Technology Debate: "Those Superfast Nike Shoes Are Creating a Problem"

Many thanks to reader JH for sending Amby Burfoot fascinating look at Nike’s new technologically superior shoes causing serious rules consternation. This follows a pair of remarkable performances by Eliud Kipchoge in Vienna and Brigid Kosgei in Chicago prompting calls for more stringent rules on legal running shoes.

Here’s the part about the recent design breakthrough:

The Nike shoes also include a carbon fiber plate in the midsole. This plate might increase energy return, or it might improve foot function during the running stride. Either way, the plate is prominently mentioned in Nike’s patent application.

Nike-supported experts soon published papers in scientific journals showing that the Vaporfly shoes could improve marathon times up to 3 percent. That sounds small until you consider it is often the difference between a gold medal and a quickly forgotten fifth-place finish.

The results were so astounding, in fact, that some considered them as just another example of Nike sports marketing.

“I was skeptical at first, but then came the second and third and fourth report,” said Ross Tucker of the Science of Sport website. “I had to change my skepticism. Now I think the effect is real, and large.”

And this may sound familiar to those interested in the golf techology debate. The quote is from a rival manufacturer whose runners appear to now be at a disadvantage:

Nike is well known in the patent world for its large and increasingly frequent applications. It also has plenty of lawyers, though no one can say what might happen in any patent infringement case until it is litigated.

White said he would be unhappy if the I.A.A.F. tightened its shoe regulation policies. “We could end up limiting creativity and losing the chance to improve running shoes for the everyday runner,” he noted. “I think the ‘must be widely available’ part of the rule is the best answer.”

The everyday runner is likely not seeing the advantage that the elite runner is getting. Sound familiar?