Next % to be banned?

justdoit

I know it's been controversial and that there has been a lot of chat about whether Nike's Next % offers an unfair advantage to wearers, but The Times reporting that it is to be banned:

'The Nike shoe used by Brigid Kosgei to obliterate Paula Radcliffe’s women’s marathon world record last year is likely to be banned when World Athletics introduces new rules on running shoes.

However, the governing body may declare a moratorium that protects the Kenyan’s mark of 2hr 14min 04sec, set in Chicago last October, which is 81 seconds faster than the previous record, set by Radcliffe in 2003.'

I don't wear the shoes, and I definitely don't often trouble the podium, but would a ban like that trickle down to an amateur being precluded from winning a race, like a local half marathon for example?

robinph

It's surprising how many pairs of pink shoes have turned up in the first couple of rows at the start of parkruns even. If I'd spent the money on them and had taken in the limited mileage that could be done in them I wouldn't be wearing them for a parkrun, maybe one a week before the target marathon but that would be about it.

Doubt there will be anything other than pointing and laughing at people wearing them in small local races, would presume that any big events such as Dublin Marathon would have to ban the elites from using them though. Just nobody is going to care about the people using them to get a GFA time.

and still ricky villa

I've been keeping an eye on these and can't help but feel if they ban them for elites but let us Joe Soaps run in them it cheapens your own records only.
I'm in a friendly first-to-sub3 battle with a guy in work and talk has already turned to whether it counts if done in magic shoes.
Maybe I'm too moral but would others consider a PB in Vaporfly's equivalent to a PB in bog standard Kayano's?

mloc123

and still ricky villa wrote: »

I've been keeping an eye on these and can't help but feel if they ban them for elites but let us Joe Soaps run in them it cheapens your own records only.
I'm in a friendly first-to-sub3 battle with a guy in work and talk has already turned to whether it counts if done in magic shoes.
Maybe I'm too moral but would others consider a PB in Vaporfly's equivalent to a PB in bog standard Kayano's?

Is running a marathon in Kayanos unfair compared to all the times set in Nike cortez and so on?

I don't get the need to block Vaporfly. Where do you draw the line? Should we all just run in the same shoes people did in the 80s?

mloc123

Also... it should be pointed out, the ruling will not impact next %... only alphafly. These are not available to the general public, and that is the issue.

This will not impact people at local races, as these shoes are not available to buy.

robinph

mloc123 wrote: »

Where do you draw the line?

By defining what a spring is a bit better to include plates of springy metal.

mloc123

robinph wrote: »

By defining what a spring is a bit better to include plates of springy metal.

No metal in vaporflys

robinph

Springy carbon then.

Ceepo

mloc123 wrote: »

Also... it should be pointed out, the ruling will not impact next %... only alphafly. These are not available to the general public, and that is the issue.

This will not impact people at local races, as these shoes are not available to buy.

Kosgei was wearing Next % and not Alphafly.
Apparently Alphafly are due to be launched in the spring.
Mary Keitany wore Adidas adizero pro in her last marathon which are prototype only.
Galen Rupp wore the vaporfly for 2016 Olympics which weren't ready available at the time.
If Kosgei and Kipchoge records are to be made null and void do you then have do the same for all results that were achieved wearing them?

As we know Nike are not the only ones using a carbon plate and not the only ones using the "Pebax" foam, I'm not sure if they are to only ones to combine them.

If the ban the carbon plate then they will have to ban them from all manufacturers.
And the same with the "pebax" foam.

Not sure if they can actually ban a running shoe but more set out the criteria that they have to adhere to, such as stack height, compounds etc.

robinph

Ceepo wrote: »

Not sure if they can actually ban a running shoe but more set out the criteria that they have to adhere to, such as stack height, compounds etc.

Difficult to ban something that hasn't been invented yet. But they can set a limit on the springyness of the shoes. Or state that records set in new models will be under review until they figure out what the difference between each new shoe is.

mloc123

The plans which I saw mentioned was to limit the stack height on the midsole. I think I read that the midsole on the alphafly is ~40mm

robinph

mloc123 wrote: »

The plans which I saw mentioned was to limit the stack height on the midsole. I think I read that the midsole on the alphafly is ~40mm

Hoka could find themselves the wrong side of the threshold.

jamule

They could just enforce the rules as they are. The carbon plate is not being put there for protection or stability, its there for energy return and propel you forward (Which they do amazingly well).

More than likley they will just use the stack hieight rule they already have for LJ and HJ

28064212

mloc123 wrote: »

Also... it should be pointed out, the ruling will not impact next %... only alphafly. These are not available to the general public, and that is the issue

That's not the current issue. World Athletics are explicitly looking at introducing new rules which will govern the parameters of what is allowed to be done with a shoe, most likely around stack height and possibly internal plates.

The "available to the general public" rule has been around since June 2018, and (AFAIK) hasn't ever been enforced. Laura Muir was wearing prototype spikes last February when she broke the British indoor mile record, and there have been any number of elites wearing prototypes at all the recent major marathons as other manufacturers scramble to release Vaporfly competitors.

