As an avowed shoe nerd, I’d like to correct the beginning of the video. Kipchoge broke two hours in the Alphafly, a then brand new prototype. By that point the Vaporfly had been around for years. We can moan about supershoes all we want, but that shift happened long ago - for better or worse it happened, and we’re living in that world. Maybe most importantly, unlike in the early days, every company now has a carbon racing shoe and there’s not much between them. If anything, Nike is being left behind by many of its competitors, with On and Adidas arguably developing better racing product nowadays. Most Nike athletes aren’t running in the newest Vaporfly models, and many of its marathoners are still running in the first alphafly - a now 4 year old shoe. I think you’re correct to point out that the shoes can hurt the sport - I’d say from 2016 to 2019 for sure Nike athletes benefitted hugely from their innovation. Look at the Rio marathon podium or the US Olympic trials 2016. Nobody even knew about the Vaporfly prototypes beside the Nike athletes and that seems grubby at best. And although the shoes get a lot of credit for these world records, one underreported factor is the huge advances in endurance sports nutrition that have been made in about the same timeframe. When it comes to sprints, the benefits really aren’t very clear at all. The winning time in the Tokyo 100m would have been 5th in London 2012 for example. If shoe tech was that important in the sprints, I guarantee we would see a lot more 9.7 and 9.6 times. As it is, 9.8 which was good but not great 10-15 years ago is usually good enough to win diamond leagues, world championships and Olympic 100m races.
Agreed with the sprint comment. I don't think "magic" shoes will make a tangible difference for sprints. He mentioned the Viperfly having a carbon fiber sole, but sprint spikes have had carbon soles for years and super stiff soles for even longer. Plus in the discussion about compliance and energy return, compliance is about comfort. Sprinters don't really care about comfort, they're only running for less than a minute. Better believe they'll take a bit of discomfort to get that energy return number as close to 100% as possible.
It is because of Bolt and some other very talanted athletes that we are used to 9.7s in the 100m and expect the same from today's elite sprinters. Actually the 9.7 runs are quite rare just check the all time list! There are other examples for technologigal doping tho....look at the 400m hurdles, the 800 m for men and 400 m for women this year. We are now used to the 400m hurdles but the time of the last two mentioned disciplines are insane this year....I mean 4 girls below 49 secs in the 400m flat...that is insane!
@@nexuslux Thanks for your feedback! Do you mean we should have shown the Alphafly instead of the Vaporfly throughout the video? We figured it's fine to show the Vaporfly since this is the shoe that started it and we talk about "super shoes" in general, but I get the confusion when you are more familiar with the topic.
@@Nahanoo Not that easy. Let's just add jet packs while we are at it. It's an extreme case of course, but shows why having an anything goes mentality does not fly either. Sports must be regulated.
This video is closing in on 6 years late. The discourse about the super shoes peaked just before Tokyo, when super spikes were just hitting the market. Also, I really hate the clickbait title. The IOC never banned any shoe. World Athletics provided guidelines. The IOC simply enforces the rules of the governing body for each event.
the comparision with Formula 1 is overblown imo, if anything it is more like cycling where a great aerodynamic bike can give great benefits to riders as they have to expend less energy for the same speeds but ultimately the human is still the engine.
maybe because nike trade marked the technology behind this so other shoes cannot replicate or make it better. while in bike, every one has similar advantage because everyone has similar technological advantages, this is different.
@@MudThought competitors are making very similar shoes that reach similar goals though and it's not like patents do not exist in cycling either. The main thing is that whatever people use, it has to be available on the market, which is the case. Just recently some Tour de France riders were complaining they were at a disadvantage because their sponsors bikes are quite a bit heavier than other teams bikes, so I think the situation is quite comparable in other sports. Arguably in cycling it's much worse if you look at the equipment of high budget vs low budget teams (or nations in the Olympics). But my main point was, even cycling is still far off the F1 situation, where you literally cannot win in a bad car even you are by far the best driver.
No this would be more like bike using advanced suspension and space age soft tire grip. Yea mechanical advantage is not the same as aero. Aero is limited by V² So the faster you go, the harder air pushes on you squared
Certainly. In my professional opinion, there appears to be a potential conflict of interest among certain members of the board, who may be receiving financial incentives from brands such as Adidas. This could influence their decisions regarding sponsorship visibility, potentially leading to the exclusion of Nike. Furthermore, the organization and management of the Olympics have been marred by numerous issues, including subpar athlete accommodations, such as uncomfortable beds and lack of air conditioning, as well as the occurrence of water events in highly polluted waters, resulting in athlete illnesses. These factors collectively contribute to the perception of corruption and disorganization within the Olympic organization.
I'm sorry but this could have used much more research. 1) World Athletics never banned any Nike shoes during this period. The rule changes covered exisiting products. 2) Super spikes are nothing new. Puma had their 'brush spike' banned back in 1968 after it broke WRs in testing. Nike even shelved a spike with metal sandpaper instead of spikes back in 1985. 3) Carbon-fibre plate running shoes are not new. Fila did this with racing shoes back in 1996. They dominated world marathons for years and only stopped when the company collapsed. 4) The Viperfly may have had the potential to improve times (it was never proven) but almost all the tech except the decoupled spike plate (which the patent said would act as a second plate) made it into production spikes 5) Even with the super spikes of today, Usain Bolt's record has not been approached.
