Run vdot test and effect of shoes??

Dave Campbell

Last night was time for another 5k run test.  Back on 1/6 was my last one and I averaged 7:54min/mile, vdot of 39.  It was very cold and good conditions.  Yesterday was 96 and very humid.  I decided that since I do this on a very nice rubberized surface track to go with my racing flats.  Yesterday, I averaged 7:22 min/mile, vdot of 43.  I was amazed with the result.  I expected to suffer and perhaps be slower in the heat.  I just cranked up some AC/DC on the ipod and gave it my best.  I ran the test in January in my regular long distance training shoes.  My question is this;  Is this improvement truly fitness related or could the difference in shoes explain a lot of it?  I was not doing as much running/week in January as I have been lately.

Thanks for any feedback.

mancona

Based on my personal experience unless you did the 7:54 pace in steel toe boots there is no way 32 second per mile was because of racing flats :-)

The negative effect 96 and humid definitely out weighs the perfomance gain of racing flats in my book.

Given the dramatic change in conditions, I would actually assume that all 32 seconds of improvement is because of your fitness and zero is because of the shoes... In fact I bet your fitness has improved even more than that. Sure the shoes help but not that much.

Nice Work in tough conditions!

Nemo Brauch

What Matt said. Give yourself a pat on the back- that's a nice new tasty vDot ya got there!

kurshing

Dave...I had a similar experience from the OS training recently, so, I will go ahead and extend a "congrats" to you! There are 2 'main' variables that dictate your 5k (and any other) fitness testing:

1. Your fitness - this is obvious.
2. Your test pacing strategy - the first time you test, you are likely to 'blow up' or leave something 'in the tank', and, as you perform the tests again in time you will get better at taking the test, which will effect your outcome. So, you could have actually had a little more fitness earlier in the year than your vDot reflected, but, just weren't as experienced at taking the test...thus giving you a larger margin for improvement this time.

Either way and for whatever reason...big gains = great news and more evidence that the combination and EN and hard work rocks!

Chris G

 No way it is the shoes.  They would make a difference of -maybe- a couple seconds a mile.  I think they provide more of a mental boost than everything.  Congrats on the improvement.  Keep at it.

Al Truscott

1. @ Dave - You clearly have made a significant fitness improvement, and the most important factor is probably the quality of your training - congrants to self are due.

2. @ Chris, Nemo, and Matt: I issue a challenge to the four of us. Do two easy 4-5 mile runs on the same course in the same conditions with the same level of fatigue going in. Wear 4-6 oz racing flats for one, and 12 oz stability or cushion shoes on the other (doubt Nemo or Matt have these, but ...) After the first mile or so, ease into a normal long run pace, and hold a steady HR, same for both days. See what your pace is for the next three miles (no fair peeking while you're running, only display your HR on your Garmin). Only if those times are the same will I believe that shoes don't make a difference. The last time I did this test, in 87F and humid condition in 2006 during an IM taper, I had a 20+ second/mile difference in my times.

mancona

I like your challenge Al!. I'll need to find a shoe that heavy as I don't have anything and Zoot doesn't even make anything over 10oz. When the timing is right in my training I'll give it a shot.

[Deleted User]

If it was the shoes, I WANT A PAIR!! But clearly its not. Amen to what Matt said. Don't be so quick to give the gear credit. YOU made your self faster, not the shoes!!

Keith Wick

Don't know how to embed this into the post, so here is the youtube link: according to Mars Blackman, "Money, it's gotta be the shoes!"



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhHONpmlxPc

Or as Michael says, "It's not the shoes Mars"

Dave Campbell

Thanks for the feedback everyone. I hadn't ran in those shoes in about 4 years. I bought them back in 2004 when Rich held a clinic at Emory and was advising us to run in a minimal shoe. Ran a few 5ks with them, but had about forgot I had them. Found them a couple weeks ago and decided to give them a try. I'm also about 8lbs lighter than I was in January, so looks like the run focus, body comp improvement is paying off. I'm getting really motivated for Augusta 70.3 in Sept. Will be my 13th 1/2IM. Running has always been my limiter, but making some progress this summer.

mancona

I'm sure the 8lbs less of weight has a HUGE impact as well. Once again, nice work and keep it up.

Eric Rueppel

I have to agree with everyone that it is not the shoes. I agree with Matt that 8lbs made a difference too. Overall great test. Have fun training in those new zones. Good job!

twilkens

While I agree that that big of a difference is not likely just the shoes. I think racing shoes do give a significant advantage. Just look at the math, (Mike G. may want to check my figures, but here goes.
Lets make it pretty straight forward. 5oz shoes at a cadence of 90(180 foot strikes/min) you are lifting 56lbs/min. 10oz shoe you obviously double that (112lbs/min) so if you are running a 20 min 5k you are not lifting, or should I say you are saving yourself from lifting 1125lbs. Over a 90 min run you would lift 5040lbs less with the 5 oz shoes than the 10oz shoes. I have a hard time believing that is a insignificant factor if all other factors are held the same. Anyway maybe my calculations are way off. Someone check me out. But I run much faster in racing flats. Placebo or not I won't change back.

Al Truscott

Earlier in this thread, I issued a running shoe test challenge. I've started that, in a new thread in the Challenge Forum. Here's a link to that:

http://endurancenation.us.dnnmax.co...aspx