The Rise of Super Shoes
Are They Necessary for Athletes to Compete at the World Stage?
- ZoomX Alphafly Next% 2
- ZoomX Alphafly Next%
- ZoomX Vaporfly Next% 3
- ZoomX Vaporfly Next% 2
- Adizero Pro 3
- ZoomX Dragonfly
- Air Zoom Victory
- Adizero Avanti TYO
- FuelCell LD
- Cielo X 2 LD
- ZoomX Streakfly
- ZoomX Vaporfly Next% 2
- Adizero Takumi Sen 9
- ZoomX Vaporfly 3
- MetaSpeed Sky
In 2017, Nike made waves in the running world with their Breaking 2 project, a highly-publicized race featuring three elite athletes attempting to break the 2-hour marathon barrier. Although the runners finished just outside of 2 hours, Eliud Kipchoge's time of 2:00:25 was an impressive 2-and-a-half minutes faster than the world record. However, this performance was not recognized as a world record due to the rotating pacers. His impressive time was partially due to the groundbreaking Nike Vaporfly 4% shoes that the runners were wearing. These shoes feature an energy-returning foam and carbon plate, which together make them 4% more energy efficient than the closest racing shoe available at the time.
Nike Vaporfly 4% shoes
Is 4% a lot of energy?
If an average runner increases their speed by 4% during a marathon, their finishing time would be 10 minutes faster. Although 10 minutes may not seem like a significant amount of time, this time improvement is a major accomplishment, given that elite runners often train for years to shave off even a single minute. Additionally, modern super shoes offer greater energy-saving benefits than the Vaporfly 4% model. The use of high-tech shoes may seem like a threat to the integrity of athletic competition. However, it's important to note that a 4% increase in running efficiency does not translate to a 4% improvement in running speed, especially at faster paces.
Estimated change in race time, compared with a previous result, when switching shoes
Fastest Shoes
Track Distance
At the beginning of any race, it's hard to miss the large number of runners wearing high-tech super shoes. Elite athletes require these shoes to stay competitive, and since they are often sponsored, they have access to them for free. However, it's less clear why so many non-elite runners also choose to wear these shoes. Amateur runners, on the other hand, often have to pay $250 out of pocket for a single pair of these shoes, which may need to be replaced after as little as 150 miles. This means that marathoners can end up spending as much as $40 per race on footwear alone. Despite the high cost, many runners still believe that the energy boost provided by these shoes is worth the price.
Is it fair?
When somebody does a great performance now, everybody will question if it's the shoe, and that is the credibility problem.
Karsten Warholm 400 hurdle world record holder
These remarkable shoes offer significant benefits that can help runners run faster and recover more quickly, enabling them to train more effectively and achieve fitness levels that were previously unattainable. Alternatively, the shoes' performance benefits on race day could lead to previously unattainable records being broken by worse athletes who are able to run faster. Usain Bolt, the current world record holder in both the 100 and 200 meters, has criticized these advances, calling them "weird and unfair." He believes that if he had access to these shoes when he was competing, he could have run even faster than his current record and perhaps broken the 9.5-second mark. Tegla Loroupe, the former world record holder in the marathon, has also condemned these shoes, stating that they essentially amount to cheating.
I don't think there's a lot of data to show that they're having such a big improvement.
Trayvon Bromell one of the top sprinters
While it is obvious that improvements to shoes will threaten records, this has always been happening to some extent and will always happen. One well known example is the 4 minute barrier in the mile.It took several years and many attempts by athletes before Roger Bannister became the first person to break the 4 minute barrier in 1954. Fast forward to to 2022 where 6 American High School athletes were able to break this barrier. Although shoe technology has been improving incrementally for years, the recent advancements were so significant that they caused controversy. It also was caused by the technological breakthroughs revolving around what is fast now.Previously, the speed of a shoe was determined by its weight, resulting in the thinnest and lightest shoes being the fastest. However, the latest advancements show that having more foam in the shoe is now faster, especially with the foam being lighter than ever before. This has allowed companies to add as much foam as they need until their product becomes the most efficient. Nevertheless, this could be easily prevented by adding a maximum stack height, which is the height of the foam underfoot, to the rules.
