How is Ironman actually going to enforce this in the age group ranks??
They won’t be unless you’re on a podium. We’ve all seen how this is policed in Marathons…aka it’s not!
How is Ironman actually going to enforce this in the age group ranks??
They won’t be unless you’re on a podium. We’ve all seen how this is policed in Marathons…aka it’s not!
You’re right about marathons. I hadn’t thought about that.
This is dumb if it’s for Ironman. I personally think it’s super cool that this part of the sport is pretty open ended where manufacturers can test and push the limits without a bunch of restricting rules. I’d get it for like wtcs and ITU, something where it should be more regulated.
So why no ebikes, recumbent bikes in IM?
I just knew you’d show up here with some silly comment given your hatred of faster shoes. Do you really need an answer for this
I picked $150 because that’s about where my old non-super shoes are now
You couldve chosen one of several supershoes for 150 on black friday. I got the Endorphin Pro 3 for 150. And they’ll easily last til next black Friday as long as you’re not using them for daily training.
I picked $150 because that’s about where my old non-super shoes are now
You couldve chosen one of several supershoes for 150 on black friday. I got the Endorphin Pro 3 for 150. And they’ll easily last til next black Friday as long as you’re not using them for daily training.
I understand that, I could have also picked up the Mizuno Rider for less than $100 on black friday.
I just hate the fact that a certain company is gouging runners so bad and then led others to do the same. $275 for a pair of shoes, come on. Makes me happy I’m not as much of a runner any more.
That’s like complaining that now there are $1-3million “hypercars”, when you can still buy a Honda at a Honda price.
There are also shoes like the Endo Speed, Hyperion Tempo, and the Decathlon supershoe that use 90% of the same tech for around $150 retail.
Like everything else, the price:performance follows the laws of diminishing returns.
So what exactly are you suggesting? That these shoes should cost the same as a crappy EVA shoe? Or they shouldn’t exist? I’m not convinced the margins are greater on the $250 supershoes than the “typical” $150-180 shoe.
I’d like to not see people be gouged by Nike who have driven the market to new norms at runners expense.
But that’s not going to happen. They’ve done too good of a job in marketing.
And this is me whining about an issue that affects friends and not me directly.
I don’t understand the people complaining about shoe prices but maybe it’s because I come from the bike world and don’t so 70 mile weeks. But $200-$250 seems reasonable to me to buy the best product available. Sorry if I’m the reason they get away with it.
PS. I don’t buy the $250 Nikes and bought my endo pro 2’s for $100 on sale.
Not sure in IM, but for World Tri events I would bet that it would be a lot like motor doping, and that they will do random checks for age groupers and elites. These have become pretty much standard at age group worlds, I was random checked at Worlds in Penticton in 2017, at least for my race, I would guess that about 7-10% of the field were random checked at TZ check-in. I suspect it would be the same with shoes (shoes are easier too, since ruler/visual checks are non-invasive, they could be done as officials check and photograph athletes spots once the TX is closed and people are down at the start line), and possibly some targeted checks in case of athletes protesting the shoes that their competitor wore.
Aligning with World Athletics simplifies things as well, because if Athletics and Tri are both outlawing shoes outside of certain parameters, there’s less incentive for manufacturers to make illegal shoes (where there was no enforcement in Tri, some manufacturers saw a value in innovating for the multisport market). Who knows you may still see the odd one (we still hear about people racing in illegal wetsuits, that fall afoul of FINA and World Tri guidelines)
Just one of my personal rants. I understand other people points
I use the Endorphin Speed and like it.
How many amateurs are at the age group races?
This is dumb if it’s for Ironman. I personally think it’s super cool that this part of the sport is pretty open ended where manufacturers can test and push the limits without a bunch of restricting rules. I’d get it for like wtcs and ITU, something where it should be more regulated.
So why no ebikes, recumbent bikes in IM?
I just knew you’d show up here with some silly comment given your hatred of faster shoes. Do you really need an answer for this
I am calling out the hypocrisy of not fighting for less restrictions bike or swim tech yet complaining about it for run having limitations.
I am happy with the restriction.They should do the same with the bikes and apply it in PTO,IM, Challenge,Clash and Superleague.
This is dumb if it’s for Ironman. I personally think it’s super cool that this part of the sport is pretty open ended where manufacturers can test and push the limits without a bunch of restricting rules. I’d get it for like wtcs and ITU, something where it should be more regulated.
So why no ebikes, recumbent bikes in IM?
I just knew you’d show up here with some silly comment given your hatred of faster shoes. Do you really need an answer for this
I am calling out the hypocrisy of not fighting for less restrictions bike or swim tech yet complaining about it for run having limitations.
No, you’re being facetious. In what was is an extra few mm of foam equivalent to an ebike which ads propulsion?
All three sports have rules and regulation. Some or more reasonable that others. And some are arbitrary because we have to draw the line somewhere. 5mm neoprene and 40mm foam falls into the arbitrary category and is entirely subjective. Most people think 5mm neo and 40mm foam is reasonable. But ask around and no one will say that ebikes are reasonable for racing.
I’d like to not see people be gouged by Nike who have driven the market to new norms at runners expense.
But that’s not going to happen. They’ve done too good of a job in marketing.
And this is me whining about an issue that affects friends and not me directly.
If its only marketing, these “affected” people aren’t forced to buy those shoes. And if if they are indirectly forced because they provide a major advantage (and its not just marketing), then a 50% premium seems reasonable. For comparison, if you look at bikes in the $8000 range, you won’t get much more performance for an extra 50%.
Why do you consider it gouging? The performance not worth the premium? The margins much larger than for basic shoes?
Depends on the race, and the age group, but the fields for age group worlds tend to be pretty large for Sprint and standard tri, for the other multisport disciplines it depends a bit on the location, but most age groups range from 20-80 people deep (5-year AGs) until you to the 65+ categories, where they start to shrink in size…
This is dumb if it’s for Ironman. I personally think it’s super cool that this part of the sport is pretty open ended where manufacturers can test and push the limits without a bunch of restricting rules. I’d get it for like wtcs and ITU, something where it should be more regulated.
So why no ebikes, recumbent bikes in IM?
I just knew you’d show up here with some silly comment given your hatred of faster shoes. Do you really need an answer for this
I am calling out the hypocrisy of not fighting for less restrictions bike or swim tech yet complaining about it for run having limitations.
No, you’re being facetious. In what was is an extra few mm of foam equivalent to an ebike which ads propulsion?
All three sports have rules and regulation. Some or more reasonable that others. And some are arbitrary because we have to draw the line somewhere. 5mm neoprene and 40mm foam falls into the arbitrary category and is entirely subjective. Most people think 5mm neo and 40mm foam is reasonable. But ask around and no one will say that ebikes are reasonable for racing.
Talk to the people in mountain bike world
A few years ago you could buy good fast competitive shoes for $100 to $150.
Now the market is up $100+ for good fast competitive shoes.
How long until we see e-assist bike Tri Worlds, like they did for MTB?
I’d like to not see people be gouged by Nike who have driven the market to new norms at runners expense.
But that’s not going to happen. They’ve done too good of a job in marketing.
And this is me whining about an issue that affects friends and not me directly.
It’s not just the marketing to be fair, the shoes are legit