wangus12 said:

---

Half Marathon world record broken this morning. Down to 56:51

---

Nice consolation prize for Kejelcha after running a sub-2 hour marathon in London, and losing.

bmac_aggie18 said:

---

Anybody have experience running the Cowtown or The Woodlands Marathon?

Deciding between one of those at the end of February

---

I done Cowtown and run the half every year. Rolling hills through the first 15 miles and then starts to flatten out. Very well organized. Spectator support is loaded on the front half before the split. Does empty out after the HM splits off. Good post race with food.

Cowtown and BCS are the 2 guaranteed races I do every year

18 miles in Houston weather yesterday was miserable

Looking for race day shoes recs; what do yall like? I've been in Brooks Ghosts for daily trainer, but hoping to find something a bit lighter and springier for Chicago Marathon without going full carbon plate

Goldie Wilson said:

---

Looking for race day shoes recs what do yall like? I've been in Brooks Ghosts for daily trainer, but hoping to find something a bit lighter and springier for Chicago Marathon without going full carbon plate

---

I'm curious of this, as well. I've only ran in Nimbus 26's and currently in Nimbus 27's. Smart idea to look at different shoes for my actual training block and races?

Goldie Wilson said:

---

Looking for race day shoes recs; what do yall like? I've been in Brooks Ghosts for daily trainer, but hoping to find something a bit lighter and springier for Chicago Marathon without going full carbon plate

---

I've gone to the dark side of running (trail running) and don't spend much time in road shoes.....but when I used to run half / 25K I loved the Saucony Endorphin speed series. It has a plate, but it's not carbon (so more flexible and less $).

It was a great compromise between the relaxed daily trainer and the carbon plated 'super shoes'.

Goldie Wilson said:

---

Looking for race day shoes recs; what do yall like? I've been in Brooks Ghosts for daily trainer, but hoping to find something a bit lighter and springier for Chicago Marathon without going full carbon plate

---

Just curious but why no carbon plate? What's your expected finish time?

Goldie Wilson said:

---

Looking for race day shoes recs; what do yall like? I've been in Brooks Ghosts for daily trainer, but hoping to find something a bit lighter and springier for Chicago Marathon without going full carbon plate

---

I've run a marathon in Endorphin Speeds and multiple halfs, it's a great line of shoes. Much lighter feeling than the Ghosts but not a super punishing ride like some plated shoes can have at slower paces.

I'd also look seriously at Adidas EVO SLs, I've never run a full in them but they are light and bouncy right out of the box. Some of the bounce dies down after like 200 miles but the comfort is still there.

If cost is the barrier to carbon/super shoes, Saucony is selling Endorphin Elites at 50% off right now and Adios Pros can be had for like $130.00. I've even seen Alphaflys for around $160. All of those options are still pretty comfortable as long as your pace is suitable for a super shoe.

Average Joe said:

---

Goldie Wilson said:

---

Looking for race day shoes recs what do yall like? I've been in Brooks Ghosts for daily trainer, but hoping to find something a bit lighter and springier for Chicago Marathon without going full carbon plate

---

I'm curious of this, as well. I've only ran in Nimbus 26's and currently in Nimbus 27's. Smart idea to look at different shoes for my actual training block and races?

---

If the goal is just finishing then I personally don't see a lot of benefit in playing around with a race day shoe. Just run in what you are comfortable in and used to. If you have time goals, than maybe a race day shoe makes sense.

Just using my own situation for context, I'm racing for time because I want to qualify for Boston, so if a shoe can give me 15 seconds a mile, that's potentially 7 or 8 minutes off my final time and the difference between running 3:06 and not BQing and running 2:59 and BQing. I'm targeting an April race here in Indy to try and BQ and I will 100% be wearing either Elites or Alphaflys when I make my attempt because every minute counts for what I'm shooting for.

As EP said, Endorphin Speed is a good choice. It has a rocker feel that seems to propel you forward, and you don't really notice the nylon plate.

New Balance SC Elite has a carbon plate but a less aggressive feel than the Nike plated shoes. I like the Elite for long training runs and pacing half marathons. Might try racing in them soon.

For racing, Nike Vaporfly has been my favorite. Even at my not-so-fast race pace, the cushion and bounce of the foam, and the rebound of the plate really help reduce leg fatigue.