I once won in college race , and I was surprised.... The only reason was best fitting comfortable shoe , It wasn't even This track shoe , but it's was comfortable
It’s funny how the video is 9:57 or 0.1 seconds better the 100m world record 9.58 while talking about how cheating could have beaten it with super shoes
I accumulated a total of 89 thousand today. I am truly grateful for all the knowledge and information you have given me over the past few weeks. I started with 5 thousand 2 months ago .God bless you Deborah
l've always wanted to be involved for a long time but the volatility in the price has been very confusing to me. Although I have watched a lot of RUclips videos about it but I still find it hard to understand
This happened in early 2000s in swimming. They banned "sharkskin" swimsuits, and all world records created wearing those swimsuits have been marked. Technology doesn't have to rule the tracks, on land or in water.
literally, if people tell me "ough. i hate running. its so exhausting. why would i do that" i always tell them "nah. you just havnt run in a good shoe yet :D"
IOC should just make a standard shoe layout which needs to be used at Olympics and can be produced by every sponsor. Much better than ruling that can be checked for loop holes.
@@sweatyatoms7719 Shit, because you made me curious now :D From my point of view as someone who just watches from the outside it feels like that way only the physique, technique and ability of the runner would count, not any advantage through better equipment. But I guess there needs to be some degree of freedom because every runner has different needs for the shoe, that are not working with the idea of a standard template?
@@Arc0w Unless you are going back to the old racing flats, you would be giving an advantage to certain athletes. Many brands are producing 2 different super shoe models and the athletes are choosing which works best for them. Saucony used to make a model specifically for Molly Huddle because the Endorphin Pro didn't work for her. Now she races in the Endorphin Elite. Molly Seidel uses the Puma Deviate Elite because the Fast-R doesn't work for her. Some people actually respond negatively to some super shoes versus flats.
There are many inaccuracies in this video - for example when you talk about Kipchoge's Alphafly's from 2:00:25 attempt, you show wrong shoes - much newer Alphafly model. These from the video were not even produced when Kipchoge ran 2:00:25 in 2017. Also, in 2:06 you show Yeezys - popular (designed by Kanye West) streetwear sneakers - as an example of running shoes. And I have just watched 3 minutes of the video yet.
@@wolololerwhy would sports brands spend billions in sponsorship money then? They are going to sponser a product that they didn’t create nor could they sell it like they normally do
Nah, what about the records? Wouldn’t be fair to previous competitors. I don’t want to see anyone breaking Usain Bolt’s using shoes that make you faster! Keep it minimal!
@@jakem5039 they might have let him cheat as it would be a massive scandal, see the fancy bear leaks about pro athletes that were doing that got away with it. Alternatively he might have used a higher end drug that can't be tested. It is certainly possible that he didn't cheat but if 3 of the 4 members of the team doped then it wouldn't be surprising if he doped too.
The “4%” label refers to the claimed improvement in running economy, a measure of oxygen consumption at a given pace. If Kipchoge ran 4% faster with super shoes we'd expect to see a time of about 1:58:32. He actually ran about 3% faster with the shoes, special pacers, pacing lights, a course specifically for this, and a day picked out of a window of days for the weather.
Exactly, it wasnt just the shoes, it was the shoes, the pacers, the lights, the constant supply of water, the rigorous diet, the perfect weather, the perfect track, and the constant cheering of people (most marathons have treks where no ppl are present)
I use the alphafly and omg yes it makes every singe run much easier and i run faster with less fatigue. As an amateur I am totally okay with those benefits
In my opinion, as long as a shoes don't give back more energy than you put down I don't see the problem. If technology got to the point where it was a 100% energy return that would be awesome and should be allowed
Springs, yes. Wheels, no. If somebody wants to run with pogo sticks, let them. But no rollerblades. We can revisit the issue when we can't distinguish springs from wheels.
I was living in Jordan era. We believe we can jump higher when using Air Jordan shoe ! Wearing it , give us boost of confidence, respect from peer and opponents and feeling you're Jordan who can fly.
And yet in the closing ceremonies in Paris, the opening act was of the Golden Voyageur coming down to recreate the lost Olympics while encountering Nike, the goddess of victory.😋
the issue isn't that these shoes exist it's that only nike can sell them. also stop it. like if we're going to see peak human performance inject em all with steroids and give them the best tech known to man. hot take probably but let's see what the body can do.
They’re all using whatever chemical compounds they can get away with anyway. If you’re not caught doping, it’s only cos the dope you’re using isn’t banned.
I believe As an Avid Runner, there shouldn’t be any kind of Ban. As long as that specific shoe is available for Everyone to obtain, it’s a fair game and a leveled Field. You Can Never stop technology and Innovation.
@@unruly7516 there is no debate for this people, they just want to win no matter what, they have no pride in their skills, they just want to be a name in history. Winning because of tecnology is not wining
If the gear has no active component similar to megalobox enhancement but just improved energy return due to good engineering. It’s not cheating. There was also just an arbitrary line drawn what is cheating. The only „fair“ way would be that all runners running barefoot on exactly the same track under exactly the same conditions but that’s impossible to achieve. In contrary to e.g. doping, there is no risk to using different shoes.
A spring board in diving doesn't give back more, but it dramatically alters the ability to store and return energy. That's why stack height is an important distinction. There is a point where you start running to use the shoe, rather than the shoes just enhancing.
