Hawkins isn't running 2:02 marathons though is he? Maybe he's running faster than he would without them but I don't know that. I do know that the front of the men's marathon field has moved significantly since the 4% arrived. Scientific study or catch up with the front of the field is where it's at.
That reminds me, Adidas has a bit of a novel approach to their plate which gives a bit more confidence that their actually trying to get something that works (the shape of the Nike plate was supposed to be important in reducing ankle work without a corresponding increase elsewhere). Of course if you can copy Nike in every and get the same results without any patent issues, that would be a no brainer for most other companies
Given how far away from the road runners in the Nikes or similar now are, do people think all that "being in touch with the ground" minimal thing has now been shown to be a load of nonsense?
(The fastest shoes I've ever had (fast being relative ie slow) were both pretty low drop and lightweight. One pair (Brooks PureConnect 2) also had another feature in that they kind of rolled me forward, something also mentioned in the Doctors of Running article.)
SPR, in fairness, we do not know what Kipchoge would run in the NB. And we're unlikely to ever find out due to the sponsorship. Similarly we do not know what Hawkins would run in the Nikes. Don't get me wrong - I love the shoe tech. But (maybe I'm old fashioned), I still think other things like training(!) are more important.
SPR, surely it doesn't matter that Callum Hawkins is 'only' running 2:08, does it? If he is wearing shoes which improve his time by x minutes, that is just as relevant as Kipchoge's performance.
Dvorak, I'm still a big believer in the 'being in touch with the ground' minimal thing, as you put it. I think it's important to keep doing it for running gait training, for maximising efficiency. Then on race day you can put on something else which gives you something extra.
The evidence at the front of the pack for the Nikes, is irrefutable. You can do it based on the number of people running X time for marathon from say 2015 onwards (and who knows how long the 'special' elite were in prototypes. There's research on this and there's no argument to be had TBH, it's fact.
Hawkins has run a time that no one thinks is beyond him, therefore why would anyone take that as evidence the the NBs are on par with Nike? We don't know about the NBs, but we do know about the Nikes.
Of course training hard is important but that doesn't negate the fact the shoes make a big difference.
Having tried most of the shoes in question, i'd say the Nike Vaporfly Next% beats most hands down (including the Alphafly). I wish i could get the upper material of the Alphafly on the Next% though.
That being said, i've been doing most of my Speed work in the Endorphin Pros and they are surprisingly very responsive. They also are much more durable than the Nike's
Free training & racing tools for runners, cyclists, swimmers & walkers.
Fetcheveryone lets you analyse your training, find races, plot routes, chat in our forum, get advice, play games - and more!
Nothing is behind a paywall, and it'll stay that way thanks to our awesome community!
Nike Pegasus
Jul 2024
