[HN Gopher] Running shoe tech: issues for the integrity of runni...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Running shoe tech: issues for the integrity of running (2020)
        
       Author : rstarast
       Score  : 37 points
       Date   : 2021-04-06 10:00 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (sportsscientists.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (sportsscientists.com)
        
       | janekm wrote:
       | The main argument of the article seems to be that some runners
       | get more benefit from new shoe technology than others (which may
       | be true, and may or may not be mitigated by other companies
       | developing different variants). However it makes me wonder
       | whether this hasn't always been the case... if shoes had been
       | banned in the sport entirely then probably other people would
       | have been successful?
       | 
       | Also the comparison with tennis is a bit silly... you won't get
       | far in tennis without a racket that costs a whole lot more than
       | any Nike shoe...
        
         | unexpected wrote:
         | Most pro level tennis rackets are $200-$250. The Nike Shoes in
         | question are $180.
        
         | piva00 wrote:
         | Not just _a_ racket, you 'll need at least 3-4 rackets to
         | rotate around during a match to avoid losing too much string
         | tension. Preferably all the same, all tensioned at the same
         | time before a match, etc.
         | 
         | I played tennis a little bit competitively when I was a kid,
         | apart from rackets you will also care about strings, you will
         | eat through them. The best strings aren't very durable and on
         | top you will be often trialing different strings with your
         | racket until finding a sweet spot for your play style.
         | 
         | It adds up fast.
        
         | snapetom wrote:
         | It would have been interesting to discuss the giant leaps of
         | racket materials though. Wood to steel/aluminum in the 70's,
         | and then graphite in the 80s. That would have been a more
         | appropriate discussion. It would be interesting to see their
         | third point, about patents, and how big of a barrier that was
         | for tennis racket technology advancement and adoption.
         | 
         | I'd imagine this Vaporfly issue wouldn't be such a big deal if
         | competitors were easily able to create similar shoes.
        
           | geoka9 wrote:
           | Once racket tech settled on graphite, there's not much
           | advancement to speak of, regardless of what racket vendors
           | might tell us.
           | 
           | String tech, on the other hand, has continued to innovate in
           | leaps and bounds, all but killing the serve-and-volley style
           | of tennis at the elite level.
        
         | geoka9 wrote:
         | Yes, comparison with tennis struck me as a bit weird too:
         | 
         | > If we did not believe that skill execution should be
         | "constrained" by tennis rackets, we'd have no limits on head
         | size.
         | 
         | There are oversized-head (tweener) rackets out there, but they
         | are almost never used by advanced players (because you you have
         | very limited control with an oversized head).
        
       | darkwizard42 wrote:
       | While it is sad to see that equipment is becoming a concern in
       | high level running, I found it most disastrous when thinking
       | about the effect of "equipment" in swimming.
       | 
       | Some of the suits that Phelps and folks wore were just so
       | stupidly cutting edge in terms of their effects on stroke
       | efficiency. I think the world swimming organizations have done a
       | better job of regulating here, but again it sounds like ALL
       | sports are required to have their governing bodies playing a bit
       | of cat and mouse to keep the playing field as even as possible.
        
         | jonshariat wrote:
         | I don't understand why more sports don't just have regulation
         | equipment that all athletes must wear and use.
         | 
         | You aren't allowed to bring your own soccer ball, basketball,
         | football, etc. Why do we allow some items that have a huge
         | impact, to be up to the player/team?
        
           | fredley wrote:
           | Have it both ways, like motorsport. There are championships
           | like Formula 1, where the 'equipment' is a huge factor, and
           | the teams are competing on their tech. This has lead to many
           | breakthroughs in car safety that have become standard in
           | consumer vehicles.
           | 
           | On the other hand, there are many championships where all
           | drivers must drive the exact same car, or the cars are
           | heavily regulated in terms of power output. Here it's all
           | about the raw skill of the driver.
           | 
           | There is room for both of these in running.
        
           | philippoi wrote:
           | Let's not forget Deflategate. Wherever the balls come from,
           | sometimes they're tamperable.
        
           | jfengel wrote:
           | I can't imagine having an ISO standard running shoe. There
           | are regulations on running shoes (like the thickness of the
           | sole), but making them all identical would really hurt a lot
           | of athletes. It would select for those who fit the standard
           | shoe.
           | 
           | Until recently, swimming advances didn't matter all that
           | much. It's only in the last decade or so that the fabrics
           | became better than the swimmer's skin, and they started
           | covering up more of the body. That gave substantial
           | advantages to swimmers with a ton of money.
           | 
           | (Substantial being relative, of course. We're talking 1%
           | improvements, so you're not taking on Michael Phelps in one
           | of these, even if he were wearing a ball gown. But it's the
           | difference between gold and not qualifying for the final
           | heat.)
        