I believe Dawn Harper (100mh/'08 OC) said they have shoes that basically "throw" you down the track several months ago and presented some of the same "tech doping" arguments. Between the questionable rules, and questionable eligibility, and questionable performances... I've lost interest. I don't want to watch a XY beat up an XX because some man in room said it's OK. I don't want to watch super shoe contestants beat the Dawn Harpers of the world. I don't want to watch some person from nowhere all of a sudden run world record times then totally disappear.
It’s funny to me that if an athletes gets a good shoe from his or her brand that other athletes have an issue with it. If your brand doesn’t make a shoe that makes you fast, you’re with the wrong brand. Technology will keep improving, since the time of shoes I’m sure as they developed, times got faster, so just because this is a giant leap, it shouldn’t be seen any differently
I recently watched the video by Cleo Abram about this and their the Nike exec told it was to further human capabilities but its not because of the human being better that the records are broken and imo i dont like this because of the non-human factor in the records being broken.
Anyone that thinks the equipment makes all the difference isn't paying attention to actual results. Many athletes in a given event have the same equipment, yet some athletes are more consistent winners.
Remember people that the best shoe for most people in most situations is a Barefoot shoe as it is healthier for your arches and overall foot strength and shape.
Also, what about the sole thickness? If you can manage to run on a superlight 5-cm thick sole, that is definitely a great advange, lenghtening your stride in addition to any energy-transfer improvement! (and I do recognize that the thicker the sole, the harder it gets to improve energy transfer)
ALL running races can be run barefoot! A textured track gives you all the traction and cushion you need. For the marathon, you run it on a beach at low tide, and or a golf course with manicured grass. Issue solved!
I thought competitions is all about progress. Why ban progress? This isn't going to halt or hinder progress in health and nutrition studies, nor sport sciences, as far as I know.
Super shoes have been around for nearly a decade now. Where's all the sprinters beating Usain Bolt or the marathon runners breaking 2hrs? It's all a bunch of nonsense. Technology is always looking on ways to improve performance but it's always the athlete that's the driving force behind the athletic endeavour.
This debate is silly. If 4% lets Lyles break Bolt's record, then putting shoes of similar or better performance on Bolt would help him break those records further. At the top level, as long as everyone has super shoes, then there is no issue. If the shoes help too much, make everyone run barefoot and _then_ we can see who's really fast.
I put on my pair of Vaporfly's for the first time and it felt like the whole back of the shoe disappeared under a cloud. It was bananas. I'd ban them too.
World records are becoming more to do with advances in technology (track, shoes, therapeutic regimes). As long as people accept that and are able to understand how great many athletics in the past were.
In ancient Greece, competitors completed naked. Let's go back to that. No shoes. No pants. No nothing. That way the swimmers can't use supersuits. Runners don't get supershoes. I guess we could allow competitors to shave themselves, but aside from that...
My first thought was to wonder why anybody gets antsy about more efficient shoes - just keep improving the breed. Surely, if athletes run only by their own energy, nobody is cheating. Then I thought about amputees running on springy prosthetic legs - ok at the length of a human leg, but an artificial advantage if they are longer stilts. Further development: roller blades, then a bicycle. All using nothing more than the athletes' own energy. Ok, we need to draw a line somewhere.
Funny how these modern record breaking athletes use technology 50 years or more advanced than the athletes that set those records and see nothing wrong about it
as long as everyone has access to the shoe than i don't see an issue. thou this dose not mean having them ava to buy to everyone but having them ava to buy at an affordable price for everyone. ie a $300 shoe might be fine for an American or European someone from Central or South America might not be able to afford this
Really stupid to ban a shoe. If theyre better all athletes should wear them and if the other brands are crying, they just have to upgrade its products, period.
They should just make them all use the same equipment to offer an even playing field where only the athlete’s ability/physical prowess determine who wins
Either make everybody run barefeet, or just allow this. This is so stupid really, why would you ban a shoe that literally every athlete can buy if they chose to?
he should learn to shut his mouth. lest someone remind him of his teammates who tested positive for peds. its hardly shoes that hangs a dark cloud over his records. there will always be a question mark when people in his team pee's acid
The other thing I never see mentioned abt the distance shoes specifically is that most of that 4% is actually prolly due to the 1-2 inches of height gain from the massive midsole. Usually extra height (therefore longer stride length) is countered by the fact that ur heart has to work harder to pump ur blood. These shoes give u the extra advantage with no drawback which is pretty unfair. An inch or two doesn’t sound like much but it means a few more inches per stride which really adds up over 26 miles. It’s not super unfair if all pro athletes have them but it ruins the amateur level bc then it becomes pay to win essentially.
Anyone complaining about records being broken because of shoes that give an advantage is honestly just lame. Shoes have given an advantage forever. The only way to have a shoe that isn't better than the rest is to run barefoot. That may be fine for 100-400 meters but marathon runners would suffer so much. And honestly if I had a world record (also because of a shoe, I doubt Usain Bold could set his times in those loafers with spikes) I'd want a technology improvement to be why I lost it, because then you can still say "If I was running today and had those, imagine what my time would be"
Athletes used to have worse shoes compared the ones being worn today. They also had worse nutrition discipline. What we are seeing is improvement. The shoes should also improve over time but it should be available for everyone. In the end, the best athlete will always emerge no matter the tools available if everyone can purchase it. Also I would like in the future a different competition where the juiced athletes can compete so that we see how far the human body can do. Only issue may be health or death for those who will want to win no matter the consequences.
