zoomzoomzoom wrote:
ClonedDuck wrote:
No offense to the other ladies, but why would you post a picture saying look at Shelby when Cory McGee is also in it. Obviously our male eyes won't look elsewhere.
lol, well okay well McGee hasn't even broken 16 for 5000m, Houlihan would lap her, almost twice
to me this is hotness
https://imgur.com/a/Fj1Wu5M
Houlihan has more artificial testosterone flowing through her system, as well.
MohammedAA wrote:
zoomzoomzoom wrote:
lol, well okay well McGee hasn't even broken 16 for 5000m, Houlihan would lap her, almost twice
to me this is hotness
https://imgur.com/a/Fj1Wu5MHoulihan has more artificial testosterone flowing through her system, as well.
This is not what a woman looks like that is using exogenous testosterone. Stupid statement. If you're going to talk $hit/make up something about someone, at least have some knowledge on the subject.
Great piece of marketing by Nike, wouldn't be surprised to find that it was Nike who complained about themselves - otherwise nobody would have heard of these, supposedly, amazing new spikes.
It was an indoor, women's mile, European record. Does anyone really care? It is seconds behind the world's best marks at either 1500 or mile.
All the "race" proved is that Muir is in good shape heading for the European indoors - where she will probably win a couple of golds.
milermb wrote:
Great piece of marketing by Nike, wouldn't be surprised to find that it was Nike who complained about themselves - otherwise nobody would have heard of these, supposedly, amazing new spikes.
It was an indoor, women's mile, European record. Does anyone really care? It is seconds behind the world's best marks at either 1500 or mile.
All the "race" proved is that Muir is in good shape heading for the European indoors - where she will probably win a couple of golds.
You make a good point- OK, this was back in the mid 80's, so there is no "proof" just my memory:
Adidas had some complaint about Nike- caused controversy and was in the news for a while.
I worked for a Sporting Goods store at the time- manager of the footwear department.
In the end- Adidas and Nike were in on it together to drum up publicity.
The Adidas and Nike reps who came to our store got a big laugh out of it.
nikemann wrote:
It's not the plate, it's the plate and the zoom x foam that provide the efficiency boost. No one is saying it's cheating by wearing them, it's cheating b/c they are available to the public. That is the new rules. There is no way anyone is going to be wearing prototypes at the WC this summer, so they better start producing this stuff. DQ's will be too easy for one company to file a protest and get someone Dq'ed. I sure hope the pros are smart about this, or it's going to cost them.
What we do not know is if these spikes have a plate or not, no formal statement has been made by Nike.
The development process has been with and with out internal plates. Not that the spikes have a spike plate that can also work as a lever or spring effect.
Ultimate final product for retail will probably come with and without. Part of the premise of the thicker midsole is cushioning and rebound, internal plate is icing on the cake.
Spotted Filip Ingebrigtsen wearing those in the DL last year:
5-dht wrote:
MohammedAA wrote:
Houlihan has more artificial testosterone flowing through her system, as well.
This is not what a woman looks like that is using exogenous testosterone. Stupid statement. If you're going to talk $hit/make up something about someone, at least have some knowledge on the subject.
I agree with you and I think Letsrun owes it to legitimate posters to ban people who make unfounded drug accusations.
I'm sick of these idiots hijacking legitimate posts.
rolows has pointed out there are three "stages" of the Nike spiked VF prototypes
He says Flanagan used Stage 2 and that Muir used Stage 3
Yes, but wrote:
nikemann wrote:
It's not the plate, it's the plate and the zoom x foam that provide the efficiency boost. No one is saying it's cheating by wearing them, it's cheating b/c they are available to the public. That is the new rules. There is no way anyone is going to be wearing prototypes at the WC this summer, so they better start producing this stuff. DQ's will be too easy for one company to file a protest and get someone Dq'ed. I sure hope the pros are smart about this, or it's going to cost them.
What we do not know is if these spikes have a plate or not, no formal statement has been made by Nike.
The development process has been with and with out internal plates. Not that the spikes have a spike plate that can also work as a lever or spring effect.
Ultimate final product for retail will probably come with and without. Part of the premise of the thicker midsole is cushioning and rebound, internal plate is icing on the cake.
Lots of bad information within this thread.
zoomzoomzoom wrote:
rolows has pointed out there are three "stages" of the Nike spiked VF prototypes
He says Flanagan used Stage 2 and that Muir used Stage 3
https://imgur.com/a/ylGgQaM
Rolows is correct. Muir's is almost a 3.5, as it contains a slightly different 3D printed plate and heel than those worn by Filip.
