4 ms·

Vaporflys are only good for 2-3 races, so if you run competitively, you are looking at six pairs a year or so. Which is quite a bit more than $250.

wazoox 7y ago
Still a far-cry even from a proper competition bicycle.
- headsoup 7y ago
  The problem is not how much they cost, it's the clear and demonstrated competitive advantage. Basically, unless you use these shoes (or competition catches up), you are disadvantaged, unrelated to ability. And before you say 'but bikes,' cycling has always had a mechanical element. You might say that's just a competitive element, but then there needs to be a discussion about the point of the sports, human athleticism or human+technology? Sure, better shoes have always provided some advantage, but it's now clear there's a point where the capability of the athletes peaks and it moves (further) into a technology competition. I feel like we're heading towards transhumanism discussions, perhaps it's time to do so.
- compiler-guy 7y ago
  Which is even further from a proper competition F1 racecar. But the two sports end up being very different.
- hermitdev 7y ago
  I used to be an amateur road racing cyclist (no sponsorship or anything). The out of pocket expenses are not trivial. For a decent bike, looking around $5k and it won't even come with pedals. Pedals will set you back a moth $200-300. Shoes are around the same price. Mind you, this a little over entry level (you could probably get a bike in $2k range if you're talented enough). For serious professional racing, the costs can be quite a bit higher. High end bikes, especially time trial, can easily be $20k. Those are up front costs. Some of which are semi reoccurring. You put in enough miles, there are going to be accidents, you're going to go through tires and brakes. I dont recall what brake pads cost, but I think they were relatively cheap, like $15 per set. Racing tires were more expensive at $45 a piece. I used to go through at least 2 sets of tires per year, assuming no punctures. I'm also on my second road bike, after having been hit by a car on a training ride (car ran a stop sign and T-boned me). Thing about carbon fiber: you really cant repair it. You have to replace it. When I got hit by the car, it cracked the frame, bent both wheels, ruined the pedals, fucked up the shifters and handlebar; basically totalled the bike. Also, screwed up my +$200 shoes. So yeah, cycling is definitely more equipment intensive than even $300 running shoes. I also used to be a distance runner in high school, and replaced my shoes far too infrequently (basically only when my feet grew).
keanzu 7y ago
[Vaporfly] last about 150 miles for racing (important races) and further 400-600 miles for training. https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=8908413 https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=8908413
catalogia 7y ago
In competitive swimming, there have been expensive low durability swim suits that promise performance enhancement. There's nothing new under the sun.
- loeg 7y ago
  Aren't the sharksuits banned in many contests? I mean, each sport basically throws arbitrary lines in the sand. You'll never get full consensus on which arbitrary lines are the right ones.

wazoox 7y ago

Still a far-cry even from a proper competition bicycle.

headsoup 7y ago
The problem is not how much they cost, it's the clear and demonstrated competitive advantage. Basically, unless you use these shoes (or competition catches up), you are disadvantaged, unrelated to ability. And before you say 'but bikes,' cycling has always had a mechanical element. You might say that's just a competitive element, but then there needs to be a discussion about the point of the sports, human athleticism or human+technology? Sure, better shoes have always provided some advantage, but it's now clear there's a point where the capability of the athletes peaks and it moves (further) into a technology competition. I feel like we're heading towards transhumanism discussions, perhaps it's time to do so.
compiler-guy 7y ago
Which is even further from a proper competition F1 racecar. But the two sports end up being very different.
hermitdev 7y ago
I used to be an amateur road racing cyclist (no sponsorship or anything). The out of pocket expenses are not trivial. For a decent bike, looking around $5k and it won't even come with pedals. Pedals will set you back a moth $200-300. Shoes are around the same price. Mind you, this a little over entry level (you could probably get a bike in $2k range if you're talented enough). For serious professional racing, the costs can be quite a bit higher. High end bikes, especially time trial, can easily be $20k. Those are up front costs. Some of which are semi reoccurring. You put in enough miles, there are going to be accidents, you're going to go through tires and brakes. I dont recall what brake pads cost, but I think they were relatively cheap, like $15 per set. Racing tires were more expensive at $45 a piece. I used to go through at least 2 sets of tires per year, assuming no punctures. I'm also on my second road bike, after having been hit by a car on a training ride (car ran a stop sign and T-boned me). Thing about carbon fiber: you really cant repair it. You have to replace it. When I got hit by the car, it cracked the frame, bent both wheels, ruined the pedals, fucked up the shifters and handlebar; basically totalled the bike. Also, screwed up my +$200 shoes. So yeah, cycling is definitely more equipment intensive than even $300 running shoes. I also used to be a distance runner in high school, and replaced my shoes far too infrequently (basically only when my feet grew).

keanzu 7y ago

[Vaporfly] last about 150 miles for racing (important races) and further 400-600 miles for training. https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=8908413 https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=8908413

catalogia 7y ago

In competitive swimming, there have been expensive low durability swim suits that promise performance enhancement. There's nothing new under the sun.

loeg 7y ago
Aren't the sharksuits banned in many contests? I mean, each sport basically throws arbitrary lines in the sand. You'll never get full consensus on which arbitrary lines are the right ones.