ATF_SPRING11-LORES

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:44 PM Page 1

Spring 2011 $5.95

Volume 18, Number 1

PA I D PRST STD U.S. Postage

Timothy Aguero Photography

Permit 50 Ft Atkinson, WI

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:44 PM Page 2

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:45 PM Page 3

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/14/11 9:53 PM Page 4

I 8 Starting Blocks

13 Track Construction 30 Exit

10 The Future of Track & Field in America: How 6 USATF Board Members See It 14 All-American Track & Field Teams 17 2011 Spring Shoe Review

’ve been traveling the country, speaking to coaches, athletes and fans about our sport.

After nearly 30 years of publishing athletics publications, I’m still bullish on our sport.

But at times we tend to shoot ourselves in the foot, from meets not starting on time to expecting fans to show up just because it is track & field.

Road running is thriving. High school track & cross country are thriving. Yet, the truth is, much of the time, these groups do not seem to work well together. There are exceptions and promise, and that is what I am writing about today.

The Millrose Games, now in its 104th year, would not exist without the help of the New York Road Runners, USA Track & Field and, over the years, adidas and Nike. The Millrose meet needs some drastic changes—and needs them now. Moving the meet to the Armory, a terrific site, is not the answer. Kids want to run in Madison Square Garden.

So why don’t we have an afternoon or early evening meet for high schools and colleges, with perhaps a $5 admission, and then clear the house and have a two-hour elite meet— including perhaps a couple of elite high school and college events and the other 90 minutes for the highest-level elite competition?

The New Balance Indoor Grand Prix showed that New Balance is committed to the sport. NB is now sponsoring Falmouth Road Race, NB Indoor Champs, NB Outdoor Champs and NB Indoor Grand Prix. NB’s long-term commitment to the Boston event showed on Feb. 5. Your comments told us that the TV, on ESPN 2, was one of the best telecasts of our sport ever. Nice job to New Balance, Global Athletics and Management and USA Track & Field.

In February, the USATF Indoor meet in Albuquerque produced nine world leaders and two American records, which was superb. I was disappointed with the Saturday night crowd, and while there are many reasons for that, one is the expectation that people will just show up. The second day of the meet was tremendous, great performances and a nice venue—but there were young fans in Albuquerque who did not get to see the great meet that USATF put on. Could a well-planned and executed promotional plan have put them in those many empty seats?

The Brooks PR Invitational. Jesse Williams and his team at Brooks invited the top high schoolers in the 60m, 60m hurdles, 400m, 800m, mile and 2-mile. They were rewarded with 2011’s #1 time in the girls’ 60m, 400m girls, mile and 2-mile, and the boys’ best time in the 60m—and overall, this one meet produced an amazing 37 of the year’s top 10 performances in those 12 events—more than 30% of the year’s top 10 marks in one meet! At the awards party, Brooks prez Jim Weber told the athletes, “We will be doing this for many years to come!”

Without the support of companies like Brooks, Nike, New Balance, ASICS and Saucony, among others, the sport as we know it would not exist. The pieces of the puzzle are there, it is now time to put those pieces together, or we will continue to be a minor major sport and not what we should be, the most positive sport in the world. And a sport that does more for the nation’s health than any other.

Let’s look at our possibilities and strengths and see what we can do! If you have suggestions (I will write about them here and on runblogrun.com or email me at larry@runningnetwork.com!)

22 Track & Field Spikes Larry Eder, Publisher

Group Publisher: Larry Eder, larry.eder@gmail.com Group Editor: Christine Johnson, ctrneditorial@gmail.com Advertising: Larry Eder, ssmadvert@gmail.com Writers/Contributors: Andy Ferrara Dick Patrick, Mary Helen Sprecher, Cregg Weinmann, Mark Winitz Circulation Changes: shootingstarmediabiz@gmail.com Photographers: Lisa Coniglio/PhotoRun, Victah Sailer/PhotoRun Layout/Design: Kristen Cerer Editor: James Dunaway, jodunaway@sbcglobal.net, 512-292-9022

Cover photo and TOC photos: From 2011 Brooks PR invitational, photos courtesy of Brooks Running.

Special Thanks To: Tim Garant, Alex Larsen, Tom Mack, Mary Atwell, Deb Keckeisen, Sydney Wesemann In loving memory of Violet Robertson, 1913–2003 www.american-trackandfield.com ph: 608-239-3785; fax: 920-563-7298 shootingstarmediabiz@gmail.com American Track & Field (ISSN 1098-64640) is produced, published and owned by Shooting Star Media, Inc., PO Box 67, Ft. Atkinson, Wisconsin 53538-0067, Christine Johnson, President, Larry Eder, Vice President. Copyright 2011 by Shooting Star Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Publisher assumes no liability for matter printed, and assumes no liability or responsibility for content of paid advertising and reserves the right to reject paid advertising. Opinions expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Publisher. No part of this publication may be reproduced or stored in any form without written permission of the Publisher.

