https://www.instagram.com/p/B7gqDbgHt-5/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link
Huge midsole. Looks even bigger than the Alphafly. Is Adidas finally getting in the game?
This is not just an answer to the Vapor Fly. This is the fear most had. Where will the brands stop and who has the “right†to actually put some limits on them. When Hoka One One came to the market they looked radically different than all other shoes. Today they look normal as all the brands have “answered†Hoka One One in their own way. Look at that picture, the Vapor Fly looks “normalâ€.
Saucony, Brooks, Hoka One One, Skechers and New Balance are out or will be out with answers to the Vapor Fly. They are now behind in development (they always have been and this was inevitable). Will the IAAF have an answer and what will that answer be?
Hoka already has 2 shoes out with a carbon plate. Sketchers has one too. Saucony is launching one in the spring. Sure, they’re behind in development, but there’s nothing stopping other companies from launching similar shoes with similar types of foam.
If you’re going to ban a particular shoe trait, do it on sporting merits - e.g. that the shoe-type makes it more about the shoe than the runner, etc.
What you don’t do is ban a particular shoe trait because Nike has a head start on everyone else, especially when anyone can walk into a store and buy a pair. Give it a year and every other shoe company will be marketing something along these lines. If you’re a pro and your sponsoring company does make the type of shoe you want, well, then you have decisions. We see this all the time in triathlon with slower bike brands sponsoring riders.
Perhaps all they need is to be a bit stronger enforcing the rule that the equipment needs to be commercially available to all. Kipchoge can get the 1st shoe off the production line, but it needs to be off the production line.
Not high enough. I will wait till 2025, so somebody comes up with this high.
It’s not that easy and it never is. Nike spends more on R&D than all others combined. For the most part their innovations are there’s for a couple of years then the industry adopts without all of the costs associated to the R&D. Flyknit is a perfect example. Nike set out to build a better upper cheaper. They got both. Now everyone has a knit upper. Pbax the foam used in the Vapor Fly is not exclusive. If the brand has the means they can use the foam. It’s a different molding process so it takes some up front investment. Carbon fiber plates have been around. All Nike did was build a better plate and in this case they have patents around it. This adidas shoe is different (adidas probably spends more on R&D than all of the remaining companies outside of Nike combined) When Kipchoge broke 2 hours in the Alpha Fly it was totally cool. The shoe was a what if project. To commercialize that shoe would be extremely difficult. Commercialize is not 3-5 sizes of bike frames. It’s making a size 7 fit and feel the exact same as a size 14 does. It’s not just the size of the foot it’s the entire structure of the runner. We don’t know what’s inside that adidas foam but just on the surface it looks closer to the Alpha Fly then the Vapor Fly. So let’s assume the IAAF does nothing. At the US Olympic trials, adidas runners will have that shoe on, Nike runners will now have the Alpha Fly on. Both Nike and adidas can afford to make shoes just for their athletes without ever commercializing it. Similar to Formula 1. Scott Fauble will have whatever Hoka is developing and Jared will have the Endorphin Pro on. Just knowing that who’s making the team?
geez, when the vaporfly first came out i thought they were weird looking… these however are just plain ugly!
they had better be fast!
That’s the thing, they actually are, and by inference from that, many people’s favorite shoe companies have been marketing to them utter bullshit products for years and years.
There’s like 5 good shoes right now based on the latest data, which is sad.
This is not just an answer to the Vapor Fly. This is the fear most had. Where will the brands stop and who has the “right†to actually put some limits on them. When Hoka One One came to the market they looked radically different than all other shoes. Today they look normal as all the brands have “answered†Hoka One One in their own way. Look at that picture, the Vapor Fly looks “normalâ€.
Saucony, Brooks, Hoka One One, Skechers and New Balance are out or will be out with answers to the Vapor Fly. They are now behind in development (they always have been and this was inevitable). Will the IAAF have an answer and what will that answer be?
I doubt any of the other brands you mentioned noticed the Hokas, let alone benchmarked them. The foam is key and there’s nothing about Hokas that make them feel fast. The only similarity is a tall stack.
I don’t know about Nikes looking “normal” but Hokas still look like snow boots because they are twice as wide. Sure it makes them more stable, but they still look like clowns shoes compared to the narrow/tall race shoes coming out
Both Nike and adidas can afford to make shoes just for their athletes without ever commercializing it. Similar to Formula 1.
To get the best out of the Nike shoes design, individual tailoring of the sole construction is absolutely essential moving forwards. If you really want to see performance enhancement of such shoes- widespread commercialisation isn’t going to be anywhere near as important as personalisation.
The foam is key because a lot of runners turned to Hokas for the cushioning. But don’t forget the rocker shape and that Nike poached a Hoka designer prior to some of their major new designs. Hoka deserves a lot of credit and thankfully they will remain a player providing products for triathletes and people with achy older knees.
This is the fear most had. Where will the brands stop and who has the “right†to actually put some limits on them.
Who is most??? And hopefully nobody will…except for physics.