TT fan wrote:
zoomzoomzoom wrote:
rolows has pointed out there are three "stages" of the Nike spiked VF prototypes
He says Flanagan used Stage 2 and that Muir used Stage 3
https://imgur.com/a/ylGgQaMRolows is correct. Muir's is almost a 3.5, as it contains a slightly different 3D printed plate and heel than those worn by Filip.
Also, the "stage 3" in that Rupp Imgur is a heel design/thickness/carbon plate placement that is slightly more thin than what Muir was given. So, if Filip's is a 3, then Rupp's "stage 3" is about a 2.5, as the thinner heel thickness idea has now trended back toward a thicker midsole again.
Yes, but wrote:
nikemann wrote:
It's not the plate, it's the plate and the zoom x foam that provide the efficiency boost. No one is saying it's cheating by wearing them, it's cheating b/c they are available to the public. That is the new rules. There is no way anyone is going to be wearing prototypes at the WC this summer, so they better start producing this stuff. DQ's will be too easy for one company to file a protest and get someone Dq'ed. I sure hope the pros are smart about this, or it's going to cost them.
What we do not know is if these spikes have a plate or not, no formal statement has been made by Nike.
The development process has been with and with out internal plates. Not that the spikes have a spike plate that can also work as a lever or spring effect.
Ultimate final product for retail will probably come with and without. Part of the premise of the thicker midsole is cushioning and rebound, internal plate is icing on the cake.
One can plainly see the carbon plate in Muir's spike- the thin black strip within the midsole. Nike will not be releasing a formal statement. That's just ludicrous. Would Ferrari release statements about R and D? All prototypes have had internal plates. There will not be a public release for quite some time, if at all.
The thing is, if anything, prototypes in competition is now clearly against IAAF rules, it's not even open to interpretation "shoe used must be reasonably available to ALL"
Don't have a problem with prototypes, because if an athlete wants to customize their shoe, softer/firmer upper etc. why not? Just the carbon spring because it violates the second clause "Shoes must not be constructed so as to give athletes any unfair assistance or advantage."
And then there is always the idiot who says in response "well they should all run barefoot"
Or the other idiots that insist it's just the pebax, when other pebax shoes are not even 1%
(and why would Nike even bother to go to the time and expense of putting in the carbon spring in a prototype above and beyond the spike plate if it did nothing)
https://www.iaaf.org/news/iaaf-news/competition-rule-amendments-june-2018
zoomzoomzoom wrote:
The thing is, if anything, prototypes in competition is now clearly against IAAF rules, it's not even open to interpretation "shoe used must be reasonably available to ALL"
Don't have a problem with prototypes, because if an athlete wants to customize their shoe, softer/firmer upper etc. why not? Just the carbon spring because it violates the second clause "Shoes must not be constructed so as to give athletes any unfair assistance or advantage."
And then there is always the idiot who says in response "well they should all run barefoot"
Or the other idiots that insist it's just the pebax, when other pebax shoes are not even 1%
(and why would Nike even bother to go to the time and expense of putting in the carbon spring in a prototype above and beyond the spike plate if it did nothing)
https://www.iaaf.org/news/iaaf-news/competition-rule-amendments-june-2018
They should all run barefoot!
idoiot! wrote:
zoomzoomzoom wrote:
The thing is, if anything, prototypes in competition is now clearly against IAAF rules, it's not even open to interpretation "shoe used must be reasonably available to ALL"
Don't have a problem with prototypes, because if an athlete wants to customize their shoe, softer/firmer upper etc. why not? Just the carbon spring because it violates the second clause "Shoes must not be constructed so as to give athletes any unfair assistance or advantage."
And then there is always the idiot who says in response "well they should all run barefoot"
Or the other idiots that insist it's just the pebax, when other pebax shoes are not even 1%
(and why would Nike even bother to go to the time and expense of putting in the carbon spring in a prototype above and beyond the spike plate if it did nothing)
https://www.iaaf.org/news/iaaf-news/competition-rule-amendments-june-2018They should all run barefoot!
The carbon fiber plate only increases how firm the shoe/spike is, and in this case stabilizing a larger stack height/allowing a more firm feeling in a potentially @squishy" shoe. There is nothing in any testing that has shown that the carbon plate increases efficiency. Rather, the thickness of the midsole has had the greatest affect on this. Note that carbon fiber plates have been around for quite some time in spikes- not just Nike. In addition, Nike is also not the first to place a plate into a racing flat. Adidas did this in the late 90's.
rendoabe wrote:
I have just heard that a clothing company, presumably adidas has complained about Laura Muir wearing the nike 4% spikes in her british mile record in birmingham. Personally I think she is a stuck up bit** as she is always complaing about her competition and the nike oregon project. I think nike is doing great advancing shoe technology and helping athletes realise their potential and making racing more excity but they should not be so secretive about their prototypes and they should make them available to consumers.
