipment is almost trivial.

Take your class warfare jealousy nonsense elsewhere. This is one of the most affordable upgrades in the sport in terms of dollars/time saved. If you are in favor of banning these shoes, you should also be in favor of banning aero helmets, wetsuits/swimskins, race wheels, aero tri suits and a host of other equipment. The companies that make this stuff have employees to pay and are not charities that give away their hard work for free. Moreover, other companies are already developing similar technologies and the price should come down and the shoes should be more widely available.

---

Strava

Class warfare.....jealousy nonsense!! No neither.
I would ban all those things though. I started racing way back. I’m not saying there was complete equality, but look at footage of races from the late eighties/early 90’s. Basic bikes, trunks/vests, basic running shoes. I would say the racing was just as, if not more exciting and competitive. You think two athletes of equal ability but one with all the bells and whistles are gonna cross the line together. Of course not. People are put off sport by the cost of competition and the cost of triathlon can be astronomical. My view would be to standardise frames, wheels, helmets, ban swim skins (necessary why exactly?), disc wheels etc, so that everyone has a fair chance. Just an opinion though.

I haven't been following any of this potential shoe ban stuff, but it seems you saying the alleged grounds for the ban were that these shoes contravene the first law of thermodynamics? I suspect either you or I may be mistaken?

Seriously, on this type of mentality, why not use Rollerblades? Not sure if they are legally banned either in usat at least

I think the rule says walk, run, or crawl only so I guess that excludes rolling? Open to interpretation i guess

---

808 > NYC > PDX > YVR
2024 Races: Taupo

This has always been my thought also. How is the different from carbon wheels? They are expensive and make you quite a bit faster but oh no, we can't have a better shoe?

I think he means that nike is the winner if this means the arms race is stopped while they are in the lead. They broke out a shoe so different and fast that instead of banning it, other companies are just banned from copying it.... 😁

I too follow on Joss1965's thinking. I be seen many great potential athletes shut out of the sport. Clicking off 15 min 5k's while ceo lawyer seeking glory for breaking the epic 20 min barrier

No, the initial allegation is that they allow performance above and beyond what a competition running shoe ought to. The mechanism around that performance and whether it ought to be a rules violation are much more complicated questions than "does it have a motor?", which is what you're reducing it to.

Nike is the winner regardless of outcome. You'll all be killing yourselves to buy a pair regardless now. It was a masterclass in marketing.

So the 15 min 5k athlete is shut out by the 20 min 5k CEO? How do you figure that?

Are you going to suggest we shut down Kona because it costs ~$10k to travel and race there, and some great athletes are shut out?

What is it about the marginal performance benefit of this particular $250 piece of equipment that has everyone up in arms?

---

Strava

I race in Mexico, all races have prize $. Some these kids race to put food on their table. You can't eat a $250 shoe