IMO these competitions should be a battle between people NOT technologies so a standard shoe should be compulsory for all runners like Formula 1 has a standard tyre for all cars.
yep Super Shoe regulation is pretty much like F1, just like Mizuno Rebellion Pro 2 finding the loophole in the rule and design a shoe that is regulated but having a total of 54mm stack midfoot
It's interesting when you look at a sport like MLB that requires wooden bats even though companies have researched other compounds and technology. I'm surprised running hasn't done a similar standardization for shoes.
7:55 "athletes don't have access to the same kind of equipment" sure they do. Nike will sell shoes to anyone with the money. If you're talking about world class athletes, they certainly have a few hundred dollars for a pair of shoes - arguably one of the most important parts of their attire.
arent they being punished for being good at their job? nike, adidas and every other shoe company have bragged about "making shoes that make you faster" for years, now that theyve actually done it, they get banned?
Nike's super shoes have undoubtedly revolutionized running, but the controversy surrounding them raises important questions about technological doping. World Athletics' response is a step in the right direction, but the debate about the fairness of these shoes will likely continue. It's interesting to explore how these advancements affect athletes' mindset and the future of competitive running.
![Megan Thee Stallion - Neva Play (feat. RM) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TpYTyAaTRts/mqdefault.jpg)
🥇What's your favorite track and field event at the Olympics?
Come on, of course it's 100m
@@zillavale what about pole vault? Or javelin should be interesting this year :)
@@AthleticInterestwomen's 400mh is the only thing which comes close in my opinion
@@zillavale What about the men's 400h? Could be just as exciting.
The Thiam and Johnson-Thompson rivalry
As an avowed shoe nerd, I’d like to correct the beginning of the video. Kipchoge broke two hours in the Alphafly, a then brand new prototype. By that point the Vaporfly had been around for years. We can moan about supershoes all we want, but that shift happened long ago - for better or worse it happened, and we’re living in that world. Maybe most importantly, unlike in the early days, every company now has a carbon racing shoe and there’s not much between them. If anything, Nike is being left behind by many of its competitors, with On and Adidas arguably developing better racing product nowadays. Most Nike athletes aren’t running in the newest Vaporfly models, and many of its marathoners are still running in the first alphafly - a now 4 year old shoe. I think you’re correct to point out that the shoes can hurt the sport - I’d say from 2016 to 2019 for sure Nike athletes benefitted hugely from their innovation. Look at the Rio marathon podium or the US Olympic trials 2016. Nobody even knew about the Vaporfly prototypes beside the Nike athletes and that seems grubby at best. And although the shoes get a lot of credit for these world records, one underreported factor is the huge advances in endurance sports nutrition that have been made in about the same timeframe.
When it comes to sprints, the benefits really aren’t very clear at all. The winning time in the Tokyo 100m would have been 5th in London 2012 for example. If shoe tech was that important in the sprints, I guarantee we would see a lot more 9.7 and 9.6 times. As it is, 9.8 which was good but not great 10-15 years ago is usually good enough to win diamond leagues, world championships and Olympic 100m races.
Agreed with the sprint comment. I don't think "magic" shoes will make a tangible difference for sprints. He mentioned the Viperfly having a carbon fiber sole, but sprint spikes have had carbon soles for years and super stiff soles for even longer.
Plus in the discussion about compliance and energy return, compliance is about comfort. Sprinters don't really care about comfort, they're only running for less than a minute. Better believe they'll take a bit of discomfort to get that energy return number as close to 100% as possible.
There will always be innovation and advances technology, inevitable.
We will have to slowly adapt, at times, adapt quickly.
It is because of Bolt and some other very talanted athletes that we are used to 9.7s in the 100m and expect the same from today's elite sprinters. Actually the 9.7 runs are quite rare just check the all time list! There are other examples for technologigal doping tho....look at the 400m hurdles, the 800 m for men and 400 m for women this year. We are now used to the 400m hurdles but the time of the last two mentioned disciplines are insane this year....I mean 4 girls below 49 secs in the 400m flat...that is insane!
how can you watch the video when he keeps showing the wrong shoes? i just stopped.
@@nexuslux Thanks for your feedback! Do you mean we should have shown the Alphafly instead of the Vaporfly throughout the video? We figured it's fine to show the Vaporfly since this is the shoe that started it and we talk about "super shoes" in general, but I get the confusion when you are more familiar with the topic.
Can we also have a competition where this is not banned?
Just to see how far this technology can go
Yeah. They are inevitably going to be used at some point.
It makes no sense why it’s banned. If it’s up in retail, every athlete should just buy them
@@Nahanoo Not that easy. Let's just add jet packs while we are at it. It's an extreme case of course, but shows why having an anything goes mentality does not fly either. Sports must be regulated.
Think metal vs wood bats in baseball. Little kids through university all use metal, but the pros use wood bats.
@@Nahanoo then you would have people using a version of the blades Pistorius used and it would be pogo running
This video is closing in on 6 years late. The discourse about the super shoes peaked just before Tokyo, when super spikes were just hitting the market.
Also, I really hate the clickbait title. The IOC never banned any shoe. World Athletics provided guidelines. The IOC simply enforces the rules of the governing body for each event.
wrong. boxing IOC ignored all the rules regarding female athletes who failed gender exams.
@@mikatu there is zero evidence that any proper tests were actually conducted
Hey, we all need to justify our sponsorships SOMEHOW.
@@mikatu Lol, you got conned by Russian fake news
BG music is loud.
