Do These Shoes REALLY Make You Faster!? (Half Marathon) 

Thats nuts! after swimming and biking too, race day adrenaline for ya haha well done :)

what do you describe as high cadence in terms of steps per min? looking at getting myself a set of pro 3s for an upcoming marathon. Cheers

@@cbruceee4765 Depends on your height. If you’re over 6”/1.83m then 170+ steps per minute is ideal at your race pace. Shorter than that you should aim for 175-185 for your race pace. On easy runs it can be less since you’re going slower obviously but still a good idea to practice form. The AP3s are good because they have a wider base at the forefoot giving more stability and a better bounce for mid foot/forefoot strikers. The lower your cadence is the more likely you’re over striding/heelstriking

@@nicholastartaglia4276 Ten Thousand CC, Decathlon, and Represent 247 generally!

Endorphin elites

Id say as a novice or trained the saucony ride 16 or 17 is a great neutral shoe for both short, fast and long runs. Ive done pb's on short distance like 3-5k and ive run ultra distance in it as welland even after a total 1200+ km the shoe is still good enough for easy runs. It's not specifically perfect at any type of run, but great as an overall trainer. The shoes in the video are amazing as well, but it would probably make sense to be more conditioned to running before investing in the expensive gear. Plated shoes can be a bit hard on the feet and so on. And by waiting until you're a more conditioned runner, the wow effect is definitely going to fire you up more

@@dionsteen2667 thanks for the advice! Will definitely check them out

🫡

How did feet and calves feel the next day? Was your recovery different?

@@ricklathem4210 tighter than usual but nothing crazy! Just don’t think my gait was well suited to these upon reflection tbh

Agreed!

🤝

Technology available to mass market means that it’s not pay-to-win but simply the winning times get quicker as an average in line with tech. Besides, upon reflection and running data since - these didn’t help me much at all, and I’m much better off in a different style of trainer (cheaper) that’s suited to my gait!

@@ferguscrawley95 I take your point, but if there is an item of technology that makes a difference (e.g. a £6k bike vs a £600 bike) and you can't afford that item but someone else can, is that not a definition of pay-to-win? Granted these things are never an equal playing field and there are many other metrics at play, but I feel this point is getting stronger all the time as tech becomes more influential.

So which are you going to use for the full marathon? I take your point about technology progressing, but at €3 per wearable km it does feel different

@@theoceansswitch a £6k bike is only fully useful to a £6k rider (arbitrary numbers but hopefully makes sense) - if you’re already hitting 3:30kms for a marathon distance, then you’ve earned the right through repetition to justify spend/utilisation of additional tech here (and in fact you’d be foolish not to). A McLaren 750s is only super fast around a track with a competent driver. Will an average person be quicker in a 750s > an M3? Undoubtedly yes. But does that mean that a 750s is the only reason, no. It’s modern tech that allows for the cherry on top of foundations already laid. If you’re not already capable of winning, there is no way to pay-to-win. And if you’re already capable of winning, you have prioritised things for long enough where it’s logical to justify expense on marginal gains. Does the average recreation runner/triathlete benefit as much from such expense? Probably not, but no price can be attached to joy, and if a 2 minute PB is a source of joy for someone, for example. Then money well spend. (Obviously with the caveat of financial sensitivity here, but within the context of pay-to-win, if you’re knocking on the door of winning, once in that deep it likely becomes a case of priorities rather than affordability if that makes sense - out with that context, it’s then entirely a case of how someone chooses to spend their money for what gain I would suggest!)

@@ferguscrawley95 I partially agree, but I think there's an underlying assumption that, through performance, you can 'earn' your way up the ladder towards better tech which isn't always true. I might be a £6k rider (I'm not, but I'm trying to illustrate a point :-p), but I'll never get a £6k bike because my chosen career (in the charity sector) simply will never afford me that option. And I can't compete with the other people at my level who've gone out and bought the £6k bike already, so I never get to the point of delivering the level of performance that would justify the investment in the first place. It's not really a big deal, and certainly at my level it doesn't really matter to anyone other than the individuals involved, and then only trivially, but sometimes it's just a bit galling to feel one doesn't have access to a level playing field in whatever level of competition one happens to be in.

Upon reflection, and data since, these really aren’t the shoes for me - I thought they might be given I get on with the endorphin pro but these just aren’t suited to my gait at all!