Now why would you want all that??? So a person could cut through all the marketing BS and finally figure out what shoe is the best for them? You are asking way too much

I have no clue how the Alphafly stacks up but the Vaporfly beats the Hoka's in that department easily.

AlphaFly Next% that was announced has one plate. The prototype had three and a double layer air pocket.

---

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.

I love the shoes, but really hate Nike at times and this is just one reason.

Gosh I wonder why the stack height limit is 40mm I’m sure it has jackshit all to do with the new Nike shoes being 39.5mm /pink

Hello

i think you mix 2 different comparaison :

1) "VF4%" vs "Old racing flats" :
this was done in lab, and yes the VF (or Next) are 3 to 4% better than Streak or Adizero :
https://link.springer.com/...07/s40279-017-0811-2

The Strava study "confirm" this (for me it confirm nothing, it is a bullshit study finding the same result as a real study).

2) VF/Next vs Alphafly vs Endorphin Pro vs NB Racer RC vs.....
this is a comparison between "new generations" shoes, all having high stack, similar foam (Endorphin also use PEBA), carbon plates, and similar geometry,
Probably done in lab, at least partially, but not published.
This study cannot be done by Strava now because.... these shoes are not used yet.... (and I am convinced this STrava study was bullshit)

So...

...like it or not, we have absolutely no info to prove the Alphafly is better than the Next, or any other shoe from the new generation (again, not the old shit).

But if you and some other peoples are convinced (from the hand of god, probably), maybe we shall rename this new Nike shoe as :

PLACEBO 0,5%

Placebo is also working for shoes.

For those that think these shoes are cheating or your R doesn't count. Then I will expect you to take your aero wheels off, your power meter and maybe even your aerobars

I mean we don't want any technology to make you faster.





.

---

Yellowfin Endurance Coaching and Bike Fits
USAT Level 1, USAC Level 3

Completely. The difference between someone spending 5 digits for optimized chains, bike fit, skin tight clothing, custom aerobars etc makes more difference compared to a stock P2, for instance, than the Nike shoe to another race flat. I optimize my bike as my budget allows (P2 for the record) and I think it's fast, and I love it. But I know it's not the fastest - I just do my best and train the best I can and in the end, I haven't looked at someone who beat me and thought...they had a better bike/shoe/wetsuit or I would have beat them.

If you are psyched out by someone else wearing a shoe, you probably aren't ready for your best performance anyways! Spend $250 on a sports psych ;)

---

DFRU - Detta Family Racing Unit...the kids like it and we all get out and after it...gotta keep the fam involved!

Not to defend Nike but don't all companies try to do this? I am thinking especially in the Bike world, where UCI's silly restrictions limit innovation. The same could be said about these super bikes that come in at 6.9kg. If high foam is the answer for all shoe companies then it would make sens for all of them to toe the line if it means competing or beating the VF.

---

808 > NYC > PDX > YVR
2024 Races: Taupo

We get your point, nothing to show about shoes that haven't yet come out, the point were making is that for all the shoes that have come out, Vaporfly has proven to be better, so if Nike continues to improve upon that while all other shoe companies are releasing their answers to the 4%, they're already two models behind and will likely continue to be behind.

As for the strava study, one view alone would be difficult to believe but the fact of the matter is that they did 4 different views of the shoe and all 4 view proved to show VF above all else. Sure the data can be faulty at times given it is self-reported but it is a massive amount of data so the errors mostly even out. Do you hate the study just because you hate Nike? It sounds like a bit of bias to me. Not that I blame anyone for hating Nike but this study was done by NYT

---

808 > NYC > PDX > YVR
2024 Races: Taupo

He hates the study cos the 4% didn’t work for him. Not stable enough or something. So he is trying to justify in his own mind that he is not at a disadvantage by not using 4%s.

Personally I had really sore calves first few times I used 4%s but now that I’m using them in most of my hard runs I no longer have that issue.

Not sure who "we" is ?

Yes, old shoes are old shoes.

No, "VF better than Streak" does not prove "Alphafly better than... Endorphin Pro".

No evidence is ... no evidence. Look at Trump trial. OK, wrong exemple :-)

I do not hate Nike.
When the study came in 2016, I read it, and understand it. I'm convinced the 4% is better than old racing flats.
I bought a VF4%. Not working for me. Too unstable. Dangerous in fact. Fair enough, stability is important.

I hate bullshit, and fanatism, and idolatry.

I'm eager to see real studies comparing the shoes.

If the Aplphafly is the best, I might buy a pair.
But I have no clear info yet about :
1) its compared performance vs other "new gen shoes" ?
2) is it stable enough ?
3) and fair priced for the value ?

All mental constructions pushing this product vs others based on "previous product was better, so this one is also" is ,,,, vain

Obama was a good president, the following will be better..... eeerrr..... no

What is the cause of your inherent lack of stability?
Could you have the best of both worlds (stability and fast shoes) if you dealt with the instability in a different manner?
Many try to solve a "top-down" problem, with a "bottom-up" solution. For example, knee valgus may be corrected (depending on the etiology) by both increased "stability" at the foot or increased stability at the hip.