Thanks for the feedback, we'll try to mix it better next time 🎧🕺
no it isn't
@@AthleticInterest nah the volume mixing is fine
@@tpsam are you okay? Do you need some hearing aids
@@Vivek-Goel_Superfanpeople reply just for the sake of contradicting others, don’t bother
the comparision with Formula 1 is overblown imo, if anything it is more like cycling where a great aerodynamic bike can give great benefits to riders as they have to expend less energy for the same speeds but ultimately the human is still the engine.
It's also the same with the prosthetics para Olympic runners use. Some of those blades are super advanced and give the athletes a mega advantage
maybe because nike trade marked the technology behind this so other shoes cannot replicate or make it better.
while in bike, every one has similar advantage because everyone has similar technological advantages, this is different.
@@MudThought competitors are making very similar shoes that reach similar goals though and it's not like patents do not exist in cycling either. The main thing is that whatever people use, it has to be available on the market, which is the case. Just recently some Tour de France riders were complaining they were at a disadvantage because their sponsors bikes are quite a bit heavier than other teams bikes, so I think the situation is quite comparable in other sports. Arguably in cycling it's much worse if you look at the equipment of high budget vs low budget teams (or nations in the Olympics). But my main point was, even cycling is still far off the F1 situation, where you literally cannot win in a bad car even you are by far the best driver.
The difference in performance is about the same though. Supertimes for all teams vary by less than 5%.
No this would be more like bike using advanced suspension and space age soft tire grip. Yea mechanical advantage is not the same as aero. Aero is limited by V²
So the faster you go, the harder air pushes on you squared
If shoes are tech doping, then make the sport barefoot.
Let’s do it Greece style , no shoes , no clothes
@@gizmonovack ah, a man of culture
Apparently, they banned that too. You are not allowed to run barefoot
@@corvusglaive5769 conseslious kipruto run and won barefoot
Certainly. In my professional opinion, there appears to be a potential conflict of interest among certain members of the board, who may be receiving financial incentives from brands such as Adidas. This could influence their decisions regarding sponsorship visibility, potentially leading to the exclusion of Nike. Furthermore, the organization and management of the Olympics have been marred by numerous issues, including subpar athlete accommodations, such as uncomfortable beds and lack of air conditioning, as well as the occurrence of water events in highly polluted waters, resulting in athlete illnesses. These factors collectively contribute to the perception of corruption and disorganization within the Olympic organization.
I'm sorry but this could have used much more research.
1) World Athletics never banned any Nike shoes during this period. The rule changes covered exisiting products.
2) Super spikes are nothing new. Puma had their 'brush spike' banned back in 1968 after it broke WRs in testing. Nike even shelved a spike with metal sandpaper instead of spikes back in 1985.
3) Carbon-fibre plate running shoes are not new. Fila did this with racing shoes back in 1996. They dominated world marathons for years and only stopped when the company collapsed.
4) The Viperfly may have had the potential to improve times (it was never proven) but almost all the tech except the decoupled spike plate (which the patent said would act as a second plate) made it into production spikes
5) Even with the super spikes of today, Usain Bolt's record has not been approached.
Just a nike ad
exactly, thanks for posting this. video is kind of trash.
this has got to be one of the greatest ads for Nike
as far as sponsored content goes, this is pretty mid
LOL
Usain Bolt after wearing the shoes : Insane Bolt
Shoepain bolt ⚡
I once won in college race , and I was surprised....
The only reason was best fitting comfortable shoe ,
It wasn't even This track shoe , but it's was comfortable
He didnt run a two hour marathon. he ran a marathon distance in less than two hours. There are certain rules he didnt meet to be classed as a marathon
It’s funny how the video is 9:57 or 0.1 seconds better the 100m world record 9.58 while talking about how cheating could have beaten it with super shoes
🤫
That 9:57 would be the world record for the slowest 100m sprint.
@@WarrChan - I'm sure he means in seconds, not in minutes.
@@chrismitty_plenty yes. I know what he thinks he means. He means 9.57 but thinks it's ironic that 9:57 looks similar.
I accumulated a total of 89 thousand today. I am truly grateful for all the knowledge and information you have given me over the past few weeks. I started with 5 thousand 2 months ago .God bless you Deborah
Thanks to my co-worker (Johnson ) who suggested expert Deborah Davis
After I raised up to 525k trading with her I bought a new House and a car here in the
state🇺🇸 also paid for my son's
surgery....Glory to God, shalom.
Can I also do it??? My life is facing lots of challenges lately
l've always wanted to be involved for a long time but the volatility in the price has been very confusing to me. Although I have watched a lot of RUclips videos about it but I still find it hard to understand
I’m interested
This happened in early 2000s in swimming. They banned "sharkskin" swimsuits, and all world records created wearing those swimsuits have been marked.
Technology doesn't have to rule the tracks, on land or in water.
What about sharkskin running vests? Or Cheetahskin running shoes?
Yeah Ian Thorpe and his famous sharkskin suit versus Popov who dudn't even wire a head gear !!
2:06 Yeezy as an example of running shoe 😆
yeah that is an instant dislike on this video. I don't think he knows what the H he is talking about !!
Yeezy is and always was TRAAAASH
Sooo..I am not slow..I just dont have the right shoe😂😂
yup
literally, if people tell me "ough. i hate running. its so exhausting. why would i do that" i always tell them "nah. you just havnt run in a good shoe yet :D"
IOC should just make a standard shoe layout which needs to be used at Olympics and can be produced by every sponsor. Much better than ruling that can be checked for loop holes.
