With the rules now stating that a 40mm sole is banned, does this make most of Hoka One illegal?
Thank you. I am a little confused on the list. If a particular Hoka is not listed (the Stintson) should one assume that it is banned? Should use the list as those are the approved Hoka’s?
So why is WTC cracking down on shoes? Who does it benefit and how does it help the sport? I know the new shoes are expensive, but it’s not like we are talking about $20K bikes and $4K race wheels. A few hundred dollars for a pair of running shoes. I mean some folks spend more than that on bike helmets and bike shoes.
Personally, I find it another (annoying) thing to worry about since my Brooks Glycerins are not on the white list. Yes I can reach out to Brooks and get confirmation my shoes are under 40mm but just another pain-in-the-ass thing I now have to worry about if I decide to race in them again. For AGers this new rule seems more of a nuisance. And why not go after some of the $20K bikes instead of shoes if it’s about making equipment accessible for everyone? What am I missing here?? Why is WTC going after running shoes??
Agreed. It seems odd that I can’t wear a pair a max cushion running shoes (without a carbon plate) to aid my arthritis riddled feet, but bikes and wet suits, where there are real tangible advantages have not been discussed. I wonder how many age groupers will be disqualified because of this. Should do wonders to increase the sports popularity.
It’s because it is a unified rulebook with World Triathlon, who takes the source from World Athletics.
Again, it’s because we emphasize rule making on the elite end of the sport versus the participatory side of the sport.
The World Athletics approval list is going to be far more concerned about true “racing” shoes for 10,000 meters on up as opposed to training shoes, which your Glycerins are. That said, Glycerins sit well below the 40mm threshold.
Let’s be honest, the only way people are going to get called out on a shoe rule violation it is if a.) you have a particularly outstanding race result and b.) somebody lodges a protest about your equipment. It’s most likely only going to come up in the professional field and eliminate prototypes like Iden’s On’s from last year, or if you KQ and somebody feels like you wore offending equipment.
Agreed. It seems odd that I can’t wear a pair a max cushion running shoes (without a carbon plate) to aid my arthritis riddled feet, but bikes and wet suits, where there are real tangible advantages have not been discussed. I wonder how many age groupers will be disqualified because of this. Should do wonders to increase the sports popularity.
Maybe the better question is this: Should Elite/Professional athletes always have the exact same rules as participatory/Age-group/non-elite/weekend warrior athletes? I mean the elites and pros do this as their jobs. Most of us are indeed passionate but we are doing this for fun. You might be able to convince me the top elite pro runners and triathletes should not be wearing 50mm shoes. But is this necessary for AGers? You have a great point. Many older folks may need the extra cushion to avoid injuries. My husband is a great example. He had an arthritic hip that bothered him for years and a doctor told him his running days were over. He switched to Hokas and the nice soft cushioning was life changing for him. He went on to do 3 Ironmans. Again, this kind of rule only hurts the non-elites who are doing this purely for the love of sport and it’s not their livelihood.
It’s because it is a unified rulebook with World Triathlon, who takes the source from World Athletics.
**Again, it’s because we emphasize rule making on the elite end of the sport versus the participatory side of the sport. **
The World Athletics approval list is going to be far more concerned about true “racing” shoes for 10,000 meters on up as opposed to training shoes, which your Glycerins are. That said, Glycerins sit well below the 40mm threshold.
Let’s be honest, the only way people are going to get called out on a shoe rule violation it is if a.) you have a particularly outstanding race result and b.) somebody lodges a protest about your equipment. It’s most likely only going to come up in the professional field and eliminate prototypes like Iden’s On’s from last year, or if you KQ and somebody feels like you wore offending equipment.
Kinda repeating myself but here goes:
I don’t think this was the only time. But when I did IMMT, the Pros were not allowed to wear wetsuits but AGers were allowed to wear them. I’m not 1000% sure about this but I seem to recall pros were not wearing wetsuits that year (2016). Maybe it was a different IM I did. Anyone want to confirm this?
But the point is that maybe what’s good for the pros may not always be appropriate and necessary for the thousands of AGers/non-elites. WTC is a corporation that can basically do what it desires. Maybe the more prudent decision would be to make this rule applicable to pros only. Yes I do believe some rules (not all) can apply to pros only.
I don’t particularly mind the footwear rule, but only if we’re going to see the whitelist on the World Athletics side also expand to cover non-racing shoes. (Most HOKAs, for what it’s worth, despite their look still won’t come in over 40mm because of where your foot actually sits inside the shoe).