There is a reason TT bikes all pretty much look the same. There is a reason all deeper carbon wheels look the same. Soon running shoes will be in the same boat…physics.
Physics will be the natural stop sign where you can’t get any faster because the human is the limiter. Running shoes have been lagging in this area for years and now they are arriving. Its strange that people either think this is some kind of detrimental arms race. It was going to happen and it will end because at the top end of innovation the amount of improvement vs physics is so cost prohibited that you only get tiny improvements, if any, at a huge cost. After that “Big Shoe” will have to resort to gimmicks like disc brakes on TT bikes.
That’s the thing, they actually are, and by inference from that, many people’s favorite shoe companies have been marketing to them utter bullshit products for years and years.
There’s like 5 good shoes right now based on the latest data, which is sad.
This^^^^ is spot on! What’s really sad is that people want these shoes regulated. Its shoe socialism. Make everyone use equally crappy shoes.
It’s not that easy and it never is. Nike spends more on R&D than all others combined. For the most part their innovations are there’s for a couple of years then the industry adopts without all of the costs associated to the R&D. Flyknit is a perfect example. Nike set out to build a better upper cheaper. They got both. Now everyone has a knit upper. Pbax the foam used in the Vapor Fly is not exclusive. If the brand has the means they can use the foam. It’s a different molding process so it takes some up front investment. Carbon fiber plates have been around. All Nike did was build a better plate and in this case they have patents around it. This adidas shoe is different (adidas probably spends more on R&D than all of the remaining companies outside of Nike combined) When Kipchoge broke 2 hours in the Alpha Fly it was totally cool. The shoe was a what if project. To commercialize that shoe would be extremely difficult. Commercialize is not 3-5 sizes of bike frames. It’s making a size 7 fit and feel the exact same as a size 14 does. It’s not just the size of the foot it’s the entire structure of the runner. We don’t know what’s inside that adidas foam but just on the surface it looks closer to the Alpha Fly then the Vapor Fly. So let’s assume the IAAF does nothing. At the US Olympic trials, adidas runners will have that shoe on, Nike runners will now have the Alpha Fly on. Both Nike and adidas can afford to make shoes just for their athletes without ever commercializing it. Similar to Formula 1. Scott Fauble will have whatever Hoka is developing and Jared will have the Endorphin Pro on. Just knowing that who’s making the team?
I assume that the answer to your question is - whomever has the fast shoes?
My point is that even if it does come down to fast shoes, comparative advantage (on its own) isn’t enough to ban the shoes. Just because one shoe is faster than another and it gives some athletes an advantage, doesn’t mean you ban the fast shoe. You ban the shoe (fast or slow) based on external benchmarks for equipment - energy return, shape, weight, whatever the appropriate & enforceable metric is/should be… (*if *you’re going to ban the shoe, that is)
Now, if you’re an athlete sponsored by a slower-shoe company, then you have two choices.
1 - wait until you shoe company comes out with a fast shoe, or 2 - switch sponsors.
We see this all the time in Cycling and in Triathlon. Heck, Rohan Dennis was rumoured to have walked away from a $1M/yr contract because of equipment problems.
It’s not that easy and it never is. Nike spends more on R&D than all others combined. For the most part their innovations are there’s for a couple of years then the industry adopts without all of the costs associated to the R&D. Flyknit is a perfect example. Nike set out to build a better upper cheaper. They got both. Now everyone has a knit upper. Pbax the foam used in the Vapor Fly is not exclusive. If the brand has the means they can use the foam. It’s a different molding process so it takes some up front investment. Carbon fiber plates have been around. All Nike did was build a better plate and in this case they have patents around it. This adidas shoe is different (adidas probably spends more on R&D than all of the remaining companies outside of Nike combined) When Kipchoge broke 2 hours in the Alpha Fly it was totally cool. The shoe was a what if project. To commercialize that shoe would be extremely difficult. Commercialize is not 3-5 sizes of bike frames. It’s making a size 7 fit and feel the exact same as a size 14 does. It’s not just the size of the foot it’s the entire structure of the runner. We don’t know what’s inside that adidas foam but just on the surface it looks closer to the Alpha Fly then the Vapor Fly. So let’s assume the IAAF does nothing. At the US Olympic trials, adidas runners will have that shoe on, Nike runners will now have the Alpha Fly on. Both Nike and adidas can afford to make shoes just for their athletes without ever commercializing it. Similar to Formula 1. Scott Fauble will have whatever Hoka is developing and Jared will have the Endorphin Pro on. Just knowing that who’s making the team?
Flyknit, the worst upper on the face of the planet. Vaporweave has been better, the additional structure in the platform was nice. But on the ZoomFly and 4%…if you’re a pronator at all, then stay away, very far away from those shoes.
Will the IAAF have an answer and what will that answer be?
the problem is the IAAF will aim at Nike and hit HOKA. there’s already been a lot of noise about max shoe height of 31mm, which grandfathers nike’s shoes but outlaws all the HOKAs that have been around for 10 years.
