6 ms·

>Compared with typical training shoes, the Vaporflys are believed to wear out quickly: Some runners have said they lose their effectiveness after 100 miles or s

by Buldak 8y ago

>Compared with typical training shoes, the Vaporflys are believed to wear out quickly: Some runners have said they lose their effectiveness after 100 miles or so. This is about two weeks of peak marathon training, although if the shoes are as advantageous as the article claims that's impressive in any case. I suppose one could reserve them for races and train with cheaper shoes.

ErikAugust 8y ago
About one week (or even less) for pros or even the most competitive amateurs. However, if you ran for Nike, they'd likely send you plenty of pairs so that's not even an issue.
llimllib 8y ago
The idea is that you don't train in them, you save them for the race. (My last marathon training period peaked at a little over 70mpw. Normal trainers last me about 500-600 miles, my lighter shoes (Kinvaras) last 400-500, and my race flats even less than that)
- lmilcin 8y ago
  You don't use your race as an occasion to test your running shoes.
  - brianwawok 8y ago
    With these you do. Maybe do a 3 mile tune-up run to make sure there are not hot spots and it fits well, then you go race in it. Can't spend 50 miles breaking in a shoe with a life of 100 miles.
    - jmull 8y ago
      I'd do something more like 13-15 miles.
    - lmilcin 8y ago
      Maybe not a particular pair, but you have to have experience with any types of shoes. I would frequently buy two pairs, one I would normally train in and the other will be reserved for events. Even the pair reserved for event I would typically test run (hahaha!) at least once during training to spot any problems. Now, this is pure conjecture, I don't think the shoes magically make you more efficient. Efficiency is something you learn when running over long period of time. I would expect, to reap benefits of these shoes (assuming there are) you would need to get used to the new mechanics of running that the shoes will require.
      - brianwawok 8y ago
        A carbon fiber spring isn't magic, it's mechanical engineering. Your foot has a natural spring built into it. This is just slightly more efficient.
  - drdrey 8y ago
    I could see using them in a couple of marathon-pace training runs, but definitely not the whole training
mpg33 8y ago
>I suppose one could reserve them for races and train with cheaper shoes. That's what I would do. You'd have a slight boost on top of the usual race day boost and $250 to get ~4 marathons/8 half marathons isn't bad. I mean that would probably be 4+ years for a lot of non-serious runners.
- justinator 8y ago
  Meh, a 4% off a crappy marathon time is still a crappy time. I would save your money.
  - ccmonnett 8y ago
    People train months (and years) to take minutes off their time, especially as their times get lower and the returns diminish. 4% of 3 hours is more than 7 minutes! That could be equivalent to tens of hours on the road. $250 is a _great_ investment at that rate. This is the "Why go to that expensive restaurant?" argument all over again. When it's your hobby, and it's important to you, the thought process behind the purchase is very different.
    - retsibsi 8y ago
      But surely the reason people value a 7 minute reduction so highly is because of what it represents -- a successful effort to get fitter and/or mentally tougher. If you're simply 'buying' that reduction, what is the point, unless you're at the level where other benefits (public glory, sponsorship) are within reach?
      - sgc 8y ago
        I don't run competitively, but in the gym I feel like spending on better shoes takes away a false limit due to inappropriate technology. Unless you are running barefoot, I can see how a runner might feel the slower number is just false due to an arbitrary limitation. There is a decent chance, if you can afford it, that these shoes might help you progress faster as well. In the end it's all about how effectively your effort is translated into movement.
userbinator 8y ago
I'm not surprised --- it's similar to the automotive world too, where racing slicks are not meant to last more than a race or even fraction thereof, made with very soft rubber so the traction is high but so is the wear. These shoes seem like the human equivalent.

by Buldak 8y ago

ErikAugust 8y ago

About one week (or even less) for pros or even the most competitive amateurs. However, if you ran for Nike, they'd likely send you plenty of pairs so that's not even an issue.

llimllib 8y ago

The idea is that you don't train in them, you save them for the race. (My last marathon training period peaked at a little over 70mpw. Normal trainers last me about 500-600 miles, my lighter shoes (Kinvaras) last 400-500, and my race flats even less than that)

lmilcin 8y ago
You don't use your race as an occasion to test your running shoes.
- brianwawok 8y ago
  With these you do. Maybe do a 3 mile tune-up run to make sure there are not hot spots and it fits well, then you go race in it. Can't spend 50 miles breaking in a shoe with a life of 100 miles.
  - jmull 8y ago
    I'd do something more like 13-15 miles.
  - lmilcin 8y ago
    Maybe not a particular pair, but you have to have experience with any types of shoes. I would frequently buy two pairs, one I would normally train in and the other will be reserved for events. Even the pair reserved for event I would typically test run (hahaha!) at least once during training to spot any problems. Now, this is pure conjecture, I don't think the shoes magically make you more efficient. Efficiency is something you learn when running over long period of time. I would expect, to reap benefits of these shoes (assuming there are) you would need to get used to the new mechanics of running that the shoes will require.
    - brianwawok 8y ago
      A carbon fiber spring isn't magic, it's mechanical engineering. Your foot has a natural spring built into it. This is just slightly more efficient.
- drdrey 8y ago
  I could see using them in a couple of marathon-pace training runs, but definitely not the whole training

mpg33 8y ago

>I suppose one could reserve them for races and train with cheaper shoes. That's what I would do. You'd have a slight boost on top of the usual race day boost and $250 to get ~4 marathons/8 half marathons isn't bad. I mean that would probably be 4+ years for a lot of non-serious runners.

justinator 8y ago
Meh, a 4% off a crappy marathon time is still a crappy time. I would save your money.
- ccmonnett 8y ago
  People train months (and years) to take minutes off their time, especially as their times get lower and the returns diminish. 4% of 3 hours is more than 7 minutes! That could be equivalent to tens of hours on the road. $250 is a _great_ investment at that rate. This is the "Why go to that expensive restaurant?" argument all over again. When it's your hobby, and it's important to you, the thought process behind the purchase is very different.
  - retsibsi 8y ago
    But surely the reason people value a 7 minute reduction so highly is because of what it represents -- a successful effort to get fitter and/or mentally tougher. If you're simply 'buying' that reduction, what is the point, unless you're at the level where other benefits (public glory, sponsorship) are within reach?
    - sgc 8y ago
      I don't run competitively, but in the gym I feel like spending on better shoes takes away a false limit due to inappropriate technology. Unless you are running barefoot, I can see how a runner might feel the slower number is just false due to an arbitrary limitation. There is a decent chance, if you can afford it, that these shoes might help you progress faster as well. In the end it's all about how effectively your effort is translated into movement.

userbinator 8y ago

I'm not surprised --- it's similar to the automotive world too, where racing slicks are not meant to last more than a race or even fraction thereof, made with very soft rubber so the traction is high but so is the wear. These shoes seem like the human equivalent.