4.5 Article

Metabolic and performance responses of male runners wearing 3 types of footwear: Nike Vaporfly 4%, Saucony Endorphin racing flats, and their own shoes

Journal

JOURNAL OF SPORT AND HEALTH SCIENCE
Volume 11, Issue 3, Pages 275-284

Publisher

SHANGHAI UNIV SPORT
DOI: 10.1016/j.jshs.2020.11.012

Keywords

Footwear; Individual responses; Minimalist; Physiology; Running

Funding

  1. Te Huataki Waiora School of Health, University of Waikato, New Zealand
  2. Running Clinic, Canada

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study compared the running economy and 3-km time-trial performance of runners wearing Nike Vaporfly 4% (VP4), Saucony Endorphin lightweight racing flats (FLAT), and their own running shoes (OWN). The results showed that VP4 improved running economy in male recreational runners at relative speeds compared to their own shoes, but the improvements were not significant compared to FLAT. Additionally, more runners achieved better time-trial performances on the treadmill in VP4 compared to FLAT and their own shoes.
Purpose: We compared running economy (RE) and 3-km time-trial (TT) variables of runners wearing Nike Vaporfly 4% (VP4), Saucony Endorphin lightweight racing flats (FLAT), and their habitual running (OWN) footwear. Methods: Eighteen male recreational runners (age = 33.5 +/- 11.9 year (mean +/- SD), peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) = 55.8 +/- 4.4 mL/kg.min) attended 4 sessions approximately 7 days apart. The first session consisted of a VO2peak test to inform subsequent RE speeds set at 60%, 70%, and 80% of the speed eliciting VO2peak. In subsequent sessions, treadmill RE and 3-km TTs were assessed in the 3 footwear conditions in a randomized, counterbalanced crossover design. Results: Oxygen consumption (mL/kg.min) was less in VP4 (from 4.3% to 4.4%, p <= 0.002) and FLAT (from 2.7% to 3.4%, p <= 0.092) vs. OWN across intensities, with a non-significant difference between VP4 and FLAT (1.0%-1.7%, p >= 0.292). Findings related to energy cost (W/kg) and energetics cost of transport (J/kg.m) were comparable. VP4 3-km TT performance (11:07.6 +/- 0:56.6 mm:ss) was enhanced vs. OWN by 16.6 s (2.4%, p = 0.005) and vs. FLAT by 13.0 s (1.8%, p = 0.032). The 3-km times between OWN and FLAT (0.5%, p = 0.747) were similar. Most runners (n=11, 61%) ran their fastest TT in VP4. Conclusion: Overall, VP4 improved laboratory-based RE measures in male recreational runners at relative speeds compared to OWN, but the RE improvements in VP4 were not significant vs. FLAT. More runners exhibited better treadmill TT performances in VP4 (61%) vs. FLAT (22%) and OWN (17%). The variability in RE (-10.3% to 13.3%) and TT (-4.7% to 9.3%) improvements suggests that responses to different types of shoes are individualized and warrant further investigation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available