October 17, 20196 yr 4 hours ago, maaarsh said: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/50041037 Seriously, why do you want Running marathons in a pair of Woolworths green flash pumps?
October 17, 20196 yr 8 minutes ago, Casino said: Seriously, why do you want Running marathons in a pair of Woolworths green flash pumps? A colleague has bought a pair and I had a good look at them today - they are hideous.
October 17, 20196 yr 3 minutes ago, Casino said: He bought some Woolworths green flash? The new Nike ones he has bought are bright green. Edited October 17, 20196 yr by Jol_BWFC
October 18, 20196 yr 20 hours ago, Casino said: Seriously, why do you want Running marathons in a pair of Woolworths green flash pumps? Are you still hung up on me? All my posts in this thread make clear my complaint, and now the BBC who would normally fawn over this sort of stuff have run a sensible article on the issue for once. I want marathon runners using shoes which stop them hurting their feet. I don;t want them bouncing along on springs because it makes the 'improvement' in times utterly meaningless.
October 18, 20196 yr So what do we go back to When did shoes start affecting times Maybe we only count times on cinder tracks
October 18, 20196 yr This isn't some incremental change - from all the thousands of trainers people used pre 2017, none of them gave a meaningful advantage, all within 1% of each other, and now suddenly the carbon fibre soles are giving 4%+ gains. Pretty obvious the IAAF review just needs to put a quantitative test behind the principle that shoes shouldn't materially affect performance. Wear what you like as long as it isn't full of springs. Running is far from the first sport to have this. Cycling had to constrain bike development (and the odd other issue...) and swimming banned a load of suits after they made a joke of the world records for a while. Far better to actually be able to compare different generations. Is the new women's world record holder really better than Paula? Sadly due to these shoes it's pointless even trying to compare the times.
October 18, 20196 yr 1 hour ago, Casino said: So what do we go back to When did shoes start affecting times Maybe we only count times on cinder tracks Shoes have always affected times. Why did Bannister sharpen his spikes in his hospital before his mile record? 1 hour ago, maaarsh said: This isn't some incremental change - from all the thousands of trainers people used pre 2017, none of them gave a meaningful advantage, all within 1% of each other, and now suddenly the carbon fibre soles are giving 4%+ gains. Pretty obvious the IAAF review just needs to put a quantitative test behind the principle that shoes shouldn't materially affect performance. Wear what you like as long as it isn't full of springs. Running is far from the first sport to have this. Cycling had to constrain bike development (and the odd other issue...) and swimming banned a load of suits after they made a joke of the world records for a while. Far better to actually be able to compare different generations. Is the new women's world record holder really better than Paula? Sadly due to these shoes it's pointless even trying to compare the times. The IAAF have introduced shoes rules whenever they have felt the need. For example in 1957 high jumpers broke records with a built-up shoe on the take-off foot. IAAF then changed the rules to ban such shoes. And yes, Kosgei has been regarded as the rising star of women Marathon runners for the last couple of years. I agree 2:14 was not yet expected, but 2:16 certainly was. Which played a bigger part, her super shoes or her two male pacemakers? Edited October 18, 20196 yr by MalcolmW afterthought
October 19, 20196 yr 10 hours ago, maaarsh said: Is the new women's world record holder really better than Paula? Sadly due to these shoes it's pointless even trying to compare the times. Paula's managed for all these years to compare her time to everyone else's without worrying about how many minutes the assistance she used gave her, sure the new record holder will be the same.
October 19, 20196 yr On 17/10/2019 at 18:42, maaarsh said: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/50041037 The science of clothing doesn't bother me. It's always been there. It's no different from swim suites or the paint on a F1 car. Like David Brailsford says, in competitive sport it's the aggregate of marginal gains that gets you the advantage. This new marathon time is an achievement but not an impressive achievement. Edited October 19, 20196 yr by Underpants
.thumb.gif.cb279cbd15af0e8ada1c2836b83b449f.gif)
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.