So make everyone use equally cheap crappy shoes?

Sports socialism at its best.

Fine, then let the local Mexican race organizers ban the shoes if they feel like it is affecting the integrity or spirit of their races. I'm sure they want fast people to show up so it's a win-win.

Also, let the CEO buy his $250 pair of shoes and break 20 minutes in a local 5k.

Mind you, all new expensive technologies (consumer goods, at least) come down in price as competition enters the market. These shoes will be priced closer to other racing shoes in a few years.

---

Strava

“Make everyone wear cheap crappy shoes?” Is that what I said? No read what I said in the first place about why the shoe should have been banned.
As for socialism, Wtf has that got to do with having a level playing field in sport. It’s not just the shoes, it’s all the other stuff people have mentioned on here? I guess the ‘wealthy’ might be a wee bit worried they could no longer buy success so easily.

You call 4% marginal🤣

You call 4% marginal🤣 //

Of course, 4% is just the name of the shoe. You don't really think the pro runners are actually getting 4% time savings with them, do you??


And perhaps I misunderstood what is happening here, aren't other companies allowed to take their technology up to the point that Nike did? I dont believe any one shoe company has a full on monopoly on the foam they used, so what is the real problem here in fairness??

Their is no monopoly on the material. It's a short term problem for Nike's competitors. The issue though is we have the Olympics in just over 6 months time.

The issue though is we have the Olympics in just over 6 months time. //

Well Asics seemed to be able to whip out a pair for Frodo pretty quickly, so not sure what the problem is really? These companies can probably make a prototype in a week if they want, I would guess that most already have..

That shoe for Frodo had been in development for nearly 2 years. I held prototype pairs in my hands 8 months before Kona '19.

Most every major brand will have a carbon plated, "special" foam racer available to the general public before the Games this summer. Some may be better/faster then others but at the end of the day it will come down to the athlete, just like it always does

---

Boots
Fleet Feet Rochester, NY
Fleet Feet Buffalo, NY
YellowJacket Racing, Rochester, NY

Most every major brand will have a carbon plated, "special" foam racer available to the general public before the Games this summer. Some may be better/faster then others but at the end of the day it will come down to the athlete, just like it always does//

Well that was my main point, so I dont understand all the fuss here from people thinking everyone will have to wear Nike's to be competitive. They did not freeze every company in their tracks, they froze Nike, and everyone else can make a catch up shoe...

I know WTA have said that should the IAAF ban them, they would follow suit, but it seems everyone is forgetting that IAAF is athletics, and in running, shoes is the "only" equipment capable of providing gains. So the argument about carbon wheels etc, although true in the advantage they provide, is only 1 of many pieces of kit, unlike athletics.

Regardless, the number of companies with carbon plate in their shoes renders the whole argument of Nike having an advantage moot. Yes they were the first 'mainstream' shoe to the market, no doubt there were many before hand. There has been articles about Hoka starting to develop these years before, until Nike poached the head of development and then beat them to market. Either way, there is always going to be competition among shoe companies, just as there is among athletes. Competition is healthy, it drives us all to succeed

I'm sorry, but this is a ridiculous argument. Extending your logic, we cannot ride bicycles anymore because I am sure there is a significant proportion of the global population that cannot afford a bicycle let alone a superbike. What about the high quality breakfast I eat on race day? I'm sure many could not afford that either; we had better ban that too.

I'd love to hear the rationale behind whatever price point you establish that makes it "fair" and "back to basics." Is it $100? $125? $50? And why that price and not any other?

I get that you are concerned about the rising cost of competing in sports, but I do not get why you feel it's your prerogative to set the appropriate cost at a price point you feel comfortable with. No one is stopping you from running in a pair of $5 flip flops. In fact, I have a friend who runs a 2:40 marathon in flip flops...faster than me in 4%. You could explore this option if cost is a barrier as it is VERY true that sport is for everyone!

In addition, there are plenty of reasons to wear vaporfly beyond speed. As many have noted on forums around the world, these shoes are simply more comfortable for many than any other shoe they have tried. I feel far less beat up by a hard run in my 4% shoes than I did on the marathon flats of days gone by. We should not be banning innovation that makes running more comfortable/enjoyable.

Science and engineering happens; progress ensues. Change. Adapt.

If you factor in the cost of inflation, $250 for a top performance shoe with a huge lead in the market is not that out of line with similar innovations in the past. Better still, the very force you decry, the market, has already encouraged the development of competitors that will both increase innovation and compete on price too. Win win win.