           | wetmore wrote:
           | I agree, although I also think once you start considering all
           | the different factors that go into an athlete's performance
           | and how there is an inequity between competitors for each
           | factor, it can be hard to determine where to draw the line.
           | 
           | For example, athletes from wealthy countries are exposed to
           | better training techniques and apparatus. Is that fair?
        
           | gameswithgo wrote:
           | the equipment is sometimes part of the fun too, you crush
           | whole industries if you spec it
        
             | ashtonbaker wrote:
             | Which is sort of the point of not standardizing things. In
             | cycling for example, if everyone rides the same bike, then
             | bike companies have nothing to advertise, so no money for
             | cycling teams. So the whole thing is really an
             | advertisement. The one exception I can think of in cycling
             | is Japanese Keirin track racing, which has heavy regulation
             | on the equipment used, but supports and is supported not by
             | advertising, but by sports betting.
        
           | thebigman433 wrote:
           | How exactly do you do that for running? You obviously cant
           | have just 1 specific shoe that everyone has to wear, so how
           | many do you allow, and how do you stop it from getting back
           | to the current form?
        
           | Someone wrote:
           | For shoes, I would think there's just too much variation in
           | foot sizes, foot shapes, and runner's weights to even
           | consider that.
           | 
           | Cycling similarly allows picking the bicycle frame to match
           | the rider's body. It does have a minimum weight for bicycles,
           | though (6.8kg, which is high for current tech. Given deep
           | enough pockets, 2.7kg was possible in 2010. See https://www.t
           | ririg.com/articles.php?id=1035_Worlds_Lightest_...), and
           | regulations that effectively forbid recumbent bikes.
           | 
           | In some cases, flexibility also is there for historical
           | reasons. In soccer, not even field size is fixed (with
           | exceptions for top levels) for that reason (fields inside
           | athletics tracks tend to be longer and less wide than fields
           | inside stadiums specifically built for soccer)
           | 
           | A soccer field must be rectangular, but can be anywhere from
           | 45 to 90 meters wide and anywhere from 90 to 120 meters long 
           | (https://resources.fifa.com/image/upload/spielregeln-2019-20.
           | ...)
           | 
           | So, minimum size is 90m x 45m, maximum size is 120m x 90m.
           | Area-wise, that's a factor of 2 2/3 .
        
           | quandrum wrote:
           | NFL teams provide their own footballs.
           | 
           | Source: https://operations.nfl.com/gameday/pre-game/nfl-game-
           | ball-pr...
        
             | taeric wrote:
             | But shoes? Gloves? Glare reducing eye makeup? Socks?
             | Hydration drinks?
             | 
             | The list can basically go on forever. With no real "a
             | priori" idea on where you have to stop to no longer find a
             | benefit in equipment. Could even go back to "access to gym"
             | or "access to trainer" and expect a level of influence.
        
             | slg wrote:
             | I think "provide their own footballs" can be a little
             | misleading. It isn't like they can go out and purchase
             | whatever brand and model they want. Teams have custody of
             | the league approved balls and can prepare them how they see
             | fit within the league specification. So while there is room
             | for a little customization, it fits well within
             | jonshariat's overall point of standardized equipment.
        
           | germinalphrase wrote:
           | This has been proposed in Nordic skiing to reduce the arms
           | race around waxing. Standardize waxing, competitors receive
           | skies immediately before race, etc.
        
         | dillondoyle wrote:
         | Why is this a disaster? genuinely asking.
         | 
         | This has always been the case in sports. I personally don't
         | agree with setting some arbitrary limit on technology creating
         | systems like Formula 1, which then becomes a race against
         | regulations and who can most creatively push the rules & find
         | workarounds.
         | 
         | The sport I know best is climbing, and the progression of gear
         | over the past 50 years has enabled as you say STUPID HUGE gains
         | in allowing the strongest athletes to push the envelope of
         | what's possible. I can't imagine having to climb with old gear
         | and shoes. Went from climbing in Converses with DIY pro to
         | specialized rubber on shoes with similar ideas to Vaporfly in
         | how they shape the foot and have flex or not based on the route
         | need. We now wear different shoes for different styles of
         | routes.
         | 
         | Now knee pads are becoming standard which has downgraded some
         | famous routes and upped the highest end grades. Some climbers
         | just log 'without' 'with' grades I guess you could do that with
         | running, but no one is saying Adam Ondra didn't climb the
         | hardest route in the world because he used a knee pad and
         | similarly I don't think it's fair to take away Phelp's
         | achievements.
         | 
         | Even going beyond 'solo' nature of climbing, the technology is
         | the same in competitions. Gear pushes the sport and I think
         | that's a good thing.
        
