Are there any "super-shoe" cynics/doubters left?

Would you also propose dual record for pre/post synthetic tracks? That is probably a bigger difference than the spikes.

I am unsure if you are disagreeing with me or not.

-The owners of these boards certainly pushed the sensational takes and slowly pivoted as new data arose, as I said.

-Performance-wise, the supportive data is there. There has already been a decent amount of objective, lab-driven analysis of the shoes. At worst, they are a small marginal gain.

-Anecdotal evidence lacks of veracity, of course, but at the same time it also doesn't-- not when every critic who wears them immediately changes tune (myself included).

-The steeple is losing popularity, and being run less frequently, so that point is moot.

-You are not wrong in bringing up the Baader-Meinhof phenomenon, but at the same time it is disingenuous to use it in this context.

-Surely you have run in supershoes?

If not, I recommend you head to the shoe store, pick up a pair, go for the happiest tempo run of your life, and return here to urgently attempt to edit your post. :)

I don't believe that the spikes provide these huge performance gains that people are claiming, at least until I see some research on it. I think faster track times are a symptom of athletes being able to train hard in super shoes and then race in a spike that's no worse than the old ones and provide a mental boost. I think if you had two identical athletes, raced them in the same conditions etc. etc. and removed any mental benefit from the superspikes, it would be a dead heat.

I don't really think this is that complicated. There are a number of factors leading to faster times:

* Times/WRs naturally progress over time

* Supershoes during races

* Supershoes during training leading to better recovery and faster training paces

* Wavelight

* Better, more consistent training w/ less racing as a result of the pandemic

* Maybe some new drug

There are surely some additional factors I am missing. How much each of these contributes to any individual athlete, performance is going to be variable. Some will be super responders to shoes, some have put in the best training of their life over the last few years, some are doping, some are now able to pace more efficiently at paces where pacemakers are no longer able to hand due to wavelight (see Cheptegei's 10k WR)

Anyone who can tell you that they are able to precisely attribute the incremental gain of any given variable is lying to you.

So called ' super shoes' like PEDs make little difference in an athletes performance.

If it would help - you can write down all the pre-super shoe times on a little sheet of paper, fold it up and put it in a draw, and we'll call that the separate record for pre-super shoe technology.

The rest of us will just get on with the sport.

If the super shoe helped Fisher go from13:11 to 13:02. You can't credit the shoes for the 12:53. The benefit is already baked into his time. Once you've benefitted from the shoe it creates a baseline for measurement. If the shoe got him to 13:02 the 9 second improvement must be him

I doubt running shoes exist.

This is the only super running shoe I need. Feels like I'm running on air.

walmart.com

Athletic Works Men's Silver Series 3 Wide Width Athletic Shoe - Walmart.com

Today Buy Athletic Works Men's Silver Series 3 Wide Width Athletic Shoe at Walmart.com

Link:www.walmart.com/ip/Athletic-Works-Men-...

It’s cheating. The shoes work and give runners a mechanical advantage. My points haven’t changed, and they won’t change. Not a question of doubt, as doubt is not the problem

try running in the spikes first

Which labs, funded by whom?

All the analyses that have confirmed some sort of "energy return" are moot. Bounciness is not what makes a fast runner fast.

I know the steeple has been less popular lately. So for a while were the 10,000 and half marathon, the two events with the biggest current records rush.

Put one of this new crop of American super-Rupps in the steeple and we'll have more than one sub 8er. American runners have improved dramatically

have run in the last month in offerings from New Balance, Nike, and Adidas. I stand by my point compared to eva / non-nitrogen TPU. It's a significant enough improvement to be tangible.

All other sports have also evolved thru technology and modernization. Indy car racing, golf, biking, football, baseball, pole vaulting and on and on. Every sport uses better material, better surfaces, better design, better bats & balls... Everything is better in every sport than it was in the old days. Why not running too?

Prior to these spikes/shoes coming out. The following was true.

The men's 5000 WR had stood since 2004. It's now gone.
The women's 5000 WR had stood since 2008. It's now gone.
The men's 10,000 WR had stood since 2005. It's now gone.
For the women, two women have destroyed the old record of 29:17 when prior to that 29:17 being run, no one had approached 29:31 since 1993.
The men's half had stood since 2010. It's been broken 4 differnt times.
The women's half WR was 65:09. Now it's 62:52.

And yet you claim things are falling "about the same pace" as before.

The road data is overwhelming. I'll admit the spike data isn't as robust quite yet but I've had sprint coaches come up to me at meets to talk about how it's obvious to even them.

Marathons yes. Track no. And that's mostly because before the VaporFly you had no real choices for a marathon shoe. You either had to sacrifice weight or cushion. I would destroy my legs in a typical 6 ounce racer each time out. Now it's the best of both worlds.

Track wise, records are meant to be broken. Training methods are much more fine tuned and scientific than in the 1990s and earlier 2000's. The Dragonflies are really nothing special but again gives runners that perfect balance of weight and cushion for the 10000 that they never quite had.

Female records will continue to fall. Female athletics in general are still relatively new and as we keep seeing more depth we will keep seeing more records in the sport.

I think everyone here just has a weird sense of nostalgia here and thinks they were better runners in their prime than the kids today when they are not. Apparently Jim Ryun would be like a 3:37 miler today.

I'll address the men's side.

While there is some truth to what you're saying, there is also a growth of the sport that has contributed. Who broke those men's records? Two Ugandans. How many Ugandans were competing before 2005? It was an untapped talent pool that unearthed some generational talents. We also need to point out Kiplimo ran 26:33 (~13:27/13:06) in regular spikes, and Rhonex Kipruto ran 26:24 in flats. The shoes' impact on the marathon/half is pretty undeniable and huge. But on the track while it exists, your argument is missing key factors and instead looking at a deeper set of stats would serve you better.

If anything, I think the shoes are slowing runners down