Regulating innovation at a pro elite level-sure that perhaps makes sense, just as the IAAF has done in other sports. Denying someone a comfortable shoe of their own preference because you feel it costs too much? That does not make any sense.

Jared Ward performed studies that did validate that. You can also look at race times of many people before and after the shoe.

How absurd is it? I saw someone who struggles to crack 19:00 yet did a 1:19 half marathon when putting on the shoes... wtf


As for those who keep bring up the damn super bike argument, drop it. Compare to the real athletes, ITU WTS athletes, where all their bikes are pretty much the same

Are you sure you don’t work for Nike? 😂

I’m a low-19 PR. If I could drop from a 1:30:00.7 PR to a 1:18 by spending the equivalent of 2-3 pairs of shoes, sounds like an easy call! Hell, even for a 1:25.

---

Aaron Bales
Lansing Triathlon Team

But some trials are taking place now. Other brands aren't able to respond fast enough and Nike already has a head start and is a generation or two ahead.

Have you even run in the shoes? I'm calling BS on that claim...

1) Any gains of the shoe will vary based upon their mass, step rate and subsequent running velocity. As a result, many recreational runners may not see the same gains as the elites as the shoes probably have not had their design tailored with that in mind.

2) Why not ? From a philosophical point of view, the principles are exactly the same (or at the very least should be debated).

3) The impact of technology will vary from sport to sport. You only cherrypicked one there. That doesn't mean that running should follow suit or attempt to match that one sport in principle. Besides, different sports have different constraints and the reason WTS probably sees a more neglible difference in bicycle technology is due to the allowance of drafting. This doesn't have to mean that running shoes should have a neglible contribution, just that its role should be debated.

People are not asking the most important question and the one that has to come first in these debates:

"Should shoe development be fundamentally part of the sport of running or not ?".

The answer to that will then suggest what limitations are required, if any, and how much.

The difference between the anti-disc brake zealots and the anti-Vaporfly zealots, is that occasionally the anti-disc brake folks would make a good point.

it's possible to hold two or more ideas in your head at the same time objectively... like, admit the Nike shoes give a huge advantage and are affecting record time progressions and will affect 2020 Olympics events, and regret that as a sports fan, but also think they are good, nay great shoes and use them. You can also like/love disc brakes and also acknowledge that they're an additional expense and don't make sense in some use cases and are pretty much mandatory in other use cases.

---

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”

isn't it more likely that the shoes are a beard?

---

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”

I'm curious how this will work, as NB, Saucony, Skechers and Brooks all have "Vaporfly similar" shoes coming out soon. Hoka is supposedly working on a new one as well. Will this mean all of these products are banned until after Tokyo, thus a major win for Nike.. or will they not be considered new tech, so it won't matter.

Or will nothing change at all, since this is primarily an issue online, and in real life no one actually pays attention or cares.

  

https://worldathletics.org/...modified-rules-shoes

• Prototypes are fine until April 30, 2020 (conveniently until right after the London Marathon)
• After April 30, a shoe must be on sale publicly for four months before it can be used in competition
• Effective immediately: Stack height limit of 40mm, only one plate can be use. It's a little more detailed in the article, but that's the essential.

Not a huge deal. It gives other companies a heads up that they can't use prototypes after 4/30. Also, it means Saucony and all the others have to start selling whatever shoe they want in the 2020 Olympics by April 9th.

Surely Nike got plenty of good press out of this, but I can't say the ruling was really in their favor. Their new shoe that Kipchoge used in the INEOS159 challenge looks to be banned from competition use. Although I don't know if Nike intended it to ever be used in competition.

Do I get it right? No Alphaflys nor rumoured zoom x spikes in Tokyo?

---

Instagram
Youtube Channel
Meta Endurance

No Alphaflys. Honestly, I didn't pay too much attention to the parts about spikes.

What’s the AlphaFly stack height btw? In any event it falls in the « two plates » category but I am curious by how much they’d have to reduce the sole to be within the limit

---

Instagram
Youtube Channel
Meta Endurance

Correct: VF 4% & Next% can be used, Alphafly can not.

The Nike prototype spike used by Nike athletes @ 2019 worlds is banned

Utilizing prototypes for elites before bringing them to market is no longer permitted

Deadline for shoe brands to release their Tokyo shoe is April: Tick Tock!!

---

Toro Performance