AggieEP said:

---

Average Joe said:

---

Goldie Wilson said:

---

Looking for race day shoes recs what do yall like? I've been in Brooks Ghosts for daily trainer, but hoping to find something a bit lighter and springier for Chicago Marathon without going full carbon plate

---

I'm curious of this, as well. I've only ran in Nimbus 26's and currently in Nimbus 27's. Smart idea to look at different shoes for my actual training block and races?

---

If the goal is just finishing then I personally don't see a lot of benefit in playing around with a race day shoe. Just run in what you are comfortable in and used to. If you have time goals, than maybe a race day shoe makes sense.

Just using my own situation for context, I'm racing for time because I want to qualify for Boston, so if a shoe can give me 15 seconds a mile, that's potentially 7 or 8 minutes off my final time and the difference between running 3:06 and not BQing and running 2:59 and BQing. I'm targeting an April race here in Indy to try and BQ and I will 100% be wearing either Elites or Alphaflys when I make my attempt because every minute counts for what I'm shooting for.

---

That makes a lot of sense. I kept seeing the recommendations for race specific shoes but no one gave any logic as to why.

Alpha Fly 3s on sale for $147. Bought a pair just to say I've tried them.

Link if you're interested: https://www.scheels.com/p/19872664282

Sweep4-2 said:

---

Goldie Wilson said:

---

Looking for race day shoes recs; what do yall like? I've been in Brooks Ghosts for daily trainer, but hoping to find something a bit lighter and springier for Chicago Marathon without going full carbon plate

---

I've gone to the dark side of running (trail running) and don't spend much time in road shoes.....but when I used to run half / 25K I loved the Saucony Endorphin speed series. It has a plate, but it's not carbon (so more flexible and less $).

It was a great compromise between the relaxed daily trainer and the carbon plated 'super shoes'.

---

I'll check out the Speeds. Thanks

Good Poster said:

---

Goldie Wilson said:

---

Looking for race day shoes recs; what do yall like? I've been in Brooks Ghosts for daily trainer, but hoping to find something a bit lighter and springier for Chicago Marathon without going full carbon plate

---

Just curious but why no carbon plate? What's your expected finish time?

---

I don't like the feel of carbon plates at my target MP: aiming for 3:30/3:40. I have some Vaporflys that are really fun for tempo/interval work, but don't like them for distance.

Goldie Wilson said:

---

I don't like the feel of carbon plates at my target MP: aiming for 3:30/3:40. I have some Vaporflys that are really fun for tempo/interval work, but don't like them for distance.

---

If your only experience with a plated shoe is with Vaporflys, you should try another model. Vaporflys are fast and feel good at 5/10K, but I found them actively unpleasant at 13.1. (I am a bad overpronator with congenitally flat feet, but tolerate Alphaflys reasonably well out to marathon distance. If I tried to run a marathon in Vaporflys I am quite sure that I would hurt myself.)

You are more than fast enough to benefit substantially from a carbon plated model. (I would submit that short of intending to walk the whole thing, almost any runner will be faster in the right plated shoe, but that's another story.)

Goldie Wilson said:

---

Good Poster said:

---

Goldie Wilson said:

---

Looking for race day shoes recs; what do yall like? I've been in Brooks Ghosts for daily trainer, but hoping to find something a bit lighter and springier for Chicago Marathon without going full carbon plate

---

Just curious but why no carbon plate? What's your expected finish time?

---

I don't like the feel of carbon plates at my target MP: aiming for 3:30/3:40. I have some Vaporflys that are really fun for tempo/interval work, but don't like them for distance.

---

Great intro to carbon shoes:

Puma Deviate Nitro Elite 3 or 4
New Balance SC elite v5 or v6
Saucony Endorphin Pro (whatever the newest volume is)

All are carbon shoes, but very much mimic non-carbon shoes.

Both the Vaporflys and Alphaflys have gone through pretty substantial changes with each of their versions, so it's more nuanced than just "this works for this" and "this doesn't". All of this is just my experience, but I have run a considerable amount except the original Vaporfly.

