Listening to Joel Filliol (he coaches the best ITU triathletes in the world and his own athletes use the Nike shoes) spoke on the topic of the shoes in the last 10 days, he basically parahrase that it leads to not being able to compare records any longer. Essentially it's changing the sport's times.

He didnt say they should be banned or that it's "wrong" to use them, just that essentially it's changing the goal posts for how you view the times.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

I followed some athletes prepping for challenge Daytona, with their egos bloated seeing faster numbers in training... Only to be disappointed race day. What they missed is that every others pros times are improving too.

A few seconds difference kind of matters............but wait until dudes race as women.....it will be minutes difference no matter the shoes.

The point being there are a lot of other larger problems. Shoes are small issues.

There's been plenty of feedback about the tech changing the meaning of times in Athletics.

Unfortunately Seb and the other corrupt shower only care about money so couldn't give a toss. But I suppose if you've always taken Nikes money then why would you stop and put rules in place that benefit athletes

Its a real shame for athletes watching record's fall when they know that their times are faster in the same shoe. The egos of the current athletes are awful too giving out that we know its the shoes

Why couldn't they have left it at steroids and EPO.

Tech always changes...

Spikes on track shoes... 1850
Rubberized tracks instead of cinder... 1950s
Now carbon advancements in shoe tech...
And that's on the track.

Look at bikes. Been one or two changes over the years I think.

Just having affordable watches where you can check your pace and HR improves your performance.

What kind of tech do you, personally, used today that you didn't use ten, fifteen or twenty years ago? Even if you're not a podium person, do you count your PR today above your PR twenty years ago? I do...

Do you want to go back to the "good ole' days?" I don't... I remember pole vaulting on steel poles and moving to fiberglass - Granted, our HS was late to the party, but I was happy when this happened.

As long as they're checking on the doping, advances in the gear is fine by me and welcome and does not diminish the value of the performance to me.

---

Not a coach. Not a FOP Tri/swimmer/biker/runner. Barely a MOP AGer.
But I'm learning and making progress.

What happens if the technology is the old illegal “doping”?

Look if the sport says it’s legal, it’s legal. But if sport orgs are basically legalizing it cus they too are getting their pockets filled with money from said company, is that good?

And no I’m not saying go back to cave man training. I’m saying if all this technology is making all these new records, that has to mean something right?

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

But maybe caveman style racing should take over.. you have a 5k race, and only will find out course at start of race. Could be road.. track.. or high tide beach sand. That definitely will determine who is the best all around runner.

But at the moment there isn't much testing going on in many countries.
The problem with shoes is that not everyone can wear them. Many athletes are legally contracted to other brands and now seeing times from other athletes becoming so much faster and there is nothing they can do about it. Some contracts are pretty tight, $$ for court cases and compensation would be required to even try to break them. It needs to stop now.

Nah I think they and we just need to acknowledge the impact the shoes are having. Again, if they are legal, cool, but stop pretending the shoes are having an impact.

Acknowledge that it's having a huge impact on the records and times in the sport and that it's simply changing the landscape. If we found similiar advantages by "doping" we'd be all up in arms....but because they are allowed we just shrug.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

It may also change who the top athletes are, as some folks' running style may benefit more than others. I doubt that a shuffle runner like Lionel and a forefoot runner like Alastair both get the same % improvement from the new supershoes. Kinda like how wetsuits make everyone faster, but FOP swimmers benefit less.

---

ECMGN Therapy Silicon Valley:
Depression, Neurocognitive problems, Dementias (Testing and Evaluation), Trauma and PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

Jarmila Kratochvílová 800 meter record from the 1980s is still standing ...

I dont think you want to go down that road to somehow prove a point....

Men records that have fallen since the "shoes":
-5k track
-5k road
-10k track
-10k road
-13.1
-26.2

Women records that have fallen since the "shoes":
-5k track
-5k road
-13.1
-26.2

From a quick wiki search (I applied 2018 and beyond as the shoe era; since the 1st sub 2 attempt)

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

It doesn't mean anything. Records fall everyday.....BFD.

Not at the rate that they are currently happening. Records are meant to be broken, but if you guys dont think the shoes are making a difference, your head is so far in the sand you can't see the obvious.

Look at the number of PR's that are occurring across all of athletics. Your trolling now...carry on.

