Kiguthi 1
Samuel Kiguthi
Cree Taylor
English 2010
25 April 2021
Innovation in Running Shoes: A Benefit To Distance Running
On October 12th 2019, Eliud Kipchoge made history by running the first ever sub-two
hour marathon, finishing in a remarkable time of 1:59:40 (Nike, Breaking2). In the years leading
up to this barrier-breaking performance, Kipchoge had near-perfect preparation. He had excellent
nutrition, an optimal training program, and a determined mindset, however many people
questioned the impact of his footwear during that race. The shoes he wore, Nike’s AlphaFly
prototype, used technology that provided an unknown advantage on top of the already
questionable Next% shoe. This effort was not ratified as a world record due to new pacers
entering during the race, however since then, World Athletics, a governing body for distance
running, has established several rules limiting what shoes can be used in competition (World
Athletics). These rules are somewhat of a temporary fix, to limit future innovation in shoes until
World Athletics can make a more structured decision going forward. Innovation in shoes is a
benefit for distance running, it helps individuals achieve excellence, motivates companies to
invest in running, brings more people to the sport, and allows more people to run despite
physical disadvantages. Additionally, the advantage shoes provide is small in comparison to
advantages athletes can gain during the months leading up to a race.
To understand the impact of recent innovations in shoe technology, we can look at the
trends for time improvement from the past, and how those trends predict what world records
Kiguthi 2
would exist today. Alexandra Newman, a professor at Colorado School of Mines, compiled
men’s and women’s season-best performances in IAAF(now World Athletics) competitions from
2011-2015. She found distance performances generally follow time logarithmically, so the faster
the times are, the more years it takes to improve on the time. Following this model, she predicted
the 10,000m, and Marathon world records would be broken in 2040, and 2100 respectively. This
study was done in 2015, prior to many recent advancements in running, and interestingly both of
these records have already been broken, which means runners today are improving much faster
than expected. What could account for this rapid improvement? Newman argues that,
“Improvements in sprint and distance running may likewise follow experience curve patterns and
could be understood as the outcome of experience accumulated by athletes, coaches and the
manufacturers of equipment, nutrition and drugs”(Newman). There is a common measure of
factors that contribute to a runners ability to run fast over distance, this metric is called Running
Economy (RE). Kyle Barnes and Andrew Kilding of AUT University have described Running
Economy as, “A complex, multifactorial concept that reflects the integrated composite of a
variety of metabolic, cardiorespiratory, biomechanical and neuromuscular characteristics that are
unique to the individual.”(Barnes & Kilding). With the knowledge that it becomes more and
more difficult to make improvements on times, and that those improvements come from
increased experience, we can determine the impact of shoes in distance running.
Recent shoe innovations that include a carbon plate in the sole of the shoe are proven to
provide an increase in Running Economy under certain conditions. In Nike’s Breaking2
Documentary, a team of scientists worked together with 3 world-class marathon runners in an
attempt to achieve the world’s first sub 2-hour marathon. These scientists looked at all of the
Kiguthi 3
aspects of RE, and took 12 months to help the athletes become the best they possibly could. For
2 of the athletes (Lelisa Desisa, and Zersenay Tadese), the scientists worked on their nutrition,
hydration, form, lifting, and training to help them improve. For the other athlete, Eliud Kipchoge,
they did not find a lot of room for improvement, “ It’s amazing to see all of what the science says
he should be doing is exactly what he is doing. Eliud’s opportunity for improvement is not nearly
as big as some of the other individuals. He already does everything almost perfectly”(Nike,
Breaking 2). This is where the team introduced some outside factors: racing at low-altitude, mild
temperatures, pacemakers for the entire race, and of course new shoes. The shoes used in the
Breaking2 attempt were engineered specifically for the 3 athletes, to provide increased energy
return for their foot strike patterns. These athletes, along with most elite distance runners, both
male and female, land on their fore-foot, which is slightly closer to the toes than midfoot (Barnes
& Kilding). This type of running is where these shoes are most impactful - giving up to a 4%
increase in RE. A 4% increase in RE does not mean a 4% faster time, but means running at the
same speed for the same distance will take 4% less energy than without the shoes (Barnes &
Kilding). This 4% increase in RE is very specific, to the athletes Nike tested them on, these shoes
impact diminishes when runners have different form, and also diminishes with speed. In
Breaking2, the scientists were able to help Kipchoge achieve a time of 2 hours, 25 seconds,
however as I mentioned before, Kipchoge broke 2 hours just 2 years later, in 2019.