Pre-Press/Printer: W. D. Hoard & Sons Company, Fort Atkinson, WI

American Track & Field is not related to or endorsed by any other entity or corporation with a similar name and is solely owned by Shooting Star Media, Inc.

Publisher’s Rep: Peter Koch-Weser, pkwadvmag@yahoo.com, ph: 310-836-2642; fax: 310-836-7093

Publisher recommends, as with all fitness and health issues, you consult with your physician before instituting any changes in your fitness program.

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/14/11 9:53 PM Page 5

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/14/11 9:53 PM Page 6

s ta rt i n g b l o c k s

Starting Blocks How cool was it for a guy like Steve Magness – a star prep miler who struggled relatively in college and became an exercise science geek – to suddenly link up with what may be the top middle distance/distance group in the country? One day he was coaching a group of high school kids and blogging about exercise physiology.

Next day he’s advising Alberto Salazar’s Oregon Project group that includes Alan Webb, a longtime Magness pal.

Salazar, a former star turned coach who is constantly seeking new information and any technological edge, hired Magness after reading his blog, The Science of Running.

Salazar spoke with Doug Binder of Oregon-based blog Track Focus about Magness: “The guy has a very good running background, trained at a high level, and coaching is what he wants to do. He’s sort of our scientific advisor. Over the last year or so I’ve thought I’ve needed someone to help me coach the athletes. Rather than bring someone in primarily to hold a stopwatch, I wanted to find someone who could add something to what we’re doing. I’ll tell him this is what we’re doing and he can look at it and give me some scientific basis for it.”

Salazar and Magness have a highprofile case in miler Alan Webb, whose last strong season was 2007 and has been with the Oregon Project for over a year.

Webb’s early results this year have not been impressive. He opened with a 4:00.70, seventh-place mile in Boston, followed by a sixth place in a 3,000 (7:51.85) in Seattle and a third-place 800 (1:52.2) in New Zealand.

Webb was irate after the mile. Salazar

has tried to calm down a runner who is coming back from injuries and is always hard on himself: “What I’m trying to get across to him is that we can use races as building blocks for the season; use races as a training effort. Not that he isn’t going to try to win, because he is.

“In (the) 3,000, he did everything he could to try to win. He positioned himself well but he just hasn’t done the speed work yet, so he lost to guys who are faster.

Yet he was leading with 150 meters to go.

So he executed everything perfectly; he just didn’t have the speed at the end.”

By early March, Webb was showing signs of improvement. He finished third in an outdoor 1,500 in Australia, recording a mark of 3:37.82 and beating New Zealander and ex-University of Michigan teammate Nick Willis, who was fourth.

Magness isn’t the only new addition to the Oregon Project, which has revived its name after competing recently under the umbrella of the Oregon Track Club. Britain’s 2010 European 5,000/10,000 champions, Mo Farah, is now part of the group and has moved to Portland for his preparation for the 2012 London Olympics.

On February 20, Farah edged new training partner Galen Rupp in an indoor 5,000 as both set national indoor records in Birmingham, England, 13:10.60 for Farah and 13:11.44 for Rupp. Farah is an interesting case for Salazar. Not only is he not American, he was not, until March, a Nike athlete (he was previously sponsored by adidas).

“It is going to be a great partnership going forward and we are going to make each other better,” Rupp told Track Focus.

Northwest Passage Salazar’s group aren’t the only ones doing something right in Portland. Chris Solinsky, who trains with the Nike-sponsored Oregon Track Club under coach Jerry Schumacher, opened the indoor season with promise after last year’s American record 10,000 outdoors, setting set a personal best 3:54.52 in the mile on February 13 in Seattle.

Solinsky continues with the same training philosophy that has helped him emerge as a medal threat at major competitions. “The last three years have kind of been the same – a hybrid between a lot of strength while always keeping the speed present. Always keeping the speed right at our fingertips but also always working on the aerobic threshold. Pushing that threshold so we can rely on our natural speed.”

Solinsky said the four previous weeks he had run at least 120 miles. “I had no idea of what I might do today. I thought I could run anywhere from 4:00 to what I ran today. But I’m pleased it went this way.”

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:45 PM Page 7

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:31 PM Page 8

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:31 PM Page 9

s ta rt i n g b l o c k s

Like Fine Wine

At 36 Bernard Lagat is showing no sign of aging. He had an interesting winter. He didn’t add to his record total of eight Wanamaker Mile titles at the Millrose Games after finishing second. He lost the U.S. 5,000 indoor record to Galen Rupp but then set an American 2-mile record and beat Rupp for the U.S. indoor 3,000 title.