           | ars wrote:
           | Because taken to the extreme it's eventually not "you"
           | competing, it's your equipment.
           | 
           | Imagine some kind of glove that grips for you, or shoes with
           | glue on the bottom. Or... there's no real limit here. Might
           | as well just wear a hover belt and float to the top :)
           | 
           | At some point you have to say "this is enough tech". So the
           | question is, what is that point?
        
             | dillondoyle wrote:
             | To me that argument is a 'slippery slope' fallacy. We're
             | not even close to that extreme. It's like saying let's get
             | rid of mail in voting because there might be vast (non
             | existent) fraud in the future.
             | 
             | And even if we go that far somehow I think the
             | differentiation will come naturally. In climbing there is a
             | totally separate thing called Aid Climbing where it's kind
             | of like you say floating to the top haha. Pulling on
             | ladders or whatever to completely eliminate strength and
             | effort. It's not treated as remotely the same sport as free
             | climbing.
        
       | blendo wrote:
       | "It undermines one of the sport's most valuable qualities, namely
       | that the outcome, the title, the victory, ..."
       | 
       | This seems less about the integrity of running, and more about
       | the integrity of winning.
        
       | kleinsch wrote:
       | I agree with many points in the article, but the idea that it's
       | unfair if one person's body responds better to the shoe than
       | another seems silly. Distance running is already a competition of
       | who has better gene adaptations. I have a mediocre VO2 max, so
       | I'll never be an Olympian. Is that unfair? My body requires a
       | longer recovery time after hard efforts than Galen Rupp. Is that
       | unfair? That's just life.
        
         | racuna wrote:
         | Agree, I was in denial for years trying to "correct" my flat
         | feet with minimal shoes (plus focusing in my running
         | technique), arc strengthening exercises, stretches, and so on.
         | But I never was able to run past 3k without knees pain.
         | 
         | Then I bought cheap insoles with arc support and the next run I
         | was able to run 6k without any issue.
         | 
         | I'll never will be an elite runner. But at least I can go
         | outside and enjoy a good sweat in the park time to time.
        
         | bo1024 wrote:
         | I think it's trying to draw a difference between how good your
         | body actually is at the activity of running itself, versus how
         | well it responds to a particular technology. Sort of like if
         | they legalized one particular performance enhancing drug. The
         | records would be set by people who happened to respond well to
         | that drug (let's say).
        
           | bagacrap wrote:
           | to carry that to its logical conclusion, all competition
           | should be held barefoot. Surely some humans are better suited
           | to barefoot running than others, hence their "response" to
           | shoe wearing is being tested.
        
             | burnished wrote:
             | From the article
             | 
             | "And while on this subject of breakthroughs and records,
             | please let's not say stupid things like "We should just run
             | barefoot", or the common gaslighting method used by many
             | that innovation has always been part of the sport, and the
             | 2016 shoes were way better than Jim Peters and Roger
             | Bannister's shoes in the 1950s. Yes, but if you're daft
             | enough to actually entertain the debate about whether
             | Kipchoge is a better runner than Jim Peters, great, but
             | find someone equally daft who'll have that one. I'd need
             | ten beers for it to even seem worthwhile. Nobody cares. We
             | get it, we expect innovation over many generations."
        
         | burnished wrote:
         | They mention this specifically in two ways. 1) we expect a race
         | to be about human elements. You won't be an Olympian because of
         | physiology, not equipment. This ties back into integrity. 2)
         | the response from the shoe is greater than the typical
         | difference between athletes, meaning that at top tier levels
         | your fitness is now defined by a running shoe.
         | 
         | Is that unfair? Hard to say. Does it undermine what people
         | appreciate about running and the competition? I think the
         | author made a pretty strong case for 'yes, absolutely'.
        
