With all her talk about the Vaporfly, she shows up in a blacked out pair of Brooks prototypes with what looks to be a carbon plate. When you point your finger at someone, there are 3 fingers pointing bring back at you.
With all her talk about the Vaporfly, she shows up in a blacked out pair of Brooks prototypes with what looks to be a carbon plate. When you point your finger at someone, there are 3 fingers pointing bring back at you.
You clearly haven't been following this story at all.
She's worn the same prototype in all her most recent races.
Just cause she wears them doesn't mean she thinks it's a good thing. It would be stupid not to wear them when competing is your job.
ezby wrote:
You clearly haven't been following this story at all.
She's worn the same prototype in all her most recent races.
Just cause she wears them doesn't mean she thinks it's a good thing. It would be stupid not to wear them when competing is your job.
I hate to burst your bubble, but I'm more than aware of what she (and everyone else) wears. You can see a variant of this shoe dating all the way back to her Boston win. What I'm pointing out is hypocrisy- I can't stand it. In my opinion, it's nearly on the level of being a liar.
And how the hell does she know how much faster the vaporflys make you. At least gen pop can buy the Nike shoes. What she has are secret shoes not available to the us.
Hypocrites unite! wrote:
With all her talk about the Vaporfly, she shows up in a blacked out pair of Brooks prototypes with what looks to be a carbon plate. When you point your finger at someone, there are 3 fingers pointing bring back at you.
Apparently all the caffeine from her coffee was not quite enough.
What's hypocritical? There's nothing illegal about "blacked out", and there's nothing illegal about prototypes. The IAAF says that a "type of shoe" must be reasonably available to all and not provide an unfair advantage. The prototypes that you complain about are of a "type" (plate plus some kind of foam) that are reasonably available to all. Those prototypes are also probably not as fast as Nike's Vaporflies due to a patent (pending) protected curved plate design.
So far, the Vaporfly models are the only ones that have unfair advantage that is protected by a pending patent. Nike's own research shows that the secret sauce in the carbon plate is that curve that they use, but other brands can't.
Maybe the non-Nike prototype shoes HAVE to be prototypes because they ARE copying the Nike extreme curve in the plate design? They couldn't sell shoes with that extreme curve without being sued to heck by Nike when/if that patent become confirmed rather than just pending.
You failed to point out any hypocrisy. Congratulations.
zzzz wrote:
What's hypocritical? There's nothing illegal about "blacked out", and there's nothing illegal about prototypes. The IAAF says that a "type of shoe" must be reasonably available to all and not provide an unfair advantage. The prototypes that you complain about are of a "type" (plate plus some kind of foam) that are reasonably available to all. Those prototypes are also probably not as fast as Nike's Vaporflies due to a patent (pending) protected curved plate design.
So far, the Vaporfly models are the only ones that have unfair advantage that is protected by a pending patent. Nike's own research shows that the secret sauce in the carbon plate is that curve that they use, but other brands can't.
Maybe the non-Nike prototype shoes HAVE to be prototypes because they ARE copying the Nike extreme curve in the plate design? They couldn't sell shoes with that extreme curve without being sued to heck by Nike when/if that patent become confirmed rather than just pending.
You don’t get it. We have no idea what is in these Brooks prototypes. With the Vapies we do know what is in them. She was bitching about this a day ago. Maybe she keeps her mouth shut and let this play out. Her career was good but never really too American which absolutely kills her.
zzzz wrote:
Maybe the non-Nike prototype shoes HAVE to be prototypes because they ARE copying the Nike extreme curve in the plate design? They couldn't sell shoes with that extreme curve without being sued to heck by Nike when/if that patent become confirmed rather than just pending.
? I’ve seen the Brooks Prototype. It’s almost like they got their hands on several pair of 4% prototypes and cut them apart ?
You dont get it wrote:
zzzz wrote:
What's hypocritical? There's nothing illegal about "blacked out", and there's nothing illegal about prototypes. The IAAF says that a "type of shoe" must be reasonably available to all and not provide an unfair advantage. The prototypes that you complain about are of a "type" (plate plus some kind of foam) that are reasonably available to all. Those prototypes are also probably not as fast as Nike's Vaporflies due to a patent (pending) protected curved plate design.
So far, the Vaporfly models are the only ones that have unfair advantage that is protected by a pending patent. Nike's own research shows that the secret sauce in the carbon plate is that curve that they use, but other brands can't.
Maybe the non-Nike prototype shoes HAVE to be prototypes because they ARE copying the Nike extreme curve in the plate design? They couldn't sell shoes with that extreme curve without being sued to heck by Nike when/if that patent become confirmed rather than just pending.
You don’t get it. We have no idea what is in these Brooks prototypes. With the Vapies we do know what is in them. She was bitching about this a day ago. Maybe she keeps her mouth shut and let this play out. Her career was good but never really too American which absolutely kills her.
So you think these prototypes are faster than the Nikes? I don't think anyone else thinks that.