Lagat made the 3,000 win look easy. After Rupp took the lead with about 600 to go, Lagat fell in line right behind him. With a lap to go, Lagat took off, finishing the final 200 in under 27 seconds to win in 7:57.17 as Rupp took second (7:59.91).

“I didn’t have a lot of strategies. I wanted to sit back and watch the race and feel the race,” Lagat said. “I wanted to keep myself in the front position so I’m not going to get boxed. If Galen or someone else wants to go, I was ready to go fast.”

Lagat still has answers for competitors whether the race is fast or slow and tactical. “I was trying to get a little bit of a jump on him but he’s really good at the end,” said Rupp, 24, who has been observing and learning from Lagat in recent years. “That’s something that I need to continue to work on.”

After his indoor success, Lagat headed to Melbourne, Australia. In a race where runners were seeking to achieve the world championships A standard of 13:20, Lagat won in 13:08.43. The U.S. had three other qualifiers in Chris Solinsky (3rd, 13:10.22), Matt Tegenkamp (4th, 13:16.27) and Andrew Bumbalough (13:16.77).

Cutting Back on Rounds The 2012 London Olympics will have a new streamlined format for races. The international track federation now has a policy of having no more than three rounds for any distance. That’s a reduction by one round in the 100 and 200. Athletes representing countries without an A or B qualifier would need to compete in four rounds to make the final in the 100 or 200.

The decision is earning mixed reviews. Those in favor like the idea that top runners can reduce the risk of injury by having to run fewer rounds. Some purists lament that the new policy will reduce the chances of competing for those not at the top of their event.

“Think of mid-level runners like me,” said Britain’s Craig Pickering, a quarterfinalist in the 100 at the 2008 Olympics. “I might get only one race now. Bring back the first round.”

Think of top runners like Tyson Gay and Usain Bolt. One less round in hot and humid weather could lead to better performances, especially if they’re doubling in the 100 and 200. Under the old system, eight races plus relay heats left sprinters like that exhausted, sore and subject to injury after a major meet.

Playing It Safe David Oliver picked up during indoor season where he left off last summer. After winning 15 outdoor races at the 110 hurdles in a row, he won his first three indoor races in 2011 and set a personal best of 7.37 in the 60 hurdles. But he withdrew from the U.S. Indoor Championships in February because of a left calf injury.

“It’s nothing serious,” said Oliver, who tore his left calf muscle in 2009. “I am back at practice after taking a week off. I just didn’t want to take any chances by running any more indoor meets.”

Oliver ran three indoor personal bests this season, indicating the first part of his race is more solid than ever. “I have become kind of a complete hurdler,” Oliver said.

“I added the final piece with my start.”

Oliver’s outdoor best of 12.89 is .02 off the world record of Cuba’s Dayron Robles.

Maybe this will be the outdoor season Oliver takes the world record.

“Everyone knows I am a beast outdoors,” he said.

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/14/11 9:53 PM Page 10

The Future of Track and Field in America: How 6 USATF Board Members See It W

hat’s the future of American track and field? Is it flourishing, or dying?

Outdoor track and field was the #1 sport among high school girls nationally in 2009–2010 with almost 470,000 participants, and the second largest for boys (572,123 participants) behind football.

And on the roads in 2009, there were approximately 10 million U.S. road race finishers, a record. That sounds like a pretty healthy future.

But in the last 25 years, track and field has lost much of its status as a major American sport. Governance at the highest levels has faced rocky territory, and plenty of criticism. And a 2009 USOCmandated restructuring cut USATF’s board of directors from 31 members to 15 left many of track’s diverse constituencies feeling they had no voice at the sport’s highest level.

Last September, barely two years after his hiring, Doug Logan, the track federation’s “new” CEO, was abruptly released by the board amid concerns that he was not performing satisfactorily.

All that is negative – but sometimes overlooked is the fact that USATF has undertaken several major initiatives (although it’s too early to assess their longterm impact): • In February 2009, a “Project 30” Task Force issued a 69-page report that analyzed Team USA performance in Beijing and set a course for programmatic change to maximize Team USA performance in future Olympic and World Championship competitions.

USATF subsequently hired a chief of sports performance and a director of coaching, and rolled out a new High-Performance Action Plan.

• A joint USATF–Nike venture is scheduled to spend approximately $8 million dollars during its 8-year term to support athletes with medalwinning potential for the 2012 and 2016 Olympics.

• In December 2009, USATF announced a new strategic plan, outlining its mission, vision and strategies through 2012. USATF’s board and its subcommittees are using it as their guide for action (check out the plan at www.usatf.org/about/committees/BoardOfDirectors/strategicPlan.asp).