---

I talk a lot - Give it a listen: http://www.fasttalklabs.com/category/fast-talk
I also give Training Advice via http://www.ForeverEndurance.com

The above poster has eschewed traditional employment and is currently undertaking the ill-conceived task of launching his own hardgoods company. Statements are not made on behalf of nor reflective of anything in any manner... unless they're good, then they count.
http://www.AGNCYINNOVATION.com

"4% didn’t work for him. Not stable enough"
----------------------------------------------------------
Interesting many extrapolate that to the Next % which are VERY stable, for me. It fact the Next % are the 1st running shoes I've worn that I haven't needed orthotics or some other arch support in over 20 years. AND, as least right now the Pebax form is without peer. If the Alpha fly is as or more stable than the Next % I will nudge as far up in line as I can get.

---

David
* Ironman for Life! (Blog) * IM Everyday Hero Video * Daggett Shuler Law *
Disclaimer: I have personal and professional relationships with many athletes, vendors, and organizations in the triathlon world.

I’d be interested to hear that. I only ran on the 4% a couple times before my knee really gave out again. But those times were less than 10 months out from a left hip labrum repair, my PCL and LCL in my right knee were torn at the time and I have a right hip labral tear I’m getting fixed next month.

There was no time running on them that I thought I they were unstable. It’s never even crossed my mind, and I had more issues than I knew what to do with at that time haha.

You’re looking at it a different way. I have no problem with companies bumping up to the absolute limits of the rule.

However, Nike had this shoe prior to the ruling, it was only last Friday. They didn’t adjust the stack height and make an announcement in 6 day’s and beable to have a production ready shoe by end of the month.

It makes me feel like the rule was made with no thought about why they were making the stack height limit at 40mm, beyond Nike being pissed if it was lower because they’d need to redesign their shoe. So they said fine we’ll include your shoe, put the limit at 40 and we’re good. Otherwise why isn’t the limit 35 or 45.

Personally I think a limit is stupid anyways, but was hoping if there was a limit there would be science involved. This reeks of the science being Nike having a shoe already in production that they didn’t want to scrap.

Ok, Fulla was right, your thoughts should be in the CLALBH thread. You won't find these new answers to the VF to be much more stable so you won't be able to run in those either. You want stable, try the infinity react. Until then, stop hating because you are part of a minority that can't/won't use them. The VF is better than all shoes released before 2019 whether you like it or not. We tend to think the alphafly will be better because why would Nike release an update that is worse? OK it's happened before, but it's likely better.

---

808 > NYC > PDX > YVR
2024 Races: Taupo

Good point, I tend to think that Nike may have had a hand in $etting the$e $tack re$triction$

---

808 > NYC > PDX > YVR
2024 Races: Taupo

I have no inherent lack of stability.
I can run in pretty much all shoes. Except VF, until now.

The inherent lack of stability of the VF4% is due to the shape of its midsole. It is a well known issue.

But who care. The VF and the Next are dead now. Nobody will buy them now.

I do not hate the Strava study.
I have done scientific studies, and regularly read and review scientific thesis.
The Strava study does not appear to me as "serious". Not serious basis. That is it.

I know the VF4% is 2 or 3 or 4% better than a race flat. Because there is serious studies proving it (not the Strava one).

The VF4% was not good to me. Nothing personal. I still recognize Nike effort to develop a very interesting direction, with high cushion and the carbon plate. Too bad they made it so unstable.

I'm happy other shoes from several brand follow the same direction.
Because I will find a good stable shoe for me, efficient and confortable :-)

What I say now is : there is absolutely no evidence the Alphafly is better than the Saucony Pro, or similar shoes following the same geometry / principles.

If a reasonable statement is "hate" to your eyes, what can I say ?

Meh, not for me

BUT ... I came up with a great tag line

"For people who AREN'T afraid of heights" and pic of the top of a podium

---

"What's your claim?" - Ben Gravy
"Your best work is the work you're excited about" - Rick Rubin

The VF is inherently unstable. It is a proven fact.

The Next is better, but still perfectible.

I'm pretty sure that, from the many models coming to the market with similar principles, I will find one stable enough for me, with a similar level of performance.

I'm not trying to convince you (the "we" group) because, when you say "stop hating" when I only use logic and facts, I suspect you project your own hate.
I answer because facts need to be exposed :-)

Yes, the VF is more efficient than shoes issued BEFORE now.
But FROM now (or a few weeks from now), the performance gap is most probably closed by several other brand models.

You think no, I think yes. Future will tell.
But now the maximum stack height is 40mm, and everybody can use same materials and geometry... guess what will happen ?

Nike HAD an advantage with the VF/Next, yes.
It is still to be proven they still have it.

This is a hard fact.

Don't hate me for stating hard facts.

This is not true. Everyone is different, so some people will still stick to previous models.
Hoka Clifton 1 is a good example. I still see some people buy re-released model and race.
I don't like newer Cliftons. They are not as cushy and comfortable as old ones.
Newer models are not necessarily better and faster for everyone.

You are right

Maybe the Alphafly is built for Olympians, and will not be usable by most peoples here. In this case the VF/Next users will stick with these older models. Or go to other brands equivalent models.

These are not facts.

---

808 > NYC > PDX > YVR
2024 Races: Taupo

How many times did you try to/actually run in the 4%? When I first began to use them I got really sore in my calves/achilles and it also felt really 'unstable' in my lower legs, but the more I used them, the better that got and I no longer get any soreness there when I used them. Same thing happened for me with the Pegasus Turbos initially, but I adjusted.