Sponsorships
If the best are willing to take $0 from a shoe sponsor because they feel they need VF [i.e., the Vaporfly, the Alphafly's predecessor] to be competitive, why would Nike pay them? And what can the next tier possibly ask for?
Des Linden winner of the Boston marathon 2018
The biggest problem with these shoes is the inequality among shoe companies. Some companies produce superior shoes, which puts many athletes in a difficult position. They are left with a choice between accepting good deals that limit their performance due to inferior shoes or taking a risk and accepting a worse deal, or no deal at all, to gain access to the best shoes. This issue is mainly caused by Nike's practice of underpaying most of its athletes, leaving many other athletes with no sponsorship deals if they want to remain competitive. In fact, the fastest U.S. athletes in the men's and women's races at last year's Boston Marathon had recently terminated their sponsorship deals and competed with the fastest shoe on the market, the Nike Alphafly.
Karsten Warholm in the 400 hurdles at the Tokyo Olympics. Notice his thin shoes compared to normal super shoes.
It's actually taking away opportunity, because unless the one company that works best for you thinks you are a perfect match you may never be sponsored.
two-time Olympian Kara Goucher
The 400-meter hurdles race at the Tokyo Olympics was a breathtaking event where Karsten Warholm shattered his own world record by an astonishing 0.76 seconds, with two other finishers also breaking his previous record. However, after the race, Warholm expressed concern about the shoes worn by the second-place runner, who was sponsored by Nike rather than Puma. Warholm complained that the shoes worn by his competitor were faster then his, despite wearing his own pair of super shoes. He later went on to take back his statement and say he didn’t actually know which pair was better.
What should be done?
It is widely acknowledged that the super shoes could be unfair and pose a significant challenge for ensuring fair competition among athletes. However, opinions on how to address this issue remain divided. One crucial step taken was the ban on shoes with multiple stacked plates, which created a spring-like effect. This decision had a significant impact on Nike's shoe lineup, as it rendered the original plans for the Nike Alphaflys, featuring three carbon plates, impossible. Similarly, the Nike Viperflys were also deemed illegal due to their design.
There was another rule added that restricted shoe technology, which was the stack height rule. It stated that track spikes cannot have more than 20mm of foam, and road shoes cannot exceed 40mm. This rule aims to regulate the amount of responsive foam used in these shoes, which is a key factor in their high performance.
In order to ensure fairness for all athletes, shoes must be made accessible to everyone at a reasonable price and for a certain amount of time before the competitions in which they will be used. This is especially important for unsponsored athletes who need access to the same shoes as their competitors.
While it is a positive step forward, the rule of making shoes available to all athletes at a reasonable price only partially addresses the challenges faced by athletes who are forced to choose between buying shoes or managing their finances.
Nike Viperflys banned due to their design
The introduction of super shoes by other manufacturers has been the most significant development in supporting athletes. While Nike still produces the top-performing shoes, the difference in performance between their shoes and those of other manufacturers has become negligible. It has become more about finding a shoe that works best for the individual athlete rather than relying on which shoe performs best in laboratory testing.
Additionally, some athletes have found a solution by signing with a company that allows them to race in whichever shoes they prefer, providing greater freedom in selecting the optimal shoe for their performance.
The rules regarding shoe technology strike a balance between allowing progress while preventing excessive advancement. These regulations are fair and necessary, particularly given the controversy surrounding the development of these shoes since their release to the public.
The regulations provide a necessary framework that ensures a level playing field for all athletes while promoting technological advancements that enhance performance. They help to prevent the creation of insurmountable advantages for certain athletes, while still allowing for progress and innovation in shoe technology.