She thinks you’re a dick, interestingly.
TT fan wrote:
The carbon fiber plate only increases how firm the shoe/spike is, and in this case stabilizing a larger stack height/allowing a more firm feeling in a potentially @squishy" shoe. There is nothing in any testing that has shown that the carbon plate increases efficiency.
yeah I was almost believing you knew something to what you were talking about until this part
because there has not been any study about the plate vs the foam, only an idiotic question by Hutchinson to a researcher who was then stupid enough to GUESS an off-the-cuff answer without doing an actual study, which is now quoted by everyone as some kind of "fact"
it's not just a plate, it's a specifically shaped, engineered spring design like a mini version of oscar pistorius blades
it's what specifically directs the energy return of the foam and shifts some of the force from the midfoot/heelstrike to the toeoff
yes, they have experimented with full length flat plates for awhile, the VF takes that effect to a whole other level
the foam is only 1% or less, the flex is 1%, the energy redirection is at least another 1%, the weight reduction is another 1%, hey look at that we're at 4%
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16540846zoomzoomzoom wrote:
TT fan wrote:
The carbon fiber plate only increases how firm the shoe/spike is, and in this case stabilizing a larger stack height/allowing a more firm feeling in a potentially @squishy" shoe. There is nothing in any testing that has shown that the carbon plate increases efficiency.
yeah I was almost believing you knew something to what you were talking about until this part
because there has not been any study about the plate vs the foam, only an idiotic question by Hutchinson to a researcher who was then stupid enough to GUESS an off-the-cuff answer without doing an actual study, which is now quoted by everyone as some kind of "fact"
it's not just a plate, it's a specifically shaped, engineered spring design like a mini version of oscar pistorius blades
it's what specifically directs the energy return of the foam and shifts some of the force from the midfoot/heelstrike to the toeoff
yes, they have experimented with full length flat plates for awhile, the VF takes that effect to a whole other level
the foam is only 1% or less, the flex is 1%, the energy redirection is at least another 1%, the weight reduction is another 1%, hey look at that we're at 4%
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16540846
If only I could tell you who I am. Just suffice it to say that I know what I'm talking about. And yes, without getting too detailed, there have been MULTIPLE tests at Campus regarding efficiency and the relation to midsole thickness. This is not anything that we would ever need nor want to make public. The plate has very little to do with anything other than the firmness of the spike. However, go ahead and believe whatever you want to delude yourself into believing. I'm totally ok with that. Though, I would encourage you to stop spouting what you THINK you know as fact. Your pulled from the air 1% numbers actually gave us all here a chuckle this evening. Ironically, I'm literally looking at a pair on my desk as I type this.
zoomzoomzoom wrote:
TT fan wrote:
The carbon fiber plate only increases how firm the shoe/spike is, and in this case stabilizing a larger stack height/allowing a more firm feeling in a potentially @squishy" shoe. There is nothing in any testing that has shown that the carbon plate increases efficiency.
yeah I was almost believing you knew something to what you were talking about until this part
because there has not been any study about the plate vs the foam, only an idiotic question by Hutchinson to a researcher who was then stupid enough to GUESS an off-the-cuff answer without doing an actual study, which is now quoted by everyone as some kind of "fact"
it's not just a plate, it's a specifically shaped, engineered spring design like a mini version of oscar pistorius blades
it's what specifically directs the energy return of the foam and shifts some of the force from the midfoot/heelstrike to the toeoff
yes, they have experimented with full length flat plates for awhile, the VF takes that effect to a whole other level
the foam is only 1% or less, the flex is 1%, the energy redirection is at least another 1%, the weight reduction is another 1%, hey look at that we're at 4%
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16540846
I want to apologize to you for being a dick in my above post. I really do appreciate your obvious interest in this prototype spike, as well as what seems to be Nike technology, in general. You seem somewhat young- possibly late teens/early 20's. I hope you don't feel that I'm talking down to you, but I just want to encourage you to be careful in stating something as fact (not just here, but any genre of discussion in life) when you might not be close to the subject at hand. I would especially avoid it on an anonymous message board. You never know who is on the other end. Good luck, and I know you'll enjoy what is coming in 2019/2020.