• USATF’s USA Distance Project has grown to 10 distance training centers nationwide to develop world-class American marathoners and distance stars. More than 50% of the top 100 U.S. distance runners train at these centers.

In addition, the USATF Foundation has become an important factor in the development of world-class athletes, annually distributing (thanks to a small group of generous USATF members) almost a half a million dollars every year to important causes within our sport.

To help American Track & Field readers learn more about USATF’s board of directors, we interviewed six of the 15 members and asked them to describe their personal top three priorities for USATF and for the sport in general.

Jack Wickens USATF board vice chairman, Board Business Development Committee chair Jack Wickens is a retired business executive. In 2005 he joined the USA Track & Field Foundation board, and as a USATF board member works closely with the Foundation’s elite athlete and grant programs and recently launched a career-mentoring and job-search assistance program for athletes as they transition out of track and field. He has a B.A. in Economics from Bucknell University, where he ran track and cross country.

Wickens’ Comments Priority A: Find common ground among track and field’s many constituent groups.

Our sport is complex, with many constituencies and different events; there is a lot of fragmentation. If we can bring people together—particularly key constituents such as volunteer leaders, etc.—and create new forums to exchange ideas, and listen better, then our new CEO will be able to simplify the focus that is created by common ground. I have confidence in the pervasive spirit of “let’s lock arms and work together to advance this sport” that can come from the many talented volunteers and business people in our sport.

Priority B: Give the presentation of our sport a dramatic face-lift. I have friends who I ran with in college who have drifted away from the sport. They could be lifelong devotees, but they don’t know when it’s on TV or who the stars are. We haven’t made it easy for people who, I think, are fairly easy fan opportunities.

They should be our initial target: Bring back the former passionate fans. Winning general sports is a tougher goal. It will take longer.

In 2011 and thereafter, fans can anticipate upgrades in how our major meets are depicted on TV, as well as much more promotion of when meets will be televised. This also means exploration of new

ways to engage our fans (and create new fans) via TV, such as new shows that profile our athletes, their fascinating life stories, and their quest to become Olympians.

In another area, the leaders of Road Runners Club of America, Running USA, USATF, and the USATF Foundation are working together on a nationwide project we’re calling Discover Running to promote and expand our sport’s impact on youth fitness in America.

Priority C: Turn on corporate America to track and field. Acquire more business partners and more revenue to fully act on the many actions and ideas that have been developed. Our sport presents a compelling value proposition for companies seeking to attach their brand to (1) health and fitness role models, (2) inspiring quests of maximum human performance, (3) the purity of competitions between the world’s fastest, strongest, and most gutsy athletes, and (4) the beauty and maturity of our athletes. We are a very cool sport that up to this point has been weakly packaged and marketed.

In 2011, major corporations and their brand managers will get a deep education about what our sport has to offer.

We’ve started these conversations with at least 25 companies from many industry sectors about potential sponsorship.

For example, health care is a multitrillion dollar sector in our economy, but there is little penetration into our sport by health care companies. Yet, track and field is a perfect match for them. I see this as our biggest opportunity. Coming from the health care industry, I can get appointments with the right people, and I plan to.

Dr. Evie Dennis USATF board member, chair USATF Leadership and Diversity Committee, member USATF board’s Audit Committee and Personnel Committee Dr. Evie Dennis is a former superintendent of Denver Public Schools, and a member of the USATF National Track & Field Hall of Fame. She has served USATF for four decades. In 1980, she played a key role in organizing The Athletics Congress (now USATF), and served as TAC’s acting president. She led the USOC delegation at the 1988 Olympic Games, and currently serves as a USATF delegate to the IAAF and as chair of USATF’s Diversity and Leadership Committee.

Dennis’ Comments Priority A: Continue to grow the sport and involve more grassroots constituents.

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:45 PM Page 11

U S AT F This is particularly important as schools cut back physical education programs. I envision USATF filling this void— if we could have active age-group programs in every USATF association, which we don’t have right now. I haven’t figured out how we can do this yet. I need help from our members to think this through. When I was superintendent of schools in Denver, the board wanted to explore cutting physical education. Of course, I said, “No way.” We need to get kids away from the TV because we’re growing a bunch of couch potatoes. I see USATF getting involved at the elementary and high school levels to fix this. Again, I don’t have specific ideas on how to do this.

I feel that it would be helpful if we had a presence in Washington, D.C. so we could talk to government officials about our track and field programs that benefit people from cradle to grave. We need to spread the word, and I don’t think we do it well enough.