There's a reason why the shoe industry is going to the design it's currently going with all it's distance shoes. It means A LOT.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Look at the 3 Oregon kids go 3:50, 3:50, 3:53 indoors in a team meet and Ben True set his 10K PB by 0:26 at age 35 and tell me the new track shoes aren't shifting the line. Whether that's a problem to be regulated or not is a debate for others, just like with the swimming speed suits, but it cannot be denied that the shoes are impacting the times.

There is no debate whether such technology is performance enhancing. It is, the research supports that it is and so do the performances. The only debate is whether they should be used and the approach to any regulations if they are.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7246269/

Records ae falling. So what's the problem? They fell with every tech advancement and will continue to do so. If we stop comparing current records to pre-4%, that's fine. Just as we don't compare to pre rubberized track times to today.

None of this is a problem. You're just drawing an arbitrary line, which is ok. But it's nothing more.

Even the argument that "not everyone can get the 4%" doesn't hold. Not all athletes have access to a masseuse, dieticians, recovery tools, or even rubberized tracks. Where you chose to draw the line is arbitrary.

I didn't say there is a problem. I said simply get your head out of your ass pretending like they aren't this huge aid in distance running.

eta: that's the whole point of the op's article. And so if a governing body is allowing a shoe because they also are getting their pockets filled with money by said shoe company, there's going to be some funny business going on with what is allowed and isnt allowed.

I have no problem with the shoes, I have simply said they are going to change how you view running records. I'm not drawing any fucking lines.....I'm actually calling bullshit on everyone who's acting like these shoes aren't changing the running scene. That's intellectual dishonesty imo, if your saying nothing to see here. That's the problem I'm calling out.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

I said something similar when the Alphafly magically fell under the height limit and essentially was the height limit.

It’s to hard to not believe money was getting exchanged under the table.

I agree.....but are old records important? If so run bare foot. If not keep innovating and stop reminiscing about old records, in my humble opinion.

I think it’s how you get the record that is important. That’s the whole point of how much “benefit” a rule allows.


Why did swimming take out the speed suits that suddenly caused every record to be broken? Shouldn’t they have allowed then with your logic and not banned them ?

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

I'm not sure I agree that it's a shame.

I say, it's about time, actually. The fact that running shoes have lacked carbon has driven me mad for a long time.

So much so that in 2011 during my MS in Exercise Science I developed a series of carbon sprint spike plates of varying thicknesses and stiffness in a joint project with an undergrad kid in materials science.

I taped my feet to them.

The plates were smooth as glass on the bottom. No traction whatsoever. Traction matters less when not accelerating during sprinting, so....

I ran flying 20's. (ie... take 50m to slowly build to top speed just before the first timing eye and then hold top speed through the second timing gate)

I was faster by close to 2-3% than in the best Nikes or Adidas sprint spikes at the time. Again, without spikes or traction...

The next development of these shoes will be increased forefoot thickness and increased stiffness from heel to toe rather than just a midfoot plate, similar to a cycling shoe, allowing greater energy return using elastic (non-energetic) components of human tissue.. (ie. achilles and foot tendons/ligamtents)

The result: faster times yet. And more stress fractures. ;)

Ankle and foot stiffness is a remarkable limiter (or gifting of performance to a "talented" few) which prevents wide swaths of incredible athletes from reaching quite as high of top speeds or efficiency in running compared to those with stiffer more responsive feet, toes, and ankles. There is nothing a person can do to enhance these characteristics to the extent that genetics can vary them. Hence statements like "you can't teach speed" exist. Obviously not true on the whole, but has some truthful underpinnings. Carbon levels the playing field a bit.

I see the carbon shoe movement as the best thing that has happened for running racing in a long time. I hope it accelerates. IMO, there is no reason that running athletes shouldn't get to wear carbon on their feet too.

---

Dr. Alex Harrison | Founder & CEO | Sport Physiology & Performance PhD
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
📱 Check out our app → Saturday: Pro Fuel & Hydration, a performance nutrition coach in your pocket.
Join us on YouTube → Saturday Morning | Ride & Run Faster and our growing Saturday User Hub

It took 8-9 years to ban them properly in the end. You then ended up in the worst case scenario of records standing that had been obtained using the suits which athletes then had to overcome without them.

An arbitrary line had to be set. Based upon they were the only shoe up for discussion at that point, the choice was to set a lower threshold and ban the Nike's outright or say "this line and no further". They went with the latter.