4 ms·

As an avid runner (10 miles every day, over 3k miles last year), shoes and tracks mean less than you think. Yes, the small fractions of a percent are meaningful

As an avid runner (10 miles every day, over 3k miles last year), shoes and tracks mean less than you think. Yes, the small fractions of a percent are meaningful but only to people who compare their results against each other to find out who is faster. To compare my result against a professional runner, they are running close to twice as fast as me and that less than 1% difference is completely meaningless.

jmye 3y ago
Yup. People badly overestimate the shoe effect, especially.
- onetimeuse92304 3y ago
  The shoes are the worst thing. Yes, they do work. But it does not make any sense for anybody except people who race for top positions. First of all, to make use of these specialist shoes you already need to have perfect running mechanics. You already have to be good at recovering good amount of the energy using springiness in your tendons and muscle and then the shoe will help with it. If you just put your foot on the ground and then pick it up a moment later, it will do nothing for you. So that probably already makes these shoes do nothing for something like 3/4th of all runners. Second, these shoes are extremely expensive and the sticker price doesn't tell the story. Not only they are something like 50% more expensive than top of the line other shoes, they also get used up very quickly, something like 5 times faster. So you could say they are probably about 7 times more expensive than even most expensive regular shoes. Third, it just does not make any sense! When I run, I am racing against my own times. Yes, I want to be better at running and having better time gives me joy and makes me proud for my accomplishment. For my hard work I put into it. What difference does 1% of improvement make if that improvement was totally artificial? Rather than use these shoes I could just take calculator and calculate the result to include 1% artificial increase in performance and it would cost me much less. It only makes sense if you are racing against other people and that does not include you or me.
  - jmye 3y ago
    I will say, in defense, that the foam and some of the carbon plates, do substantially help with recovery. I use an older pair of VaporFlys for that reason - my feet and calves feel much better the day after a big race. That said, the effect, for me, only matters at full marathon distance. I don’t see any point in wearing any of those shoes for the average weekend 10ker.
    - onetimeuse92304 3y ago
      You can buy good recovery shoes/slippers for small fraction of the price though...
      - mikestew 3y ago
        I’m sure those make for horrible race shoes. I think you missed parent’s point.
iamacyborg 3y ago
> As an avid runner (10 miles every day, over 3k miles last year), shoes and tracks mean less than you think. I’m also a fairly avid runner and I’m going to call BS on that. There’s a ~14 second difference in world record times between track and road in the 5k. Track surface technology is a real thing, just as shoe technology is.
- morepork 3y ago
  A 14 second difference is less than 2% of the total time though, so it doesn't entirely disagree with them. Between dirt in casual running shoes to a track and top tech shoes, there would I guess be about a 15-20% difference, and most of that would be the surface. I would speculate more for a sprint as traction/acceleration is more critical.
  - iamacyborg 3y ago
    Right, track surface is a big differentiator, let alone shorter indoor 200m tracks. There’s a big difference in shoe technology between road and track too, primarily in terms of the amount of super foam allowed which in terms of the shoe is generally what seems to provide the most benefit.
    - morepork 3y ago
      For sprints in particular, the spikes make a decent difference on the track, more so for elite athletes as they need the extra traction more
      - iamacyborg 3y ago
        Yep, but for longer distances the track has a better energy return than running on the road.

jmye 3y ago

Yup. People badly overestimate the shoe effect, especially.

onetimeuse92304 3y ago
The shoes are the worst thing. Yes, they do work. But it does not make any sense for anybody except people who race for top positions. First of all, to make use of these specialist shoes you already need to have perfect running mechanics. You already have to be good at recovering good amount of the energy using springiness in your tendons and muscle and then the shoe will help with it. If you just put your foot on the ground and then pick it up a moment later, it will do nothing for you. So that probably already makes these shoes do nothing for something like 3/4th of all runners. Second, these shoes are extremely expensive and the sticker price doesn't tell the story. Not only they are something like 50% more expensive than top of the line other shoes, they also get used up very quickly, something like 5 times faster. So you could say they are probably about 7 times more expensive than even most expensive regular shoes. Third, it just does not make any sense! When I run, I am racing against my own times. Yes, I want to be better at running and having better time gives me joy and makes me proud for my accomplishment. For my hard work I put into it. What difference does 1% of improvement make if that improvement was totally artificial? Rather than use these shoes I could just take calculator and calculate the result to include 1% artificial increase in performance and it would cost me much less. It only makes sense if you are racing against other people and that does not include you or me.
- jmye 3y ago
  I will say, in defense, that the foam and some of the carbon plates, do substantially help with recovery. I use an older pair of VaporFlys for that reason - my feet and calves feel much better the day after a big race. That said, the effect, for me, only matters at full marathon distance. I don’t see any point in wearing any of those shoes for the average weekend 10ker.
  - onetimeuse92304 3y ago
    You can buy good recovery shoes/slippers for small fraction of the price though...
    - mikestew 3y ago
      I’m sure those make for horrible race shoes. I think you missed parent’s point.

iamacyborg 3y ago

> As an avid runner (10 miles every day, over 3k miles last year), shoes and tracks mean less than you think. I’m also a fairly avid runner and I’m going to call BS on that. There’s a ~14 second difference in world record times between track and road in the 5k. Track surface technology is a real thing, just as shoe technology is.

morepork 3y ago
A 14 second difference is less than 2% of the total time though, so it doesn't entirely disagree with them. Between dirt in casual running shoes to a track and top tech shoes, there would I guess be about a 15-20% difference, and most of that would be the surface. I would speculate more for a sprint as traction/acceleration is more critical.
- iamacyborg 3y ago
  Right, track surface is a big differentiator, let alone shorter indoor 200m tracks. There’s a big difference in shoe technology between road and track too, primarily in terms of the amount of super foam allowed which in terms of the shoe is generally what seems to provide the most benefit.
  - morepork 3y ago
    For sprints in particular, the spikes make a decent difference on the track, more so for elite athletes as they need the extra traction more
    - iamacyborg 3y ago
      Yep, but for longer distances the track has a better energy return than running on the road.