No, this is a bad idea and I don’t want to explain why.
@@sweatyatoms7719 I guess one of the reasons would be stagnation in terms of innovation
@@sweatyatoms7719 Shit, because you made me curious now :D
From my point of view as someone who just watches from the outside it feels like that way only the physique, technique and ability of the runner would count, not any advantage through better equipment.
But I guess there needs to be some degree of freedom because every runner has different needs for the shoe, that are not working with the idea of a standard template?
@@Arc0w Unless you are going back to the old racing flats, you would be giving an advantage to certain athletes. Many brands are producing 2 different super shoe models and the athletes are choosing which works best for them. Saucony used to make a model specifically for Molly Huddle because the Endorphin Pro didn't work for her. Now she races in the Endorphin Elite. Molly Seidel uses the Puma Deviate Elite because the Fast-R doesn't work for her. Some people actually respond negatively to some super shoes versus flats.
@@runnin3216absolutely. Different athletes have different feet and running styles, so if everyone uses the same shoe it wouldn’t work.
There are many inaccuracies in this video - for example when you talk about Kipchoge's Alphafly's from 2:00:25 attempt, you show wrong shoes - much newer Alphafly model. These from the video were not even produced when Kipchoge ran 2:00:25 in 2017.
Also, in 2:06 you show Yeezys - popular (designed by Kanye West) streetwear sneakers - as an example of running shoes.
And I have just watched 3 minutes of the video yet.
very poor video from this channel. click bait much.
Just look at the diagram at 8:12 to appreciate the _professionalism_ and _accuracy_ of the author of the video.
You can tell the script is written by a generative AI haha. Extremely lazy channel.
I don't know what shoes Armin Hary was wearing in 1960 Rome Olympics , but it got him down the Gravel 100m track in 10sec flat.
“Without the athletes, super shoes would just be very expensive slippers”
Quote of the day 🔥
Don’t ban the equipment, equip everyone with the same equipment. They all have to wear footwear anyway or have them run in bare feet
Arms race to be the sponsored equipment lets go
@@FleetAdmirable Just make a standartized equipment, and brands can design the paterns on it. It doesnt have to be all the same 1 colour shoes
I'd agree with this with one exception, if the faster shoes are demonstrably less safe to use, then they should be banned.
@@wolololerwhy would sports brands spend billions in sponsorship money then? They are going to sponser a product that they didn’t create nor could they sell it like they normally do
Nah, what about the records? Wouldn’t be fair to previous competitors. I don’t want to see anyone breaking Usain Bolt’s using shoes that make you faster! Keep it minimal!
I always find it weird that sport equipment in competitions are not standardised.
No better advertising then banning ashoe for being too good
Needing super shoes to beat Bolt explains how GOATed he is
What about the shoes he wore vs the world record holders before him?
3 of 4 of usain bolt's teammates were caught doping in the 2012 olympics so I wouldn't be surprised if bolt doped too.
@@sadiporter2966then why didn’t he fail the test lol
@@cjezinneI mean they were improvements sure but the premise establishes that not much has improved shoe wise until this.
@@jakem5039 they might have let him cheat as it would be a massive scandal, see the fancy bear leaks about pro athletes that were doing that got away with it. Alternatively he might have used a higher end drug that can't be tested. It is certainly possible that he didn't cheat but if 3 of the 4 members of the team doped then it wouldn't be surprising if he doped too.
The “4%” label refers to the claimed improvement in running economy, a measure of oxygen consumption at a given pace. If Kipchoge ran 4% faster with super shoes we'd expect to see a time of about 1:58:32. He actually ran about 3% faster with the shoes, special pacers, pacing lights, a course specifically for this, and a day picked out of a window of days for the weather.
Exactly, it wasnt just the shoes, it was the shoes, the pacers, the lights, the constant supply of water, the rigorous diet, the perfect weather, the perfect track, and the constant cheering of people (most marathons have treks where no ppl are present)
@@adrianpaulochoa9825 performance enhancing crowd cheering. ban them, that's cheating.
I use the alphafly and omg yes it makes every singe run much easier and i run faster with less fatigue. As an amateur I am totally okay with those benefits
The Nike Gambit ♟️✅
Nike also has a popular kneepad line.
In my opinion, as long as a shoes don't give back more energy than you put down I don't see the problem. If technology got to the point where it was a 100% energy return that would be awesome and should be allowed
Sounds like the tech suits in swimming during the 2000s. World records fell like flies
Springs, yes. Wheels, no. If somebody wants to run with pogo sticks, let them. But no rollerblades.
We can revisit the issue when we can't distinguish springs from wheels.
That outro hits deep
I was living in Jordan era. We believe we can jump higher when using Air Jordan shoe ! Wearing it , give us boost of confidence, respect from peer and opponents and feeling you're Jordan who can fly.
And yet in the closing ceremonies in Paris, the opening act was of the Golden Voyageur coming down to recreate the lost Olympics while encountering Nike, the goddess of victory.😋
the issue isn't that these shoes exist it's that only nike can sell them. also stop it. like if we're going to see peak human performance inject em all with steroids and give them the best tech known to man. hot take probably but let's see what the body can do.
They’re all using whatever chemical compounds they can get away with anyway. If you’re not caught doping, it’s only cos the dope you’re using isn’t banned.
