[ad_1]
Paris (AFP)
When Eliud Kipchoge made history by breaking the two-hour mark for the marathon, the Kenyan was wearing a pair of controversial Nike sneakers that he has sent rival companies to catch up on a business worth billions of dollars.
The likes of Adidas, Asics, Brooks, Hoka, New Balance and Saucony have recently launched or are about to present their own versions of carbon fiber sneakers.
Critics claim new shoes are the equivalent of mechanical doping, while supporters praise them as a revolutionary technical advance in footwear after decades of stagnation.
Nike said its Vaporfly range, introduced in 2016, was an “example of how product design can capture the fascination of an entire sports community and, more broadly, inspire new benchmarks of athletic potential,” with an improvement. in times of up to four percent.
Elite athletes using versions of the Vaporfly, whose carbon plates bring a propelling feel to each stride, have created a series of personal successes, and Nike runners have practically swept the board at long-distance events – taking 31 of the 36th podium. places in the six biggest marathons last year.
Kipchoge was wearing an AlphaFly prototype with three carbon fiber plates when he submerged less than two hours in Vienna on October 12, while his partner Kenyan Brigid Kosgei was in ZoomX Vaporfly Next% shoes with a single plate when he set a surprising new record. female 2 hours 14min 04sec in Chicago a day later.
Critics have been quick to question the advantage that athletes who wear Nike suddenly enjoyed. That led to World Athletics finally stepping in to limit the sole thickness to 40 millimeters (Vaporfly is 36mm) and an embedded plate, while insisting that running shoes had to be commercially available from mid-March to be able to participate in elite competition. That is, no more prototypes.
– ‘Technology evolved other sports’ –
“I think carbon fiber plate shoes are part of the long-term evolution of running shoes and part of the continuing innovation that has been at the center of running shoe development since the early 1970s.” said United States-based journalist Brian Metzler. , author of “Kicksology: The Hype, Science, Culture and Cool of Running Shoes,” he told AFP.
“I think those shoes are fair for a number of reasons, but the most important is that they don’t artificially create energy, but only maximize the strength and energy that a runner naturally puts in their path,” said Metzler.
He argued that tennis, skiing, cycling, golf, and soccer had evolved due to advances in equipment.
“The key is that, at some point, all competitors must have access to similar or equal technology to ensure an equal playing field.”
Geoff Burns, a biomechanics and sports performance researcher at the University of Michigan, said the introduction of Vaporflys had been a turning point.
“Previously, the optimization equation for running shoes was to provide some cushioning with the lightest possible weight,” Burns told AFP.
“The new foam allowed engineers and biomechanics to rethink the architecture of what was on someone’s foot, and demonstrated that substantial performance improvements were still on the table with modifications to the equipment despite being stagnant during the most of four decades. ” “
– “Absolutely unfair” –
Amby Burfoot, winner of the 1968 Boston Marathon and former editor-in-chief of Runner’s World magazine, said he thought the unannounced presentation of Nike sneakers in 2016, particularly at the US Olympics. USA And the Rio Olympics, it had been “absolutely unfair”.
“It was equivalent to letting one group of pole vaulters use fiberglass while all the others were shipped to bamboo or another rigid material,” Burfoot told AFP.
Burns, who competes internationally in ultramarathons, said it was now “how much we want the performances to be engineering feats.”
He argued that it was not too far down the development curve that World Athletics could not further tighten regulations if they deemed it necessary.
“Sport is in a place where our interpretation of results and performance will always be colored by team ratings. Do we want that? Some do it, as others see engineering advancements as a fun part of the equation.”
“Others don’t, as they see it as a distortion of the purity of human performance. They all fall somewhere along that spectrum.”
Nike appears to have a significant initial advantage over other research and development producers, although top rivals have been quick to release their own versions in a bid for ultra-competitive market share.
“To be fair, Nike has always been a leading innovator in footwear and sportswear,” explains Metzler.
“That has been part of his corporate identity since the 1970s as a means of becoming the successful leader he is.
He said the controversial shoes were “by far” the leaders in performance and sales “because Nike is a successful marketing machine” and with a large percentage of the world’s best contract runners “their visibility and enthusiasm are much greater.”
Burfoot argues that other manufacturers had been abandoned because of the dust.
“The world woke up to a new reality. But it wasn’t easy for other shoe companies to catch up with Nike, it took time, trial and error, and we still don’t know how close the gap was.”
Running shoe expert Burns said in terms of rivals’ new sneakers “there are only one or two that may be approaching Nike’s.”
“It seems that most of the other companies have made shoes that are one step ahead of their previous racing shoes, but I would be surprised if any of them is as beneficial as the original 4% Vaporfly three years ago, let alone the newer iterations. “
Adidas, Asics, Brooks and Saucony, after Nike and Hoka, will launch marathon shoes this year for sale to all runners, in time for the Tokyo Olympics, postponed to next year due to the coronavirus pandemic.
“The difference now is that we have rules that somehow regulate shoe design. It is no longer the total wild west. Given World Athletics regulations, it will be difficult for a shoe to stand out dramatically from the pack,” Burfoot argued.
But the COVID-19 outbreak could favor Nike, Metzler argues.
“Several brands have delayed or postponed the launch of shoes due to the pandemic, and shoe sales and marketing have decreased, in part because races, racing shows and running stores have been postponed or closed,” he said. .
While there were “great new shoes” from various brands, he said “he wasn’t sure how much exposure they would have this spring and summer.”
All shoe companies, Burns said, will also look for the best way to overcome what is proving to be an economically disastrous pandemic that has already seen factory closures in Asia.
© 2020 AFP