Priority B: Build our base of USATF— certified officials. Our current officials are aging and younger people don’t seem to want, or have the time to get involved. Our officials are tremendously dedicated volunteers. We need to look at ways to keep our officials’ programs going and entice new people to come in. We can do this with creative thinking.

Priority C: Cultivate a common goal, or goals, for our sport that transcend our various constituent groups. We’ve documented some of these goals in our strategic plan, but we need to focus on these goals all the way down to the USATF associations. Some associations are doing a great job with superb programs, while others are doing almost nothing. We need to somehow transfer the knowledge, enthusiasm and activism cultivated by the active associations to the associations that don’t have it. Perhaps we could do more through our current association workshops.

Steve Miller USATF board member, Board Competition Committee chair Steve Miller is CEO of Agassi Graf Holdings and Andre Agassi Foundation for Education. He was previously CEO of the Professional Bowlers Association, director of global sports marketing for Nike, adjunct professor at the University of Oregon Warsaw School of Sports Marketing, and director of athletics for Kansas State University. He has more than two decades’ experience as a high school and collegiate track and cross country coach.

Miller’s Comments Priority A: Run our sport in a more businesslike fashion. Over the years track and field has lost the ability to understand the business ramifications of its decisions related to events, how you communicate with

the public, sponsorships and internal communication. Without the appropriate communication platforms, we can’t be a successful business.

Running our sport more efficiently doesn’t mean that business has to be cold and hard. If done properly, it can be done effectively and humanely. We have a diverse group of individuals in track and field that is not convinced that we share a common goal. Over the years, our constituent groups have grown farther apart because they see their mission and objectives as singular to their entity. The result is a lack of unanimity and bad clarity about what we’re trying to accomplish. In any good business there are a few absolute goals and objectives that each of the constituent groups are looking to fulfill as best they can.

Priority B: Have strong, communicative and intelligent leadership. Without this leadership you can’t communicate effectively, and you certainly can’t get constituents to join together. The only time we bring our diverse people together is at USATF’s annual national conventions. We don’t find ways to vest these people in the process, and the only way that you can do this is through strong leadership—collaborative rather than dictatorial. If you don’t have collaboration, you have all the separate parts, but are missing a common goal—which we desperately need in track and field because of its diversity. If our leaders can coalesce and amalgamate our constituents, and provide a clear and common message, then we have a chance at being successful.

Priority C: Achieve economic stability. This lack of economic stability forces us to make short-term decisions that are not good for the business. To achieve economic stability, we must create a value proposition. Other sports—most recently the NFL—do things in a particular way [to achieve economic stability] because they have very specific goals and objectives in this area. In track and field, we have a large membership base. Economically, this membership base alone isn’t going to get us the money we want. However, it does give us a national imprint. It means we have a bunch of people that say, “I want to be part of this and I’m a consumer.” So, you make this consumption valuable to sponsors.

We need a consistent TV presence.

Today, you don’t know what meets are on TV, or what channel they’re on. You have no consistent programming, no “appointment television.” Appointment television means that every Tuesday night with my family I’m going to watch a specific show that I know will be aired at a specific time.

The bottom line for creating economic stability is not just based on simply visiting prospective sponsors. It’s creating a value proposition. What is the value of our membership? What is the value of our constituent groups? What is the value from events? What is the value of our young ath-

letes going out and speaking in front of crowds? Without a strong value proposition that includes TV, on-site spectators, athlete success, commercialization, etc., you can never gain economic stability. You can’t count on major sponsors every year to bail you out.

So, get the constituent groups together so they recognize that collectively they have more power and more value than they do individually. The beauty of track and field is that it has a world-class side, a competitive non-world-class side, a recreational side, and a lifelong health side. But we don’t promote this collectively. As a result, our value proposition is too broken up and no one sees it in total.

Max Siegel USATF board member, Board Operations Committee chair Max Siegel is the CEO of The 909 Group LLC, a sports, entertainment and lifestyle marketing firm. He also practices law with Baker & Daniels in Indianapolis, with clients such as the Seattle Mariners, USA Gymnastics, USA Swimming and NCAA. A leading NASCAR consultant, Max is the former president of global operations for Dale Earnhardt, Inc., a former executive with the Sony BMG/Zomba Label Group, and a cum laude graduate of the University of Notre Dame School of Law. Siegel’s Comments Priority A: Position the brand and the sport to create value and attract commercial targets. Creating value isn’t just about marketing and visibility. It’s really about return on an investment. One thing we’ve been doing is an assessment of our assets and coming up with campaigns that resonate with audiences. Track is a diverse sport. You can hit the health care sector, the female/minority demographic, etc.-- so many constituencies that are part of my idea of how we present the brand. In addition, track and field is a lifestyle sport. It’s an international brand that is integrated in our lifestyle. It doesn’t matter if you’re an elite athlete, a race walker or a youngster.