After the advent of Nike’s 4% shoe, there has been continued innovation, primarily from
Nike and Adidas as they are the two largest companies that make distance running shoes. Nike
has released Next%, as well as AlphaFly Next%, the latter of which is the shoe which Kipchoge
wore to go sub-2. Adidas has released the Adios Adizero, and Adios Adizero pro, which are
Kiguthi 4
comparable to the aforementioned Nike models. Every single regularly contested road race from
the 5k distance to the Marathon has had at least one new world record for both men and women
in these shoes since 2017 (World Athletics). Advancements in running shoe technology have
provided the opportunity for athletes around the world to run the best times they possibly can. I
believe this is amazing for distance running for a couple reasons. First, distance running is a
competitive environment, in order to be successful, you have to be better than not only those
around you, but also athletes of the past, new shoes allow more athletes to be successful. Not
only that, but these shoes help people achieve their goals, for example Kipchoge. He dedicated
his life to achieving a sub-2 hour marathon, and through lots of hard work, he was able to
achieve his goal, and shoes aided that process. These are some of the opportunities that
innovation in shoe technology can provide, but their reach extends beyond elite athletes.
Due to the consumer nature of new shoes, both companies and the community
surrounding distance running stand to gain from shoe innovation. According to Nike’s Annual
Report through the SEC, their primary source of income is footwear, accounting for about 70%
of their income (SEC, Nike). Additionally, in the three months following the release of Next%,
in 2019, they outsold Air Force 1s. Nike regularly sells about 10 million pairs of Air Force 1s a
year, and at the time of release, Next% were $250 a pair. This goes to show that innovation in
shoe technology can be very lucrative for companies. Due to the success that was shown in
running, Nike began to invest back into the sport. NN running team, an athletics club sponsored
by Nike has since obtained about 60 runners, from 15 different countries (NN). There has also
been increased innovation for shoes at multiple price ranges, as similar technology to that found
in the best shoes can now be bought for less than half the price, Zoom Fly which has a carbon
Kiguthi 5
plate at $80. This is a similar story with Adidas, who has great success in distance running as
well (SEC, Adidas). Many more athletes have had the opportunity to be sponsored runners, due
to the success of new shoes. Running shoe innovation has contributed to company interest, but it
also contributes to public interest.
The large sales numbers of these shoes, and the record breaking performances also help
the sport grow interest. When Kipchoge broke the 2-hour marathon, I had friends and family that
had never participated in distance running, or watched it posting it on Instagram, and talking
about it in school. Even Barack Obama, who has no connection to running, tweeted about this,
saying, “Yesterday, marathoner Eliud Kipchoge became the first ever to break two hours. Today
in Chicago, Brigid Kosgei set a new women’s world record. Staggering achievements on their
own, they’re also remarkable examples of humanity’s ability to endure--and keep raising the
bar.”(Obama). The shoes themselves also broke the bubble of distance running, as Next% found
themselves common in sneaker outlets, and even received an Off-White (Italian luxury fashion
label) remake . Running shoes have never really been a part of the sneaker market, but Next%
were found on very sneaker-specific websites such as Hypebeast, and GOAT.
