Olympic Champion: Shoe Technology is ‘Hurting Athletes’ Credibility’
Olympic 400m hurdles champion Karsten Warholm says carbon-technology shoes are “hurting athletes’ credibility”.The 25-year-old Norwegian shaved seven tenths of a second off his own world record at the Tokyo Games.
After winning gold, Warholm criticised the thick-soled Nike shoes of second-placed American Rai Benjamin, saying they act like a “trampoline” and diminish credibility, despite also wearing spikes with a carbon plate to improve performance.
“What I said was misunderstood in some way, because I had one comment about it after the race and it just blew up and that wasn’t my plan at all,” said Warholm. “To be honest I don’t know if that shoe [Nike] is the best shoe. My shoe [Puma] is maybe just as good, but that’s not what it is about, necessarily. I haven’t done the science. When somebody does a great performance now, everybody will question if it’s the shoe – and that is the credibility problem.“
Many athletes now wear super-light shoes containing a rigid plate and unique foam that lend a propulsive sensation to every stride.
Critics claim the shoes, first developed by Nike, are the equivalent of mechanical doping. Former marathon world record holder Tegla Loroupe stated athletes using the shoe technology are “cheating” and that it is “almost like doping”.
Supporters, though, hail them as a revolutionary advance.
“People sitting at home, I don’t want them to feel like they’ve been fooled or tricked. I want there to be credibility,” added Warholm. “Hopefully somebody is doing the research and hopefully World Athletics are there to protect both athletes but also the audience.“
See more here: bbc.co.uk
Header image: Getty Images
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Howdy
| #
All these shoes should be banned. Develop a standard comfortable, and light shoe and be done with It
The goal is to witness the athletes ultimate performance from their own resources, not some technical add-on. All these shoes do, is show that the athlete will no longer measure up without high tech “running aids”. I find that quite sad, but really, It’s It’s just another sign of the times.
Reply
DeadHeartDiary
| #
“The goal is to witness the athletes ultimate performance from their own resources, not some technical add-on.”
Unfortunately that’s impossible. Think of say, equipment used for a US athlete, vs an Ethiopian athlete.
I’d say if the shoes make them run faster, use better shoes.
Reply
Squidly
| #
Interesting that few other sports operate that way. For example, in NASCAR you can’t just “use a bigger motor”, in motocross you can’t just “use a bigger motor”, in shooting sports you can’t just “use a machine gun”, in golf you can’t just use whatever you like. In virtually very single sport you can name there are regulations on equipment, for very good reasons. In Formula 1 they probably have more regulations than almost anywhere, the reason, because the drivers themselves were being take out of the equation. So now is track a competition of the best shoes? .. or the fastest runner?
Go ahead, do as you suggest but then quit calling it a foot race and call it what it is, a shoe race!
Reply
DeadHeartDiary
| #
Interesting that the runners aren’t using motorcycles for shoes yet. In say, NASCAR, or WHATEVER, people are gonna use whatever to their advantage. That includes equipment variances (within whatever limits).
It’s as if you think things are fair. As if you clamour for homogenization. If you want that, what you do is you have 1000 clones in exactly the same conditions, life experiences, training, equipment used throughout their lives. And you make sure they all wear the same pants.
Personally, I think all olympic runners should be born on the same day, train the same and run around naked. I’m not gonna watch that, but it’ll be fair.
In NASCAR you might not be able to use a bigger motor, but you could have a better motor, or better tuning (thanks to, perhaps…equipment).
NASCAR is garbage, btw.
Reply
DeadHeartDiary
| #
“Go ahead, do as you suggest but then quit calling it a foot race and call it what it is, a shoe race!”
Well look, all you have to do is replace those runners with robots or like automated shoes for that suggestion to be valid.
I mean, I don’t bother watching sport anymore, but from what I remember, the runners utilize the shoes, rather than the shoes utilizing the runners. Like those shoes won’t quite get there without some incentive.
Howdy
| #
“Unfortunately that’s impossible. Think of say, equipment used for a US athlete, vs an Ethiopian athlete.”
Equipment means nothing. If they’re all on the track using standard footwear, the chance is leveled and you see what each is capable of.
It’s not like it’s tyres for an F1 car or something.
Reply
DeadHeartDiary
| #
Except, you’re ignoring everything it involves to get there.
Reply
denis dombas
| #
DeadHeart,in every comment you simply pee against wind and it goes over your body.
Reply
Doug Harrison
| #
Oh very well said Denis!!
Reply
Howdy
| #
“Except, you’re ignoring everything it involves to get there.”
Makes no difference in the end. Each of us has a limit to the best we can achieve. One Is either close to that pinnacle of development, or one is not, and there is room for improvement. If I’m running In the olympics , then I guess I’m pretty close.
“The 25-year-old Norwegian shaved seven tenths of a second off his own world record at the Tokyo Games.”
Was that because his physical frame was able to generate more acceleration at the start? Sustain a higher average speed, or was It the shoes that reduced slip at the moment of launch, or maybe they are just a tad lighter than the others. The former, is his own work. The latter, external forces. Standard equipment for particular Items would remove doubt.
“That includes equipment variances (within whatever limits).
In NASCAR you might not be able to use a bigger motor, but you could have a better motor, or better tuning (thanks to, perhaps…equipment).”
Absolutely, but we are talking about a mechanical device there. and development is at such a stage that there is nothing left to gain. No matter what route you take there will come a point that maximum exploitation of a particular technology or component is reached. This is why creative use of the rules is sometimes applied. For instance the F1 cars that used fans, or other methods to “glue” the car to the track. It was so effective that even the weight penalty imposed could be discounted.
When all wheel drive entered motorsport It was viewed in some quarters as unfair. It gave a massive advantage in rallying and circuit events. Thing Is, once the details were sorted out, anybody could use ItOnce It was passed asI view it as a logical progression
The vehicle, and It’s chances of winning are ultimately still down to the human component, and development of the skills required (which includes the “back room boys” who are hands on). Technology is an aid. Nothing more. It separates the result from the one true component that matters: The human component. Personally, I think It’s a great loss to sport everywhere.
I’m not keen on oval racing myself, but what I’ve gleaned from looking around, is that Nascar racing is something of an art. Knowing when to make your move is crucial to gaining a place, quite apart from the actual driving Itself, and It is noticed, as in many areas of Motorsport, the vehicles collect in groups, so It would seem the odds are very even indeed, despite the technological advancements. Law of diminishing returns?
I like saloon car racing and rallying. If historic vehicles are in use so much the better.
“It’s as if you think things are fair”
I don’t think that, and things obviously are not, but fairness should be the foundation. I would hope fairness at least got a mention.
I think I got everything In one post. Sorry It’s so long.
Reply
Howdy
| #
sigh ItOnce It was passed asI view it as a logical progression
Should read: I view it as a logical progression
Reply