After all, why wouldn't they sell them then? The only reason I can think of is that they either are slower than the Nikes (like the Hoka plated shoes that have come out), OR they copy the patent pending extreme curve of the Nikes, and thus wouldn't be allowed to sell them due to the likelihood of getting sued by Nike for each one that they sell.
zzzz wrote:
You dont get it wrote:
You don’t get it. We have no idea what is in these Brooks prototypes. With the Vapies we do know what is in them. She was bitching about this a day ago. Maybe she keeps her mouth shut and let this play out. Her career was good but never really too American which absolutely kills her.
So you think these prototypes are faster than the Nikes? I don't think anyone else thinks that.
After all, why wouldn't they sell them then? The only reason I can think of is that they either are slower than the Nikes (like the Hoka plated shoes that have come out), OR they copy the patent pending extreme curve of the Nikes, and thus wouldn't be allowed to sell them due to the likelihood of getting sued by Nike for each one that they sell.
The OP must be a Nike shill or intern. They know that Nike is the one with the faster shoe technology, but points fingers at the brands trying to catch up, even when those brands are totally in the right according to IAAF rules.
zzzz wrote:
zzzz wrote:
So you think these prototypes are faster than the Nikes? I don't think anyone else thinks that.
After all, why wouldn't they sell them then? The only reason I can think of is that they either are slower than the Nikes (like the Hoka plated shoes that have come out), OR they copy the patent pending extreme curve of the Nikes, and thus wouldn't be allowed to sell them due to the likelihood of getting sued by Nike for each one that they sell.
The OP must be a Nike shill or intern. They know that Nike is the one with the faster shoe technology, but points fingers at the brands trying to catch up, even when those brands are totally in the right according to IAAF rules.
This comment is display of supreme idiocity, bias and hypocrisy all in one. Prototype shoes reasonably available to all... LOL thats something new. Let me know where can I buy them
If you can't beat them join them.
OPFail wrote:
You failed to point out any hypocrisy. Congratulations.
Complains about plates in shoes, shoes not being available to everyone, and "unfair advantage". Uses Brooks version unavailable to anyone with an attempted copy of the Vaporfly. I'm going with hypocrisy on this one.
nv4 wrote:
This comment is display of supreme idiocity, bias and hypocrisy all in one. Prototype shoes reasonably available to all... LOL thats something new. Let me know where can I buy them
Read the IAAF rule. They want the shoe "type", not specific model, to be reasonably available to all. The rules about unfair advantage should be read as between sponsored athletes with different sponsors, not pros vs. hobby joggers. The IAAF doesn't care about pros vs hobby joggers. If they did, then elite water tables and starting corrals would be illegal.
zzzz wrote:
zzzz wrote:
So you think these prototypes are faster than the Nikes? I don't think anyone else thinks that.
After all, why wouldn't they sell them then? The only reason I can think of is that they either are slower than the Nikes (like the Hoka plated shoes that have come out), OR they copy the patent pending extreme curve of the Nikes, and thus wouldn't be allowed to sell them due to the likelihood of getting sued by Nike for each one that they sell.
The OP must be a Nike shill or intern. They know that Nike is the one with the faster shoe technology, but points fingers at the brands trying to catch up, even when those brands are totally in the right according to IAAF rules.
Huh?! I'm a former "sub-elite"/elite from the mid/late 80's that works in the tech industry. Adidas sponsored me all ~4 years of chasing the dream. I owe them a lot; and if anything, I despise Nike.
Ritz's favorite teammate wrote:
OPFail wrote:
You failed to point out any hypocrisy. Congratulations.
Complains about plates in shoes, shoes not being available to everyone, and "unfair advantage". Uses Brooks version unavailable to anyone with an attempted copy of the Vaporfly. I'm going with hypocrisy on this one.
Saying that she doesn’t think the sport should allow them but following suit because they do is not hypocrisy.
Fail.
Hypocrites unite! wrote:
zzzz wrote:
The OP must be a Nike shill or intern. They know that Nike is the one with the faster shoe technology, but points fingers at the brands trying to catch up, even when those brands are totally in the right according to IAAF rules.
Huh?! I'm a former "sub-elite"/elite from the mid/late 80's that works in the tech industry. Adidas sponsored me all ~4 years of chasing the dream. I owe them a lot; and if anything, I despise Nike.
Well, you sound like a Nike shill or intern. Read my arguments again carefully. They are entirely reasonable.
Hypocrites unite! wrote:
zzzz wrote:
The OP must be a Nike shill or intern. They know that Nike is the one with the faster shoe technology, but points fingers at the brands trying to catch up, even when those brands are totally in the right according to IAAF rules.
Huh?! I'm a former "sub-elite"/elite from the mid/late 80's that works in the tech industry. Adidas sponsored me all ~4 years of chasing the dream. I owe them a lot; and if anything, I despise Nike.
sure you are? LOL!!!!!! sub-elite/elite, LOL!!!! when you post your name, then and only then will you be believed. otherwise it's just another anonymous former elite crapper.