But this is why I wrote that front page piece about further differentiating race categorization. If you’re looking to WC qualify, you should be held to the letter of the entire rulebook – from wetsuits to shoes to anti-doping, etc. If you’re not, well, let’s look at where we can trim from a currently 32-page rulebook (which doesn’t cover where you need to then go to World Triathlon, or another sport’s rulebook, to figure stuff out) and let people otherwise enjoy their race day experience.
I don’t particularly mind the footwear rule, but only if we’re going to see the whitelist on the World Athletics side also expand to cover non-racing shoes. (Most HOKAs, for what it’s worth, despite their look still won’t come in over 40mm because of where your foot actually sits inside the shoe).
But this is why I wrote that front page piece about further differentiating race categorization. If you’re looking to WC qualify, you should be held to the letter of the entire rulebook – from wetsuits to shoes to anti-doping, etc. If you’re not, well, let’s look at where we can trim from a currently 32-page rulebook (which doesn’t cover where you need to then go to World Triathlon, or another sport’s rulebook, to figure stuff out) and let people otherwise enjoy their race day experience.
Yes agree. And as someone looking to KQ this year and who has qualified for former 70.3 WCs, I’m Ok with this. I would just have to make sure I had the proper documentation printed out from Brooks if I chose to go back to my Glycerins instead of my Sauconys. But if my husband (who is not going to be KQing…in this lifetime) wanted to wear his HOKAs for his aging arthritic hip, he can still compete w/o worrying about a DQ. I think most come in under 40mm but thought there were a couple above it? But you get my point. Now the MOP guy like my husband who needs the extra cushy shoe can race w/o worrying about stack height.
So on this list, if a shoe is listed as “yes” under road and XC, that means it’s allowed in all triathlon races?
It’s because it is a unified rulebook with World Triathlon, who takes the source from World Athletics.
**Again, it’s because we emphasize rule making on the elite end of the sport versus the participatory side of the sport. **
The World Athletics approval list is going to be far more concerned about true “racing” shoes for 10,000 meters on up as opposed to training shoes, which your Glycerins are. That said, Glycerins sit well below the 40mm threshold.
Let’s be honest, the only way people are going to get called out on a shoe rule violation it is if a.) you have a particularly outstanding race result and b.) somebody lodges a protest about your equipment. It’s most likely only going to come up in the professional field and eliminate prototypes like Iden’s On’s from last year, or if you KQ and somebody feels like you wore offending equipment.
Kinda repeating myself but here goes:
I don’t think this was the only time. But when I did IMMT, the Pros were not allowed to wear wetsuits but AGers were allowed to wear them. I’m not 1000% sure about this but I seem to recall pros were not wearing wetsuits that year (2016). Maybe it was a different IM I did. Anyone want to confirm this?
But the point is that maybe what’s good for the pros may not always be appropriate and necessary for the thousands of AGers/non-elites. WTC is a corporation that can basically do what it desires. Maybe the more prudent decision would be to make this rule applicable to pros only. Yes I do believe some rules (not all) can apply to pros only.
The rules aren’t exactly the same for Pro and AG, but most of the differences focus on sprint and standard distance. For long-course non-draft racing, there are limited differences between Elite and Age group in the World Triathlon rules, which Ironman largely leverages. The 3 sports rules have generally aligned with their governing bodies (FINA/UCI/World Athletics), which is where some of these more severe equipment rules originate from. In terms of your wetsuit example at IMMT, I do not recall that specific case, but the water temp thresholds for wetsuits is one of those areas where there is a difference between Pro & Age group (and World Tri has also now changed it for the older age groups too, so it’s now possible that it could be no wetsuit for most age groups, but a few would still be allowed to wear them.
In terms of shoes, remember that the lists are largely limited to race shoes, not trainers. As long as they’re commercially available and not flirting with the 40mm border, there should be no issue. I suspect that shoe checks for age groupers will largely be focused on cases of process. There might be some random checks, but as long as the shoes are not flirting with that 40mm limit, it should be a formality.
So is the Asics Nimbus 25 really illegal for Ironman triathlons? It’s crazy to me that such a workhorse shoe is now effectively not allowed.
I keep waiting for Asics to come out and say “oh, sorry - we measured wrong. It’s actually a 40mm stack. Not 41”