Everything that you do has a health benefit and everyone can participate in it. So, I’m passionate about making sure that USATF develops grassroots programs that resonate in communities, and that we develop media properties so sponsors can get returns by being involved.

Priority B: Increase USATF’s available resources by bringing in new commercial partners and sponsors. But we need to do the first piece [position the brand] right before we can do this one.

Human resources, program partners, and financial resources are all critically important. Part of my goal for the board’s Operations Committee is that we have the necessary resources in place to execute our

Continued on page 14

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:45 PM Page 12

U S AT F business objectives in our strategic plan.

Priority C: Improve our service to the sport’s constituency base. Galvanize this base, set some obtainable goals and figure out what is needed to achieve them. At the grassroots level, whether it’s masters or youth, we need to hear what the constituents want to accomplish. This constituent base needs to be unified in voicing the goals they want to achieve. In the end, the ability to achieve these goals will come down to financial resources and the manpower to execute them. If you have fragmented grassroots programs that aren’t tied into a broad, well-defined return on investment, it becomes even harder to secure financial resources.

I believe in our constituents’ creativity and autonomy in their respective areas, but they need to be tied into the support of a national resource to assist with finances. People and organizations have responsibilities in their own communities and they are passionate about making their programs in their home space successful.

[We need to show them] that working together collectively moves their individual agendas forward in a very effective manner. And, if constituents feel like they are adding value to the table, the more they will seek out the national office and try to bring them into the process.

Robert Hersh USATF board member, IAAF representative, and member of board’s Audit and Competition subcommittees In 2007, Bob Hersh was elected as one of four vice presidents of the IAAF, and also appointed chair of the IAAF Competition Commission. Hersh is a retired attorney who has worked as the English-speaking announcer at the Olympic Games and IAAF World Championships. He served as a member of the IAAF Technical Committee from 1984 until 1999, when he was elected to the council. He has served on the board of USATF and its predecessor organization, TAC, in various capacities since its formation in 1980.

Hersh’s Comments It’s difficult to isolate three priorities. We have our strategic plan, which has six major visions, and they are all important.

We need to continue what we’ve been doing, and do some things better. We’ve created a federation that has great strengths, and we can be proud of it in many ways. Let me give you several of my priorities, none of which are in priority order.

Priority A: Support our high school and college communities as they undergo economy-related challenges. We have over a million high school kids doing track and field and cross country annually. For

the sport’s participation base and competitive orientation, this is where it starts— with USATF’s youth programs and the nation’s school programs. Today, there are school districts that are asking: Do we keep our track coach or keep our chemistry lab open? Do we buy a discus or do we buy a flute? All these things are important. We need to make sure that our educational communities and governments are aware of the importance of track and field—not because we want to produce medals, but because it is good for kids, and the general population, to be participating in sports.

And we can help with America’s childhood obesity crisis..

Traditionally, this hasn’t been something that the federation has had to think about much. We need to organize our USATF national office and association resources so that when an economic crisis related to track and field happens at a school or university we are in a position to assist. I think we have the resources within the organization to form a task force or committee that can figure out what we can do to accomplish this.

Priority B: Grow USATF’s revenue base. One of the problems we’ve had in recent years has been a lack of growth of our sponsorship base. We have very good relations with our existing sponsors, but we have lost a couple. There are whole sponsor categories, some of which we’ve had in the past, that we don’t have now.

Today’s sports marketing is challenging, and today’s economy doesn’t make it any easier. I believe we ought to be able to present a good value proposition to prospective sponsors more successfully than we have recently.

On the plus side: Historically, the federation never conducted serious fundraising among individual, private donors, but we’re doing it now through the USATF Foundation.

Priority C: Restore confidence in USATF that has been lost by some of our constituents—coaches, athletes and volunteers. We have some great support programs, but we haven’t always carried them out or communicated them as well as we could. We have an opportunity now, with new leadership, to restore this confidence, and build on our record of success. We have the organizational structure and culture that is right for supporting athletes and coaches. We’ve developed valuable programs for athletes and coaches, and we need to continue to fine tune them.

We also need to sell our sport to the people who can sell it to others—to print and online media, bloggers, etc. This is a challenge. I’ll give you an example: When USA Today runs a track and field story, it’s under the subject “Olympic Sports.” Do they do this with boxing, basketball or tennis stories? No. Also, there are newspapers who aren’t covering track and field at all, or not covering it the way they used to.