• Vaporfly 2 - lots of people still talk about it being the best shoe Nike has made, super snappy and there were tons of marathons run in it as it was Nike's option at the time it was introduced, product marketing was half marathon and marathon distances, remained popular with elites even with the introduction of the 3 and the Alphafly
• Vaporfly 3 - my favorite shoe Nike has made, it was wider and had a more substantial platform than the 2, lots of people thought that it lost pop relative to the 2 and that was true but the other changes actually made it a better ride at the marathon distance, product marketing was half marathon and marathon distances
• Vaporfly 4 - a complete shift back to a more scaled down, sleeker shoe that offers less protection than the 3 and even the 2, clear move by Nike to actually differentiate the Vaporfly from the Alphafly and have a 5k to half marathon shoe and a half marathon to marathon shoe, they have been open about the intention of the shift

• Alphafly 1 - super poppy but a pretty harsh ride, really harsh on the arch, took a lot of mechanical work to get them cruising but when you did, they were magic
• Alphafly 2 - heavy, disjointed, an absolute clunker
• Alphafly 3 - lighter than the 1 and 2, has all the pop of the 1 but doesn't have nearly as harsh of a ride, some people think Nike democratized them too much but Nike also has been open about their desire to democratize them, they are legit

ptothemo said:

---

Alphafly 3 - lighter than the 1 and 2, has all the pop of the 1 but doesn't have nearly as harsh of a ride, some people think Nike democratized them too much but Nike also has been open about their desire to democratize them, they are legit

---

Maybe my coffee hasn't kicked in yet, but would you mind expanding on the bolded? I've read that sentence like 5 times and I still don't understand what it means.

https://www.highsnobiety.com/p/nike-alphafly-3-super-shoe-interview/

They made design decisions that made it more accessible and a better option for a wider range of runners. Widening the platform and carbon plate, reducing the protrusion of the arch, smoothing out the transition with the continuous midsole, and increasing the expected life of the shoe (250 miles is what they say) are all examples.

Now, it has to be said that those changes work for the elites too, but they generally work for a broader base of people. There are people - and I'm using the general people as in people on the internet - who have been rather loud in complaining and saying that the changes take away from performance. I am not one of those people, so I was just acknowledging that they exist.

I think even with the democratization (which is true of most super shoes, especially relating to compromises to increase durability) a runner still has to have a pretty consistent and aggressive turnover to really make ideal use of the shoe. The science behind the plate or the rods or the special foam depends on you having a stride to make efficient use of that technology. The faster you go and more force you can push onto the plate with powerful strides to more aggressive boost the shoe can create.

My Adios Pros that make me feel like a great runner at a 6:30 pace feel unstable and slightly uncomfortable at a 9 minute pace. The shoe IMO was made to run with a powerful push off on each stride and to let the shoe make that motion more efficient and repeatably fast.

Runners that maintain something more akin to a jogging pace as their race pace would probably (as Yokel said) see faster paces and times when wearing super shoes as the shoes still are doing some propulsive work but the question then becomes whether it's worth it to buy super shoes to go from a 4:40 marathon to a 4:35 marathon time. For some people working towards PBs, the answer is probably yes, but for others it won't make much sense.

AggieEP said:

---

My Adios Pros that make me feel like a great runner at a 6:30 pace feel unstable and slightly uncomfortable at a 9 minute pace. The shoe IMO was made to run with a powerful push off on each stride and to let the shoe make that motion more efficient and repeatably fast.

---

I total agree with this. Every plated shoe that I've worn feels awkward when I'm jogging, but smooth at tempo+.

So much so that I've often thought about changing my shoes for warm up and cool down... so I don't have to wear speed shoes when I'm cruising. Has anyone ever done that?

Connor Mantz doesn't understand why you run 6:30 miles in super shoes when it's his recovery pace. He doesn't care what shoes you wear, but you might feel aggrieved if he looked at you and said you don't need super shoes because you don't run fast enough.

The shoes have no clue what pace someone is running. The shoes do understand the mechanical force that is being put into them and then returning that energy up from the ground. I get what you are saying about the difference in a 6:30 mile and a 9:00 mile for you, but the fallacy is thinking that your 9:00 mile is the same as someone else's 9:00 mile.

You even said it yourself when you said, "The shoe IMO was made to run with a powerful push off on each stride and to let the shoe make that motion more efficient and repeatably fast." The idea that a those parameters only happen at your race pace - or something faster or subjectively close enough - is where this goes sideways.

I am not saying you are doing this, but there is a pervasive undertone in the running world of what makes someone a "real runner" or "fast enough for super shoes" when really it's just an implicit bias or pride that creates gatekeeping.

I agree with you on most points here and not trying to create a runners vs. non-runners argument. And yes pace is all a matter of perspective on what is fast versus slow.

I did not mean at all to create the idea that real runners run at pace X or Y or whatever. I am certainly aware that my pace is far behind what elite runners are running. When I told my daughter (13 years old) about the new Marathon record being an hour faster than my goal she laughed and told me that I'm old and slow.