World Athletics have created a huge problem for themselves by being so slow to react. It was obvious from when the first Vaporfly's were released that it was going to develop into an arms race. By letting it run on for so long, they now have to look at how they're going to handle records set in no-longer-legal records, and it's going to be a mess

MY BAD

Adidas answer to the Alpha fly/Next %
IMG_20200119_223508.jpg

opus

The Dubai marathon is on this weekend, it's normally very fast anyway so will be interesting to see what difference the magic shoes make.

partyguinness

The logistics of banning them is too much. May as well make everyone run barefoot.

I have them and I have to admit I have done some very impressive runs. Only keep them for special occasions.

sideswipe

I'd say it'll be more interesting to see other manufacturers answer to them like in Houston last week. They'll be looking to go one better rather than match them. All the publicity is a dream for Nike.

partyguinness

sideswipe wrote: »

I'd say it'll be more interesting to see other manufacturers answer to them like in Houston last week. They'll be looking to go one better rather than match them. All the publicity is a dream for Nike.

Nike only release them in that lurid green colour so everyone knows.A bit embarrassing really when you're only smashing out a 10k in 42-43mins...:o

Lads expecting great things from you.

robinph

partyguinness wrote: »

The logistics of banning them is too much.

No more complicated than saying that the elites can only take on water/ gels from the specified elite water stations and monitoring that, or that they have to wear a chip on both shoes, or that they must wear club colours/ national colours, or that they can't wear sponsor branding bigger than X * Y dimensions.

The rest of us, well nobody cares really.

Yes, the shoes are already out their amongst the masses, but if the manufacturers can't put the elites in them then they will stop producing them and they will eventually get worn out and stop being used by the rest of the running population.

partyguinness

robinph wrote: »

No more complicated than saying that the elites can only take on water/ gels from the specified elite water stations and monitoring that, or that they have to wear a chip on both shoes, or that they must wear club colours/ national colours, or that they can't wear sponsor branding bigger than X * Y dimensions.

The rest of us, well nobody cares really.

Yes, the shoes are already out their amongst the masses, but if the manufacturers can't put the elites in them then they will stop producing them and they will eventually get worn out and stop being used by the rest of the running population.

Yes banning them outright is simple in itself and is no different to the other factors you mentioned but it's more the knock on effect I'm thinking about.

-Who or how do you differentiate between other new shoes and if they give an unfair advantage?
- Nike will just tweak or dress it up.
- Is there a stop put on all shoe 'technology' going forward?
- Nike will just cry foul when Adidas or whoever introduce a new shoe.

You can only imagine the hair splitting that will happen- end up like F1.

I can't imagine Nike with all the money and influence they wield would take it lying down.

robinph

But they can define things like saying no carbon plates and the sole can only consist of foam, rubber and air and be no deeper than Ymm.

Then just let us know if you are making it out of some other material and we'll have a think about it. If they end up making a super strong carbon plate like rubber which acts as a spring then you rethink the rules at that point, just like F1 where they rewrite them every so often when things change.

skyblue46

robinph wrote: »

But they can define things like saying no carbon plates and the sole can only consist of foam, rubber and air and be no deeper than Ymm.

Then just let us know if you are making it out of some other material and we'll have a think about it. If they end up making a super strong carbon plate like rubber which acts as a spring then you rethink the rules at that point, just like F1 where they rewrite them every so often when things change.

There is so much they have to consider alright. Nike already have a patent on an adjustable sole height...

mloc123

I still don't see the issue with the shoes... Apart from the handful of people wearing the aplhafly prototypes.

Anyone can go and buy a pair of next% and race in them... Therefore the field is level?

robinph

mloc123 wrote: »

I still don't see the issue with the shoes... Apart from the handful of people wearing the aplhafly prototypes.

Anyone can go and buy a pair of next% and race in them... Therefore the field is level?

Anyone can go and buy a motor to attach to their bike, doesn't mean that it should be allowed in cycling though.

mloc123

robinph wrote: »

Anyone can go and buy a motor to attach to their bike, doesn't mean that it should be allowed in cycling though.

Come on... Not even in the same ballpark comparison.

This is closer to riders sponsored by Mavic complaining that others get to use Zipp wheels

In fact... In both sports, people have been doing the same thing... Using blacked out versions of their non sponsor gear.

skyblue46

mloc123 wrote: »

Come on... Not even in the same ballpark comparison.

This is closer to riders sponsored by Mavic complaining that others get to use Zipp wheels

In fact... In both sports, people have been doing the same thing... Using blacked out versions of their non sponsor gear.

There are also technical regulations pertaining to equipment in cycling...

OOnegative

skyblue46 wrote: »

There are also technical regulations pertaining to equipment in cycling...

Same technical regulations Kipsang was caught for?

skyblue46

OOnegative wrote: »

Same technical regulations Kipsang was caught for?

Now don't you be throwing curve balls! ;-)

OOnegative

Me for one have no problem with the runners, as long as they are legal let people part with there hard earned money, there choice. Though my hard earned sheckles will go elsewhere, the price doesn’t match the gains for me.

skyblue46

OOnegative wrote: »

Me for one have no problem with the runners, as long as they are legal let people part with there hard earned money, there choice. Though my hard earned sheckles will go elsewhere, the price doesn’t match the gains for me.

I don't expect them to be banned in all honesty. I think it's far more likely that a line will be drawn in the sand around some specifications.