Next%- the ongoing debate

Ive seriously upped my mileage in February, done 163 miles. Mainly all by HR and had no real goal in mind. Going to go out tomorrow and run a 5k in my endorphin speeds (havent worn them yet) to see how much it has helped me.

Got the Hoka One One Carbon 2 and Saucony Endorphin Speed.

Subjective analysis is a win for the Saucony.

The Saucony speed roll encourages a slightly more forward leaning gait. This is good but it means your muscles will be used in slightly different way.

Dont do all runs in them at first.

Not a bad time to look at improving your running form, making it more hip dominated as these shoes will help with that.

Hips forward and imagine pushing a heavy shopping trolley in front of you (push the legs out powerfully behind you). Handy visualization and cue for your next steady/tempo run to use with these shoes.

partyguinness wrote: »

Would you not be tempted to run the 5k in your normal shoes just to have a better picture on how much you might have progressed? I went for 5kn TT last October but I stayed in my Clifton 7s rather than the Next% beacuse I knew the Next% would have given me an extra 5-10 seconds.

But then again you can work that the other way too...5km now in the Endorphin and then again in a few months.

Yeah I thought of that too. But these are what I will race in so tested with them.

If I did them in my normal ones, in a few months I would test with the endorphins anyway and see and improvement then

Have Zoom Tempo Next% and Endorphin Speed for the last 4 months.

Tempos give me around 10sec/km on my threshold runs - 4:10 vs 4:20 for the same effort (by feel and by HR). Ran a 5k TT at start of marathon training block in 19:50, whereas I felt like I was in 20:30-21:00 shape. The Tempos are noisy as hell, some slapping noise off the road especially at slower pace. They do seem to help avoid any DOMS after intense efforts, and calves also feel more "relaxed". Not uncomfortable, but my little toes are almost poking out through the fabric so I'd be dubious about going a full marathon in them. Soles seem to be wearing well.

Endorphin Speed - are comfortable, good snug fit from the solid lacing. Not as fast as Tempos but improvement on my usual Brooks Ghost.. They feel much better on uphills and tight corners. Good thing is that they consistently increase my cadence to around 180 from my usual 170-175. I'm not aware of it while running, but it shows up in the post run data. Would happily wear them for a marathon, keen to try out the Endorphin Pro now!

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Took about 15 seconds off my 5km a couple of months back. Down to 18.03.

In some €60 Asics. Not sure of the name.

It just wouldn't cross my mind to spend €200 on runners. I'm an average 5km runner. I had upped mileage to about 100km a week. That was all. Doing a lot of hills at the moment preparing for a long outing in May so might try another fast 5km soon to see how that affects it.

Yes, TBH I would rather better my 5k/10k PB in my regular shoes so that I know I have really improved - however come race day, I'd prefer not to be giving 30 secs or more advantage to others in my age group!

Yevon wrote: »

Nobody on this thread has contended that the primary way of achieving better running times is better training. Which seems to be the crux of that post and not any assessment or critique of the trainers.
Along with a very smug assessment of time achieved with cheap trainers they cant even remember the name of. Condescending in the extreme.

There was a critique on the price. The benefits of the shoe are not worth the cost in his opinion.

I didn't read anything smug or condescending about the post.

I don't know Conor's intentions, I'll let him answer. I find it bizarre that you would find his post bizarre.

I have the 4% versions myself. They would prob give Conor a nice 10 second improvement based on his current best. But that doesn't seem to interest him, and thats his right.

Probably bit of topic here. Can a pair of runners effect your hamstrings? I recently changed and now have a niggle in mine. Altough i have upped my pace recently knocking good times off my 5k 10k and half.. or could someome recomend runners for tight hamstrings..

Murph_D wrote: »

€200? Vaporfly lists at €275. Hard to get for less with the limited quantities they seem to release. Can get lucky in a sale, if you’re not a popular size, I suppose.

Birthday month discount on the Nike app 25% makes a decent enough dint in the price....Some runners have even been known to have as many, if not more, birthdays than HRH Queen of England herself.

Murph_D wrote: »

They seem to have cottoned on to that trick (or else I’m just not clearing my cookies properly!)

I have the birthday discount available at the moment but still plenty of wear left in my existing pair, that have only been raced once.

Well there's another healy1835 in Newbridge that still lives with his parents...... to be fair the discount comes in handy for other items as well. But if you're planning on getting a pair of Next% it's a no-brainer.

For me anyway, I've found that in certain races when I've worn the shoes I haven't felt like I've gone to the well as much as I did in flats. Now I don't know if that's just me being a bit subjective and using a pretty small sample size as I haven't had the chance to race in the shoes over the last 12 months obviously.

During this time I feel like I've improved to the extent that all my PB's are up for grabs when racing does return...but having said that, and I feel like I'm rambling a little and maybe not getting my point across very well, there's time in races where I've maybe held back a little and got comfy in the nice, bouncy rhythm and not attacked as much as I should have. I'm curious if anyone else has had similar experiences.

I got the pro's on tuesday, first time out today for 8k . Unlike the Nike bouncy things they feel really ordinary, like a pair of standard cushiony shoes. There is no feeling that your going to run any quicker or any different. I still prefer the flats as they just feel better.

For comparison the last 3 8km's have been on the same route with 3 diff pairs of shoes, so good to see a comparison. (there were 2 dodgy K's with interuptions). Not sure which I would call faster but i'm thinking it could be the Nikes, but its not the flats.

HR was lower in the Nikes, but the 1st k had a stoppage.

Cadence is lower in the Nike but the avg ground contact time is far less than the other 2, strangely (?) the flats are more or less the sames as the pros for cadence and ground contact (although when you take out the dodgy dog attack KM they are the same)


Nike % Sauc Flat End Pro Nike % Sauc Flat End Pro Nike % Sauc Flat End Pro Nike % Sauc Flat End Pro
KM Time Time Time HR HR HR Cad Cad Cad Contact Contact Contact
1 00:04:10 00:03:44 00:03:45 145 153 154 178 186 183 223 211 204
2 00:03:44 00:03:46 00:03:40 153 179 168 181 188 184 193 197 204
3 00:03:48 00:03:56 00:03:42 166 176 171 182 185 185 201 207 201
4 00:03:55 00:03:59 00:03:41 169 176 175 181 184 185 201 212 205
5 00:03:41 00:03:58 00:03:52 173 176 178 183 185 185 193 209 213
6 00:03:46 00:03:57 00:04:38 174 176 167 184 184 176 195 211 241
7 00:03:44 00:03:58 00:03:51 173 176 173 182 184 183 194 214 222
8 00:03:29 00:03:57 00:03:42 175 177 175 184 184 184 179 208 211
Total 00:30:17 00:31:15 00:30:51 166 173.625 170.125 181.875 185 183.125 197.375 208.625 212.625

partyguinness wrote: »

Bloody hell...all these high HRs. Is there something wrong with me...:o

I struggle to get over 150 (142-145 would be normal) on a steady 60-90 minute run. At push at the end of a hard long rep at the end of an interval session I might hit 162-165 but I am blowing up at that stage.

Even last Saturday I had a 3 x 3km reps which hurts. Averaging 3:50 per km I never got above 159 bpm and it was not flat.

The only time my watch shows a 177 or 187 is when there is a temporary glitch with the strap.

Everyone's max HR is different. It doesn't really mean anything if your max is 200 or 170. With training, your resting HR can be lowered, however, meaning your range is greater.