I was only trying to point out that some of these shoes were purpose built to help elite runners find an extra 10 seconds a mile. A lot of non-elite runners are also benefitting from these shoes. However, some people have noticed/argued that there are diminishing returns on the gains (by percentage) you get from shoes as pace slows. My own personal experience seems to confirm that the shoes are less of an asset when I slow my pace significantly.

As for whether my 9 minute pace is different than someone else's race pace that is 9 minutes, I'm dubious as far as the shoe impact is concerned. Certainly my cardio effort would be different, but I would think that cadence, stride length and other biomechanical factors impacting the force of each stride would be similar assuming similar height and weight.

And anyone that has more of a background in body mechanics can feel free to correct me, but in general as pace increases ground reaction force also increases. It's this force that the carbon plate is trying to harness and use as propulsion.

It doesn't mean that only people of pace X should use them, but there is a relationship between pace, GRF and what that means for performance plated shoes.

This is probably over the top, and I recognize that. I really enjoy the underlying stuff in running, and I'm home sick for the day, so here we go.

https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/jappl.2000.89.5.1991

This is supportive of the idea that faster speed is produced more by greater ground reaction force than just moving the legs faster. However, the assertion that two runners of the same height and weight running at the same speed would have the same cadence, stride length, etc isn't supported. There are many other biomechanics factors that go into that.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20581720/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

This study had runners run at the same pace but manipulate their cadence 5-10% above and below their natural or preferred. It found that when cadence increased and speed stayed the same:

* step length decreased;
* vertical center-of-mass excursion decreased;
* braking impulse decreased;
* the foot landed closer to the runner's center of mass;
* peak knee flexion changed;
* hip and knee energy absorption changed;
* at +10% cadence, peak vertical ground-reaction force changed

So that's same runner, same speed, different cadence, different stride length, different forces and loading.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20093666/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

This is slightly different, but the study found that force magnitude, force application time, and stride mechanics are separate variables. So even if one variable is equal in two runners of the same height and weight running at the same speed, the other two variables may not be.

Bringing shoes into all this adds a whole other layer of complexity in that some people respond well to super shoes and some don't respond as much. Also, just about everyone is going to respond to one brand better than another for a multitude of reasons. But the underlying biomechanics and outputs don't support the idea that height, weight, and pace make force and loading equal.

I personally think that none of this really matters that much, too. As much as I love it, the bottom line is just go run. If a shoe feels good and makes someone feel their best on a Tuesday at 5:00 AM, wear it. If a race day shoe does the same on a Sunday morning at 7:00 AM after however many months of hard work, then let it rip.

Really good post, I wonder if the shoe companies have the kind of data we'd want to know about how their super shoes perform under different pace conditions and for different runners. (Broken out by gender, height, weight, cadence and stride length etc.) It seems they should, but it would also be likely they wouldn't want to share that data because the data would impact sales.

If data supported that one brand was better for my pace I would for sure be moved to buy just that shoe. As it stands now, I end up with multiple different super shoes and I kind of have to run the experiments myself each year to discover what works best. As you posted earlier, even the same shoe sometimes changes dramatically from version to version so it's not as simple as just picking up the newest model.

I do think that part of the reason Adidas doesn't really sell the shoe that Sebastian Sawe used is because that shoe only works for an elite elite runner. They sell the general population the Adios Pro 4 because it's a bit tamer. But that's just a theory, no real information to back that up.

AggieEP said:

---

I do think that part of the reason Adidas doesn't really sell the shoe that Sebastian Sawe used is because that shoe only works for an elite elite runner. They sell the general population the Adios Pro 4 because it's a bit tamer. But that's just a theory, no real information to back that up.

---

I was under the impression that Sawe was wearing the Adizero Adios Pro Evo 3 in London. You can buy the shoe; it just costs $500.

Where are you seeing the shoe for sale? They had a limited release so they could claim the shoe was legal and then people were reselling them for like over a thousand dollars. Also the shoes apparently won't last more than about one race.

AggieEP said:

---

Where are you seeing the shoe for sale? They had a limited release so they could claim the shoe was legal and then people were reselling them for like over a thousand dollars. Also the shoes apparently won't last more than about one race.

---

Does this work?

Caveats:

1) I have not, in fact, purchased this shoe.

2) It looks like if you want to pay anything like retail, you better have very, very small feet.