Running shoe innovation was able to introduce many more people to the sport that
otherwise would have never really paid any thought or attention to distance running. With more
athletes competing at all levels, more fans of the sport, and more companies investing, the
opportunity for sport to become bigger is incredible. I always remember in High-School, cross
country and track were often overlooked; the budget for the team was much smaller, support
from other students and faculty was smaller, and participation was smaller. This is fairly
Kiguthi 6
common, not only in High-School, but at all levels. I doubt running will ever be bigger than
Football or Basketball, but as the sport grows, the experience could be much more exciting, and
popular. As the sport grows in popularity, it is important to include all people who have interest.
Innovation in running shoes also allows more people to run despite physical
disadvantages. Due to interest in the sport, many companies have developed shoes that combat
over-pronation, and over-supination, which are abnormal foot-strike patterns. These shoes are
able to lower risk for lower limb injuries, a study done by AmirAli Jafarnezhadgero found that
these shoes were able to improve rearfoot eversion and lower limb joint moments in female
runners with pronated feet (Jafarnezhadgero). This essentially means that the mechanics found in
these runners were improved due to their footwear, which could decrease the likelihood of injury
due to high volume running. Additionally, some people could have an easier time even starting to
run, Matthew Walzer, an athlete with Cerebral Palsy said, “Out of all the challenges I have
overcome in my life, there is one that I am still trying to master, tying my shoes”, he continued
on saying that everyone deserves to call themselves an athlete (Murphy). Creating opportunities
for more people to enjoy distance running is a great benefit of innovation, however, not everyone
enjoys these benefits.
There are a few groups of people, and individuals that can not obtain new running shoes.
As I have mentioned before, Next% cost $250, Adidas has shoes that cost $180, even if an
individual has enough money, these shoes are almost always sold out due to their very high
demand. Not only this, but the advantage these shoes provide increase the divide with athletes in
countries where access to shoes is very limited. Kampala Kids Academy is an example of this, it
Kiguthi 7
is a sports team in Uganda that has inadequate equipment, most of their athletes run without
shoes (Kampala Kids Academy). There are many reasons that individual athletes, and groups of
athletes around the world won’t have access to these shoes. This is not fair to these athletes, but
there is still the opportunity to outrun someone with these shoes. Mary Keitany, a runner
sponsored by Adidas said, “The shoes don’t run. It is the person who is running. So I don’t mind
about the shoes”(Huber). As we discussed before, these shoes provide an increase in Running
Economy, which means an athlete will use less energy to run the same speed over the same
distance. In order for the shoes to be effective, athletes must be able to run their desired speed for
a distance. To do that, they must account for the other factors in Running Economy, by training,
getting proper nutrition, and overall working on running faster. This can be done without these
shoes, and really without much at all. Eliud Kipchoge, who I have referenced often, grew up very
poor, he did not have access to fancy shoe technology until he himself pioneered its use in
athletics. While running shoe innovation continues, all athletes can continue improving with or
without the shoes, but when it reaches the elite level, there are advantages that exist.
Once individuals start running times that qualify them for Diamond League races in
World Athletics, they are almost always sponsored (World Athletics). Not everyone is able to
pick up a sponsorship from one of the big companies, and they are often left with shoes that do
not provide the same advantages as Nike or Adidas (Abbate). Martin Huber, a journalist for
Outside, compiled some quotes about Nike’s 4% from male and female runners sponsored by a
variety of companies. One of these athletes Kellyn Taylor, a runner for Hoka One One said,
“[Technology] is always advancing, but is there a line that can’t be crossed, where it’s too much
when it’s just about the shoe and not the athlete? I think I’m kind of where everybody is. Is it too
Kiguthi 8
far? I don’t know. I’ve never worn them. I have no idea what they feel like, but I think that it’s
close” (Huber). There are also athletes of the past, who never had access to these shoes, Des
Linden (sponsored by Brooks), said, “It’s a little frustrating to see people in the past who are just
getting bumped off lists but they didn’t have access to that [shoe technology] . . . We just have to
educate people and make sure they understand that something different is happening right now”
(Huber). It is proven that these shoes provide an advantage, and at the world-class level, there are
runners that don’t have access to that advantage, which is unfair. There are many disadvantages
in running, from coaching, to elevation during training, to access to proper nutrition. Athletes
should be willing to accept the small disadvantage due to innovation, as it also provides so much
for the sport. All of the benefits I have described of running shoe innovation mostly depend on
these shoes being in competition at the highest level. Without record breaking performances that
drive huge sales, and iconic figures of the sport advocating for the shoes, it's unlikely that
innovation would continue in a way that provides all of these opportunities.