       | PeterisP wrote:
       | The patent angle in one of the OPs argument struck me as very
       | important - I wouldn't automatically disqualify a need to
       | purchase some a legal monopoly of a particular sports-relevant
       | aspect, where some competitors are prohibited to have it at the
       | whim of a third party (e.g. the author suggested, perhaps
       | hypothetical, example of a shoe 'sold to public' by putting 50
       | pairs in a Tokyo store once and never again) does not seem fair
       | play.
       | 
       | Can we make a simple blanket policy that patent-protected gear of
       | any kind are automatically prohibited in races? I mean, if
       | there's no performance impact, then it shouldn't be a problem for
       | athletes to use some other, patent-free gear, and if there is a
       | performance impact, it shouldn't get used. Perhaps this could
       | also negate the core issue of this article, as the impact on
       | sports is arguably caused by the desire to sell such tech to mass
       | market; but if the high-tech shoes can be sold to mass market
       | _only_ without an impact on competitions, then Nike can put in
       | their shoes whatever shiny gadgets they want.
        
         | LatteLazy wrote:
         | I think this is a good idea. It reminds me of the "sharkskin"
         | suits used in swimming that were expensive, single use, very
         | effective and allowed enormous improvements in performance.
         | Then had to be banned.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-technology_swimwear_fabri...
        
           | wging wrote:
           | Mentioned in the article, FWIW:
           | 
           | > Swimming? Who can forget what happened between 2008 and
           | 2009...
        
         | bagacrap wrote:
         | The sport (at the elite, televised level) is not just impacted
         | by the desire to sell shoes, its only reason for existence is
         | as a vehicle to sell shoes. Every professional runner has a
         | salary paid by a shoe company.
        
       | npilk wrote:
       | Not to disagree with the broader point about the integrity of
       | world records, but I thought this perspective was interesting:
       | 
       | > _I don't want a five-set final at the Australian Open thinking
       | "Shit, I wonder if this result would be different if Thiem and
       | Djokovic could swap tennis rackets? If only my guy had a
       | different sponsor"._
       | 
       | A similar dynamic already exists in many team sports, where the
       | elites can sign all the stars and smaller teams have to try and
       | win with better drafting, coaching, player development, etc. And
       | in these cases, fans often seem to love watching a less-
       | privileged team overcome those challenges to win (see Leicester
       | City or small college basketball teams like Oral Roberts as
       | examples.)
        
         | amelius wrote:
         | Why don't they just give all players the same official rackets
         | before the match? Problem solved :)
        
         | philippoi wrote:
         | That's why some team sports have imposed salary cap limits.
        
         | browningstreet wrote:
         | Your example is better than the article's, as Thiem's earnings
         | put his net worth at $30M, and Djokovic's at $220M.
         | 
         | That said, against the cost of racquets, each can buy -- or get
         | from sponsors -- whatever racquets they want.
        
           | thereisnospork wrote:
           | It is also worth noting that elite athletes aren't
           | necessarily beholden to using their sponsor's equipment. It
           | is easy enough to doll up e.g. a Head racket to look like a
           | Wilson.
        
             | piyh wrote:
             | Flashback to Gal Gadot tweeting with an iPhone while having
             | an Android sponsorship.
        
       | AtlasBarfed wrote:
       | Don't forget: This is amateur league play compared to designer
       | genetics, or when actually practical crispr edit-in-place gene
       | therapy hits mainstream.
       | 
       | And basically PEDs is a lost cause, all they try to do now is
       | contain it from frankenstein levels.
        
       | frereubu wrote:
       | Semi-seriously, I quite like the idea of going back to the
       | original ancient Greek way of doing competitive sport naked. That
       | would take care of quite a lot of the issues surrounding running
       | shoes, swmming suits, and so on.
        
         | slim wrote:
         | some sports still need equipement that need to be regulated :
         | javelot, tennis, etc..
        
         | cafard wrote:
         | The comic strip Tank McNamara long ago had a Sunday strip that
         | showed the eponymous ex-jock sportscaster stopping into a
         | running-goods store. The weedy sales guy starts piling him up
         | with road shoes, off-roads shoes, racing shoes, warmups, etc.,
         | etc. As Tank stands baffled at the cash register, his girl
         | friend says "And to think the ancient Greeks did it naked."
         | 
         | I think it was _Running_ magazine that did not find his
         | amusing.
        
         | dillondoyle wrote:
         | Haha ouch. My sport is climbing. I have a home wall and I've
         | tried this. It does not work well for modern climbing on lots
         | of textured volumes ;)
         | 
         | Would definitely make world cups more interesting to watch!!
        
         | francisofascii wrote:
         | A series of barefoot running events sounds viable.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-04-07 23:02 UTC)