Super Shoes don't seem to work with American Marathoners. R Hall ran 2:06 at London in 2008, Salazar ran 2:08 in the 80's.

Actually, Salazar ran 2:08 in the ‘80s.

You mean American men. Yes they’re notably awful especially now that Rupp’s in a rut. Mantz you’re our only hope.

US is not sending best to the event. They're all sub elite caliber runners. I forget his name. The one who runs for Saucony. He is a perfect example.

Here is the deal: very few US men can even race a half marathon at the marathon world record pace. Maybe 15-20 could, and most of those guys are probably racing on the track. You can probably count on one hand the number who could reliably pace Eliud at world record pace for a half marathon, and again most of those guys are racing on the track. The US probably has nobody who could pace Eliud through 25K at world record pace. So it seems that the best US runners are running on the track and also, even if they weren’t, they may feel quite intimidated at the notion of trying to race anywhere near the best in the world.

Ryan Hall maybe would have run 2:04 at London in super shoes. KK might have run 2:03? These guys were special and we haven’t really had anyone special since Galen got old.

Fisher and the Goose are special but they have not and may never run the marathon.

Salazar would have run 2:07 low if he held it together, 2:05 in supershoes. Hall a 2:03 in London.

That said Lopes would have run 2:04 and Kimmetto would have the WR to this day.

It's really weird, and similar among British men. Only 18 British men have ever broken 2:10 in the marathon, but only 3 have done it wearing supershoes (Farah, Cairess, and Ghebresilasie). We had Steve Jones running 2:07 in 1985, Charlie Spedding running 2:08 and winning an Olympic bronze in the 1980s, and a bunch of guys running 2:09 throughout that decade. Hell, in the 1970s we have Ron Hill and Ian Thompson running 2:09-low.

These were guys running in shoes that offered less cushioning than Crocs, no energy drinks or gels, Ron Hill ran in a string vest. Now, with all the advance in sports science and shoe technology, only 4 men have broken 2:10 in the last five years. Are British elites immune to supershoes?

In Germany it's right into the other direction. Where 2:15-20 seemed quite good in the early 2010s, it is now a slew of like 10+ runners with 2:04 - 2:12s.

I believe that the only thing we see from Hall's 2:06, Khannouchi's 2:05s etc is how great their training was and how talented. In todays running world I definitely would see Hall/Khannouchi go out in 60/61 with the likes of Kipchoge etc and go 2:03/04 at least. I definitely give a 3"/k advantage for the shoes and that'd put Hall right around 2:04.

Did you seriously forget Khalid?

Reason they shouldn't be among the best miler.

You can't claim to be a GOAT of the mile while you are bad at longer distances.

Scott Fauble is not special? Reid Buchanan is not special?

You need to understand that whatever affect the shoes have on performance the result depends on a runner's capability. Super shoes are not getting me to a sub 2:10 marathon and they likely aren't getting someone who would run 2:13 or so in conventional shoes to 2:04. If we get someone capable of running times that Hall and Salazar did in their conventional shoes into a pair of super shoes and we're still not seeing 2:05s or so you might be onto something.

You're right. It's not about the shoes. Right now the top US 5k/10k men don't want to try the marathon. That's the real reason US men aren't good in the marathon right now.

First, look at the number of US sub 2:12 runners pre super shoes and compare to after. Second, read this study.

nature.com

Influence of advanced shoe technology on the top 100 annual performances in men’s marathon from 2015 to 2019 - Scientific Reports

Scientific Reports - Influence of advanced shoe technology on the top 100 annual performances in men’s marathon from 2015 to 2019

Link:www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-018...