5 ms·
IAAF rules already prohibit that: > (e) Use of any technical device that incorporates springs, wheels or any other element that provides the user with an advan
by llimllib 8y ago
IAAF rules already prohibit that:
> (e) Use of any technical device that incorporates springs, wheels or any other element that provides the user with an advantage over another athlete not using such a device.
Nobody has brought a challenge over this shoe and its debatable use of a "spring"; the IAAF may in fact decide it's a mechanical advantage if/when somebody does
- monkmartinez 8y agoGreat comment. Now, how often are officials confiscating shoes and sawing them in half to see what is really inside? Corked bats? Hidden motors... etc...
- dmurray 8y agoNobody had even a proof of concept for a shoe that looked like a running shoe on the outside but had "springs, wheels" inside, so the officials didn't need to. Compare it with competitive cycling, where for a hundred years officials didn't need to X-ray the bike to check for hidden motors, but now they regularly do [0]. If the Nike shoe is banned from professional competition, athletes will stop wearing it, and officials will investigating other shoes for carbon fibre inserts, and will likely catch some. They're not stupid. [0]https://cyclingtips.com/2015/04/hidden-motors-for-road-bikes-exist-heres-how-they-work/amp/ https://cyclingtips.com/2015/04/hidden-motors-for-road-bikes...
- iguy 8y agoHave there been any cases under this rule about "incorporates springs"? I mean for things which might vaguely count as running shoes... not oscar pistorius etc.
- fenwick67 8y agoThis is funny to me because there's nothing magical about a metal spring - the sole of every running shoe is a "spring" in that it has a spring force that helps you run.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]