Deena Kastor USATF board member, member of board’s Budget & Finance Committee and Business Development Committee Deena Kastor is one of only two American women ever to medal in the Olympic marathon. She was the 2004 Olympic Games Bronze medalist, and is the American recordholder at this distance. She is a three-time Olympian, two-time World Cross Country championships Silver medalist, She has won 18 national championships, five on the track at 10,000 meters, six on the roads as 15K champion and seven as national cross country champion.

Kastor’s Comments There are so many facets of this sport, and so many pieces are being moved simultaneously, that to narrow our strategy down to the top three priorities is almost impossible. Since I’m on the board’s Budget Committee and Business Development Committee I can briefly share a few of the visions we have for the coming year and the next quadrennial Priority A: Create more revenue for USATF. Priority B: Create more events. We look forward to working with our CEO to create new flagship events for our athletes, but also to include youth and disabled athletes.

Priority C: Broaden our fan and participation bases. Our present media model isn’t packaged in a flattering way, so we’ll look to recreate a brand that excites our fans and entices new viewers. The national office has restructured the USATF website so it’s more user-friendly. We’ll also look at using innovative media outlets to attract more fans to our sport.

There is no reason USA Track & Field shouldn’t be at the forefront of the health and wellness movement in our country. We need to make running, jumping and throwing easily accessible to all of our youth so that we not only have greater participation in high school, college and on a professional level, but also so we can reverse the current epidemic of obesity and diabetes. Since our sport doesn’t have socioeconomic barriers, it should be the most relatable and fan-friendly sport in our country and have the most participation.

MARK WINITZ is a longtime writer for AMERICAN TRACK & FIELD. He sits on USATF’s national Men’s Long Distance Running Executive Committee and Law & Legislation Committee. He also sits on Pacific Association/USATF’s Board of Athletics and is a Certified USATF Master Level Official/Referee.

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:31 PM Page 13

Easy Care for Artificial Turf by Mary Helen Sprecher O

ne of the great things about artificial turf is ... it’s artificial!

No weeding, no need to rest the field between uses, no worries that a lacrosse game on a muddy day is going to tear up the surface.

That’s not to say, though, that an artificial turf field is the invincible super-hero of sports facilities. Like Superman who wants to avoid Kryptonite, your field has its own vulnerabilities, and part of being a good manager is being able to keep it safe.

Those who work in sports facility construction, and who have expertise in artificial turf, have compiled some pointers for maintenance workers, coaches, ADs and managers of athletic facilities.

Marching orders: While it’s traditional for the school’s marching band to play during halftime, track builders caution against having the band hold regular practices on the artificial turf field. Having large groups of individuals making sharp turns on the same spot leads to worn areas on the field. Keep the band off the field except for games.

Running in place: Another problem for athletic fields? Running exercises or routines that are always held in the same area. Whether it’s soccer players running drills, runners practicing sprints or anyone else, such activities tend to take place in the same area, and eventually, the field will look worn there.

Getting off on the wrong foot: Improper footwear is a huge enemy of artificial turf, since the constant shoe/turf interaction can flatten and damage the surface. Surprisingly, flat-soled tennis shoes can be detrimental to the turf as well.

Appropriate athletic footwear (many turf manufacturers recommend athletic shoes with rubber cleats) should be mandated.

Throwing it out there: Having field events on artificial turf can be great—provided they’re the right events. With the increasing use of synthetic turf come concerns over whether throwing events can cause damage to the athletic surface. The UEFA, the European governing body for soccer, has guidelines on synthetic turf that say the shot put and discus do not cause damage, but that hammer and javelin can.

Some events, therefore, may need to be shifted during meets and competitions.

Keep it up: Lack of maintenance can be the biggest foe of all, and can make a turf field look old and worn before its time.

Unfortunately, too many facility owners assume that like a plastic plant, an artificial turf field requires nothing in the way of upkeep. Instead, do this: Keep food and water off the surface, and make sure the fibers are brushed regularly to keep them upright.

Don’t try this at home: Some of the worst damages inflicted on artificial turf facilities are done by well-meaning man-

agers, maintenance crew members and others who try to perform repairs and inadvertently make problems such as loose seams or displaced infill, making things worse than they started. Good intentions are, well, good, but unfortunately not always good for the field. Call in an expert.

Water, water everywhere: Turf managers often water fields to keep the playing area cooler; however, in many cases, watering raises the humidity on the field more than it cools the area, creating an unpleasant playing environment. Many who are caring for a turf field for the first time find that it takes about a year to understand the ambient temperature, its relationship to the field temperature, and how long a field needs to be watered in order for a comfortable playing environment to prevail.

Summing up: Taking care of a synthetic field means keeping it safe from its enemies. Do that, and you’ll always know that the grass is greener on your side of the fence.