Will the IAAF have an answer and what will that answer be?
the problem is the IAAF will aim at Nike and hit HOKA. there’s already been a lot of noise about max shoe height of 31mm, which grandfathers nike’s shoes but outlaws all the HOKAs that have been around for 10 years.
Thanks for confirming, I have been wondering about that with these potential stack limits. At least Hoka has enough influence in triathlon to keep any potential IAAF restrictions out of triathlon.
At the US Olympic trials, adidas runners will have that shoe on, Nike runners will now have the Alpha Fly on. Both Nike and adidas can afford to make shoes just for their athletes without ever commercializing it. Similar to Formula 1. Scott Fauble will have whatever Hoka is developing and Jared will have the Endorphin Pro on. Just knowing that who’s making the team?
Now I may not know much about the men’s US field but I still would put my money on Scott & Jared with Galen IF he is able to run, if not then Brogan (who wears Nike but is not sponsored, so no alphafly). The top of the men’s field in the US is quite thin. Maybe it will have more impact in the women’s race?
Pbax the foam used in the Vapor Fly is not exclusive. If the brand has the means they can use the foam. It’s a different molding process so it takes some up front investment. Carbon fiber plates have been around. All Nike did was build a better plate and in this case they have patents around it.
The company that is producing for Nike does have an exclusive. And, their process is a bit unique, which make the foam properties a bit different from a tradition PEBA. I’m not sure if this is the “molding” that you are talking about above. Regardless, to achieve this, we’re talking millions of dollars to create a facility to manufacture the foam. Add to that the knowledge of how to do it, IP, etc. It’s a pretty tall task and one that Nike is not doing on their own, nor are any other Brands.
Will the IAAF have an answer and what will that answer be?
the problem is the IAAF will aim at Nike and hit HOKA. there’s already been a lot of noise about max shoe height of 31mm, which grandfathers nike’s shoes but outlaws all the HOKAs that have been around for 10 years.
Thanks for confirming, I have been wondering about that with these potential stack limits. At least Hoka has enough influence in triathlon to keep any potential IAAF restrictions out of triathlon.
At the US Olympic trials, adidas runners will have that shoe on, Nike runners will now have the Alpha Fly on. Both Nike and adidas can afford to make shoes just for their athletes without ever commercializing it. Similar to Formula 1. Scott Fauble will have whatever Hoka is developing and Jared will have the Endorphin Pro on. Just knowing that who’s making the team?
Now I may not know much about the men’s US field but I still would put my money on Scott & Jared with Galen IF he is able to run, if not then Brogan (who wears Nike but is not sponsored, so no alphafly). The top of the men’s field in the US is quite thin. Maybe it will have more impact in the women’s race?
as you may guess, some of us are discussing this right now. it’s your industry advocacy group at work 
i would not assume the safety in size that you do. the default posture of the ITU is to follow the individual sports. they don’t always, but, when they don’t it’s because they’re shown the unique nature of triathlon and its need to deviate from single-sport rules. don’t underestimate the capacity for the IAAF to wreak havoc on triathlon, if the ITU blanket adopts the IAAF’s technical rules on shoes.
Will the IAAF have an answer and what will that answer be?
the problem is the IAAF will aim at Nike and hit HOKA. there’s already been a lot of noise about max shoe height of 31mm, which grandfathers nike’s shoes but outlaws all the HOKAs that have been around for 10 years.
Which proves just how ridiculous an arbitrary criterion like stack height is, as there is zero evidence that Hoka shoes provide anywhere near the performance benefit of the Vaporfly despite their height.
I’m not suggesting the shoes are faster and by that the runners wearing the adidas or the Alpha Fly are the contenders and everyone else should bow out. I’m only saying it opens the sport up to that kind of question. Whatever the IAAF decides will have an impact.
Triathletes - Sponsors - Bikes, Clothing, Wetsuits, Running, Sunglasses, Nutrition, and more. drop one and it hurts but if you think you’ll be faster then maybe it’s worth it in bonuses from all of the other sponsors.
Cycling - If you are really good you can be a total d%&K and you’ll get picked up by another team.
Running - One piece of equipment. For most it’s the only source of income that includes salary and bonus. Scott Fauble joined NAZ Elite - in his first year he made no salary and wanted to prove himself worthy of a contract. He did that then NAZ and Hoka One One brought him on. There is a loyalty built in running between brands and athletes. Athletes are celebrated at the offices and some of them build brands. If you’ve ever had the opportunity to visit the Nike campus you would walk away with one thing Pre is right up there with Jordan, Mia Hamm and Tiger Woods. A runner! Go to adidas to the museum in Central Germany. There you can hold the spikes Jesse Owens wore. There you can hold the adizero adios Haile wore to smash the marathon world record. Right next to the cleats Beckenbauer wore. A rep for Hoka One One told me that they will have a new shoe on the feet of runners at the Marathon Trials. You can bet that shoe has been developed around one athlete. The same guy who took a no salary contract.