Innovation in running shoes have provided the opportunity for individual success, and
growth and accessibility in distance running. Despite this, these shoes provide an unfair
advantage to some athletes during competition. Runners and fans around the world should be
willing to accept this discrepancy, because of all the benefits the sport has to gain for innovation.
Jared Ward, a runner for Saucony said, “The shoes have been a big part . . . but I think it will
level out. At some point there’s diminishing returns because as you get taller and taller shoes,
you have to build wider and wider shoes and then they start getting heavy. So, it will be
interesting to see what these shoes converge at, or if the IAAF decides to do some regulating.”
(Huber). I hope that runners around the world will consider all of the opportunities that
Kiguthi 9
innovation in running shoes provides, and make a decision similar to the decision Ward pointed
out, and that they will choose innovation.
Kiguthi 10
Works Cited
Abbate, Emily. “Inside the Cult of the Vaporfly.” Runner's World, 17 Dec. 2020,
www.runnersworld.com/gear/a20864246/inside-the-cult-of-the-vaporfly/.
Adidas. EDGAR Search Results, SEC, 2020,
www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0001011311&a
mp;owner=include&count=40&hidefilings=0.
Barnes, Kyle R, and Andrew E Kilding. “Running Economy: Measurement, Norms, and
Determining Factors.” Open, Springer International Publishing, 27 Mar. 2015,
sportsmedicine-open.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40798-015-0007-y.
“Breaking2.” Nike.com, www.nike.com/running/breaking2.
Huber, Martin Fritz. “Elite Marathoners Weigh in on the Nike Vaporfly Debate.”
Outside Online, 2 Nov. 2019,
www.outsideonline.com/2404817/elite-marathoners-nike-vaporfly-debate.
Jafarnezhadgero, AmirAli, et al. “Effects of Anti-Pronation Shoes on Lower Limb
Kinematics and Kinetics in Female Runners with Pronated Feet: The Role of
Physical Fatigue.” PloS One, Public Library of Science, 14 May 2019,
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6516670/.
Kiguthi 11
Kampala Kids Academy, Facebook, 30 May 2020,
www.facebook.com/pages/category/School-Sports-Team/Kampala-kids-Academ
y-_uganda-100798021653688/.
“List of Approved Competition Shoes Published: PRESS-RELEASES: World Athletics.”
Worldathletics.org, 13 Aug. 2020,
www.worldathletics.org/news/press-releases/list-of-approved-competition-shoes-publ
ished.
Murphy, Colleen. “Nike Created a Hands-Free Sneaker And It Is Being Calling a Win
for People With Disabilities.” Health.com, 2 Feb. 2021,
www.health.com/fitness/fitness-gear/nikes-new-hands-free-sneaker-disability-de
sign.
Newman, Alexandra, et al. “One Hundred and Fifty Years of Sprint and Distance
Running - Past Trends and Future Prospects.” European Journal of Sport
Science, Routledge, 18 June 2015,
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4867877/.
NN. “About / NN Running Team.” NN Running Team, Nike, 2021,
www.nnrunningteam.com/about/.
Nike. EDGAR Search Results, SEC, 2020,
www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0000320187&a
mp;owner=include&count=40&hidefilings=0.
Kiguthi 12
Obama, Barack (@BarackObama). “Yesterday, marathoner Eliud Kipchoge . . .”. 13
October 2019, 3:20 PM. Tweet.
“World Athletics Home Page: World Athletics.” Worldathletics.org,
www.worldathletics.org/.