I believe As an Avid Runner, there shouldn’t be any kind of Ban. As long as that specific shoe is available for Everyone to obtain, it’s a fair game and a leveled Field. You Can Never stop technology and Innovation.
And what happens to Usain Bolt’s records, what colour are you, why would you want to cheat your way to the top, what kind of dirty mentality is that.
@@unruly7516get help first you sound like a couch potato who didn’t touch grass since Jurassic age
@@unruly7516 there is no debate for this people, they just want to win no matter what, they have no pride in their skills, they just want to be a name in history. Winning because of tecnology is not wining
Even with the super shoes, this year 100m finalists only got 9.79 the fastest..what a letdown
If the gear has no active component similar to megalobox enhancement but just improved energy return due to good engineering. It’s not cheating.
There was also just an arbitrary line drawn what is cheating. The only „fair“ way would be that all runners running barefoot on exactly the same track under exactly the same conditions but that’s impossible to achieve.
In contrary to e.g. doping, there is no risk to using different shoes.
A spring board in diving doesn't give back more, but it dramatically alters the ability to store and return energy. That's why stack height is an important distinction. There is a point where you start running to use the shoe, rather than the shoes just enhancing.
I believe Dawn Harper (100mh/'08 OC) said they have shoes that basically "throw" you down the track several months ago and presented some of the same "tech doping" arguments. Between the questionable rules, and questionable eligibility, and questionable performances... I've lost interest. I don't want to watch a XY beat up an XX because some man in room said it's OK. I don't want to watch super shoe contestants beat the Dawn Harpers of the world. I don't want to watch some person from nowhere all of a sudden run world record times then totally disappear.
They don't "throw" anything. When you see a video that looks like the shoe is launching itself... it's the person holding the shoe who is throwing it.
Cleo Abram made this exact video
Love her videos. But of course AI does it a bit better.
It’s funny to me that if an athletes gets a good shoe from his or her brand that other athletes have an issue with it. If your brand doesn’t make a shoe that makes you fast, you’re with the wrong brand. Technology will keep improving, since the time of shoes I’m sure as they developed, times got faster, so just because this is a giant leap, it shouldn’t be seen any differently
This sounds like both the script and voice were generated by AI
Yes, by *A* thletic *I* nterest :)
I recently watched the video by Cleo Abram about this and their the Nike exec told it was to further human capabilities but its not because of the human being better that the records are broken and imo i dont like this because of the non-human factor in the records being broken.
Cleo is a great communicator and filmmaker but she's a little too comfortable with tech boss promises of a better tomorrow
It’s not cheating, it’s innovation.
but the OG supershoes is pretty much Brooks Fusion at 1989
For so long the innovations that mattered for speed were on the track itself helping all runners. Better running surfaces etc
Can you turn the music up, I can still hear you talking😅
Anyone that thinks the equipment makes all the difference isn't paying attention to actual results. Many athletes in a given event have the same equipment, yet some athletes are more consistent winners.
9:11 Of the shoes you showed, the ones with a big "N" on the side are New Balance, not Nike.
Remember people that the best shoe for most people in most situations is a Barefoot shoe as it is healthier for your arches and overall foot strength and shape.
"Really expensive slippers" 🤣 love this line!
8:55 wow im surprised runners' shoes have their own version of homologation
Also, what about the sole thickness? If you can manage to run on a superlight 5-cm thick sole, that is definitely a great advange, lenghtening your stride in addition to any energy-transfer improvement! (and I do recognize that the thicker the sole, the harder it gets to improve energy transfer)
ALL running races can be run barefoot! A textured track gives you all the traction and cushion you need. For the marathon, you run it on a beach at low tide, and or a golf course with manicured grass. Issue solved!
I thought competitions is all about progress. Why ban progress? This isn't going to halt or hinder progress in health and nutrition studies, nor sport sciences, as far as I know.
This is nike advertising nothing from nike is banned, do not be blind.
@@ZondaRbg Oh... now that's interesting.
"Which is why most of the super shoes have this ridiculous look" 😆
Did the shoe companies just call Bolt out of his retirement?
i worked inside Nike world hq for years and this is what they do.
They started with a Kenyan. Great people we are!! 🇰🇪
It's wild that passive apparel would be banned.
Super shoes have been around for nearly a decade now. Where's all the sprinters beating Usain Bolt or the marathon runners breaking 2hrs? It's all a bunch of nonsense. Technology is always looking on ways to improve performance but it's always the athlete that's the driving force behind the athletic endeavour.
This debate is silly. If 4% lets Lyles break Bolt's record, then putting shoes of similar or better performance on Bolt would help him break those records further. At the top level, as long as everyone has super shoes, then there is no issue. If the shoes help too much, make everyone run barefoot and _then_ we can see who's really fast.
yep agreed. as long as they all have access to the same its all good.
I put on my pair of Vaporfly's for the first time and it felt like the whole back of the shoe disappeared under a cloud. It was bananas. I'd ban them too.
Sprinting is becoming formula 1 💀
Real 💀💀
World records are becoming more to do with advances in technology (track, shoes, therapeutic regimes). As long as people accept that and are able to understand how great many athletics in the past were.
In ancient Greece, competitors completed naked. Let's go back to that. No shoes. No pants. No nothing. That way the swimmers can't use supersuits. Runners don't get supershoes. I guess we could allow competitors to shave themselves, but aside from that...
