Vaporflys soon to be banned! (Read 368 times)

Again, I think the "ban" would just be for championship events, and results that are eligible for records. I doubt there's more than a handful of people HERE who are currently elites competing for money and national team membership, so a ban would not affect us. We could still wear Vaporflys to get a PR or win our age group in a firecracker or turkeytrot run and not be disqualified.

Shoe companies would have to stage special events like Breaking 2 or the Hoka 50 mile record attempt to get their fastest shoes on their fastest runners for marketing. But they will still sell a boatload of Vaporflys and Carbon Rockets to the rank and file even if they are banned from major competition.

To be sure, midsole foam COULD be considered a "spring" since it stores and returns energy, albeit not the same way a carbon blade does. The Skechers Hyperburst stuff is amazing. Maybe the rules clarification would have a measurement of the maximum amount of energy return allowed regardless of shoe composition and materials used.

They seem to be interested in stack height for some reason, though. Stack height alone is meaningless regarding cushion or energy return unless it's designed to for either. If stack height alone equalled performance, these guys would have set a lot of records:

I remember having these Moon Shoes as a kid. I was able to jump 2 feet off the ground and run pretty fast in them. Maybe those should be banned as well for being too springy.

Another editorial article this morning suggested that only the (unavailable) Alphflys and their triple carbon plate and 3" midsoles (so the springs have more energy return) tech would be banned, but the existing Vaporflys would not. It's a slippery slope if anything goes, so regulations and limits are being updated to keep pace with technology.

Alphaflys are indeed like the Moon Shoes! (thanks AndyTN) 

Science Of Sport made a pretty compelling case that simply regulating stack height would almost certainly work as a regulation. Also, while a rocker sole does have some effect, it's not actually the plate acting like a blade that gives the energy return, it's the foam. The problem is that the foam, especially when it's in a nearly 2"" stack, is not stable enough. The plate is just adding low weight rigidity to the midsole.

 

The Alphaflys could easily be banned under existing IAAF rules anyway which require shoes to be reasonably available to all athletes.  Anyone can go out and buy a pair of Next%'s - sure, sponsorship deals prevent non-Nike elites from wearing them in competition, but that's their own contractual decision.  The Alphaflys on the other hand aren't exactly mass market (yet).

This matches the old NASCAR rule that a car manufacturer could only race a car they sold something like 2,500 units to the public. They started selling 2,500 cars that were just like their race cars, changed the horsepower rating from the engine to the rear wheels for insurance purposes (high horsepower is more expensive) and continued to race. IF this rule was upheld Nike could sell their shoes to the public for $500/pair and people would complain "they're too expensive. no one can afford them. it isn't fair. They're cheating." except everything they claim is a lie because Nike is offering the same race shoe to the public and people just don't want to PAY $500 for shoes. Keep trying to make them illegal and Nike will keep finding a way to beat the rules and it's going to bring some amazing technology to race shoes.

EDIT: The rule should just stay ONE shoe will be worn by all athletes attempting a record. It makes it fair for everyone. No one can complain about anything other than "he/she trained harder than me and/or is more talented/gifted than me."

Sponsorship pretty much makes a universal shoe impossible.  I did see Rhonex Kipruto just smashed the 10K World Record (Road) wearing *gasp* Adidas shoes.  That can't be right because according to every article I've read this week, today's runners pretty much suck and just have technology doing the work.  I read one that questioned if Kipchoge is really that gifted.  Um...Yes.

 EDIT: The rule should just stay ONE shoe will be worn by all athletes attempting a record. It makes it fair for everyone. No one can complain about anything other than "he/she trained harder than me and/or is more talented/gifted than me."

Sponsorship pretty much makes a universal shoe impossible.  I did see Rhonex Kipruto just smashed the 10K World Record (Road) wearing *gasp* Adidas shoes.  That can't be right because according to every article I've read this week, today's runners pretty much suck and just have technology doing the work.  I read one that questioned if Kipchoge is really that gifted.  Um...Yes.

 

Even in the late 1900's Nike had a little cobbler shop in the old Quackenbush building in Eugene that made custom fitted shoes for it's athletes. I bring that up to agree that elites are NOT wearing off the shelf shoes "available to everyone" and haven't for quite a while. At least most of the time. There are probably some who get the regular shoes for training, maybe even some races.

Regarding shoe tech, I go back to my oft told tale of my Dad training in Chuck Taylor basketball shoes and racing in leather spikes in the late 40's/early 50's and achieving a 4:07 mile on dirt tracks. And shortly after, the 4:00 mile was achieved (Bannister), and even today with all the shoe, track and training technology it is extremely difficult to achieve a 4:00 mile, only about 1500 men have done it ever, but the number has seemingly been increasing in correlation with advancements in track surface and shoe technology.

But, there is no technology that I am aware of that will take the average person off the street and allow them to achieve top 10% performances in running events, or even top 50%. Training is 99% of the equation. And another but; when you get to the level of elites, just a very small iota of advantage can be the difference between Olympic gold medal and not even qualifying for the finals (hence the Oregon Project searching for every little thing...)

 

If training is 99% of the equation, then you're talking about mental attitude, diet, height, stride length, along with the aspect that no one can sell you.

Yes, all of that packed into a box labeled "training". Race day performance is almost entirely (if not all) the result of preparation, aka training. That training is physical, mental and emotional.

And back to the shoes, the technology employed in the Vaporfly is indeed a "mechanical device" and the shoe is indeed "available to all competitors". The saga of the Vaporfly currently unfolding concerns re-defining and clarifying restrictions on shoe technology and specifications. It's not because the governing bodies are mad that people are "winning", but the improvements in performance across the board by people switching to the Vaporfly are an indication that the technology employed IS measurably superior to other shoe designs. Before even thicker midsoles and springier carbon plate springs are offered (like the Moon Shoes above!), the governing bodies want to get a handle on things.

I have yet to see a pic of the new Nike sprinting spikes that are controversial and may be banned. Beyond light and stiff, what way could they improve them for the 100/200?