My first thought was to wonder why anybody gets antsy about more efficient shoes - just keep improving the breed. Surely, if athletes run only by their own energy, nobody is cheating. Then I thought about amputees running on springy prosthetic legs - ok at the length of a human leg, but an artificial advantage if they are longer stilts. Further development: roller blades, then a bicycle. All using nothing more than the athletes' own energy. Ok, we need to draw a line somewhere.
Shoes won't move on their own. Banning them is pure BS. Technology advancement in every sport should be welcomed.
Funny how these modern record breaking athletes use technology 50 years or more advanced than the athletes that set those records and see nothing wrong about it
Deceptive title, this has nothing to do with Paris Olymipics and the ban was to one specific shoe that never went into production.
as long as everyone has access to the shoe than i don't see an issue. thou this dose not mean having them ava to buy to everyone but having them ava to buy at an affordable price for everyone. ie a $300 shoe might be fine for an American or European someone from Central or South America might not be able to afford this
The spikes is where the real rebound technology is but it is TOP SECRET. Opps! I just revealed it.
Really stupid to ban a shoe. If theyre better all athletes should wear them and if the other brands are crying, they just have to upgrade its products, period.
new tech is always an issue, in every sport. For example, at what point do things like table tennis rubbers become too OP?
But Kipchoge did not run a marathon under 2 hours, Kipchoge ran 42 kilometers under 2 hours in controlled conditions, that is not a marathon.
Swear with or without Western shoes, us Kenyans always been runners.. why you think some of y’all athletes come train with us?
There is an old saying, go where they are. Always works
They should just make them all use the same equipment to offer an even playing field where only the athlete’s ability/physical prowess determine who wins
Either make everybody run barefeet, or just allow this. This is so stupid really, why would you ban a shoe that literally every athlete can buy if they chose to?
I propose a new category: bare foot running 😂
Bolt is only complaining because he is sponsored by Puma, had it been that he was a Nike athlete he wouldn't open his mouth.
he should learn to shut his mouth. lest someone remind him of his teammates who tested positive for peds. its hardly shoes that hangs a dark cloud over his records.
there will always be a question mark when people in his team pee's acid
The other thing I never see mentioned abt the distance shoes specifically is that most of that 4% is actually prolly due to the 1-2 inches of height gain from the massive midsole. Usually extra height (therefore longer stride length) is countered by the fact that ur heart has to work harder to pump ur blood. These shoes give u the extra advantage with no drawback which is pretty unfair. An inch or two doesn’t sound like much but it means a few more inches per stride which really adds up over 26 miles. It’s not super unfair if all pro athletes have them but it ruins the amateur level bc then it becomes pay to win essentially.
Anyone complaining about records being broken because of shoes that give an advantage is honestly just lame. Shoes have given an advantage forever. The only way to have a shoe that isn't better than the rest is to run barefoot. That may be fine for 100-400 meters but marathon runners would suffer so much.
And honestly if I had a world record (also because of a shoe, I doubt Usain Bold could set his times in those loafers with spikes) I'd want a technology improvement to be why I lost it, because then you can still say "If I was running today and had those, imagine what my time would be"
Flubber shoes. Already invented in the 60s.
Now you know why so many records fell in recent years. Our current athletes really better than those before them? Supershoes!
Not a coincidence, my RUclips showed Adidas ad before this video.
Nice to see that the IOC is more concerned about gear than doping...
Athletes used to have worse shoes compared the ones being worn today. They also had worse nutrition discipline. What we are seeing is improvement. The shoes should also improve over time but it should be available for everyone. In the end, the best athlete will always emerge no matter the tools available if everyone can purchase it. Also I would like in the future a different competition where the juiced athletes can compete so that we see how far the human body can do. Only issue may be health or death for those who will want to win no matter the consequences.
Finding efficiency is cheating now? What BS
IMO these competitions should be a battle between people NOT technologies so a standard shoe should be compulsory for all runners like Formula 1 has a standard tyre for all cars.
yep Super Shoe regulation is pretty much like F1, just like Mizuno Rebellion Pro 2 finding the loophole in the rule and design a shoe that is regulated but having a total of 54mm stack midfoot
A 4% improvement would take me from not qualifying for the Olympics to still not qualifying for the Olympics…
It's interesting when you look at a sport like MLB that requires wooden bats even though companies have researched other compounds and technology. I'm surprised running hasn't done a similar standardization for shoes.
Meanwhile, Tarahumaras run 200km distances in barefoot huarache running sandals.
Isn't it a little backwards to not allow such technological marvel?
Races should be run only in original Dutch wooden clogs, with no 'right or left' shoe but just one shoe that points straight ahead. Problem solved.
7:55 "athletes don't have access to the same kind of equipment" sure they do. Nike will sell shoes to anyone with the money. If you're talking about world class athletes, they certainly have a few hundred dollars for a pair of shoes - arguably one of the most important parts of their attire.
arent they being punished for being good at their job? nike, adidas and every other shoe company have bragged about "making shoes that make you faster" for years, now that theyve actually done it, they get banned?
while shoe technology can give athletes an edge, let's not forget the real reason the athlete win medals: Doping.
@@maxmeier532 Yeah but every country dopes
Only smokeable dope allowed
Nike's super shoes have undoubtedly revolutionized running, but the controversy surrounding them raises important questions about technological doping. World Athletics' response is a step in the right direction, but the debate about the fairness of these shoes will likely continue. It's interesting to explore how these advancements affect athletes' mindset and the future of competitive running.