Note: The American Sports Builders Association (ASBA) is a nonprofit association helping designers, builders, owners, operators and users understand quality sports facility construction. The ASBA sponsors informative meetings and publishes newsletters, books and technical construction guidelines for athletic facilities including running tracks. Available at no charge is a listing of all publications offered by the Association, as well as the ASBA’s Membership Directory. Info: 866-501-ASBA (2722) or www.sportsbuilders.org.

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:45 PM Page 14

2010 American Track & Field Magazine High School

All-American Track & Field Teams All-America Track & Field Team as selected by Andy Ferrara

P

icking a high school All-America team is not an easy task. America is a big country and the season stretches from February to June. The problem is the season does not extend that long for any one.

Different parts of the country start and finish at different times. The 50 state meets are spread out over a 7-week period. While it would be nice to have head-to-head competition decide all the selections, it is not really practical. The post-season all-star meets, USATF Junior Nationals and Junior Olympic meets come long after the high school season is over in many parts of the country. Every year outstanding athletes choose to end their seasons after their state championships. Some of these post-season meets name All-America teams based on places won at the meet. If you do not compete there, you cannot possibly earn that status. At the same time there are athletes, for a variety of reasons, who do not compete for their high school yet enter these meets. They are accorded All-America status.

In selecting this All-America team, the

greatest emphasis was placed on the regular high school season and state championships.

An athlete had to represent and be a part of their high school team. This is first and foremost a high school All-America team. If you do not compete for your high school, in high school meets, against other high school students, it is hard to justify inclusion on a high school All-America team. The hammer throw presents a special situation. Only Rhode Island contests the hammer throw as part of the regular schedule of events. As a result of the limited competition across the nation, meets outside the high school scope were used to determine selection. The javelin throw also has limited participation across the nation. At the present time only 17 states have the javelin as part of the schedule of events contested. With this in mind, postseason results were also given additional weight in the selection of javelin athletes.

In all events, consistency, high level marks, and success at the state championships were emphasized. In a few events, competition within a state was so good that

finishing second also earned All-America status. Many states contest their state meets by school size. These go by several names, class, division, group, etc. A small number of states bring the class winners or medalists together in a meet of champions (MOC). In these cases of multi-division meets, the “best” of the state champions were considered. Fortunately there are many regular season competitions to support an athlete’s credentials. The United States has a robust and vibrant high school track and field history.

There are many outstanding athletes competing across this nation each year. I have selected six in each individual event for special recognition. There are others that might have been picked and would be just as deserving. After careful analysis and thought these are my choices. All athletes are listed alphabetically on either the first team or the second team. No other distinction is made between athletes. Marks listed for each athlete are their season bests. If an athlete’s mark made the all-time Top Ten list the place is noted.

Boys’ High School All-America Track & Field Team 100 METERS First Team Keenan Brock (Carver, Birmingham, AL), senior, 10.37, AL 5A state champ Sheroid Evans (Dulles, Sugarland, TX), junior, 10.39, TX 5A state champ Remontay McClain (Covina, CA), junior, 10.35, CA state champ Second Team Marvin Bracy (Boone, Orlando, FL), sophomore, 10.42, FL 4A state champ Miles Shuler-Foster (Long Branch, NJ), junior, 10.39, NJ MOC winner Darrell Wesh (Landstown, Virginia Beach, VA), senior, 10.42, VA 3A state champ

200 METERS First Team Sheroid Evans (Dulles, Sugarland, TX), junior, 20.82, TX 5A state champ Remontay McClain (Covina, CA), junior, 21.00, CA state champ Benjamen McRoy (Lakeland, FL), senior, 20.93, FL 3A state champ Second Team Michael Bellamy (Charlotte, Punta Gorda, FL), junior, 21.12, FL 3A state runner-up Brady Gehret (Altoona Area, Altoona, PA), senior, 21.12w, 21.23, PA 3A state champ

Zamir Thomas (Snyder, Jersey City, NJ), junior, 21.19, NJ MOC winner

400 METERS First Team Brady Gehret (Altoona Area, Altoona, PA), senior, 46.39, PA 3A state champ Josh Mance (Don Lugo, Chino, CA), senior, 45.90, CA state champ Robert Woods (Serra, Gardena, CA), senior, 46.17, CA state runner-up Second Team Michael Berry (Rainier Beach, Seattle, WA), senior, 46.81, WA 3A state champ Hugh Graham (Northwestern, Miami, FL), junior, 46.82, FL 4A state champ Brycen Spratling (Webster-Schroeder, Webster, NY), senior, 46.81, NY state champ

800 METERS First Team Chris FitzSimons (Hamden, CT), senior, 1:48.83, CT class LL & open state champ Sean Krinik (Valencia, Placentia, CA), senior, 1:48.20, CA state champ, equal 8th best all-time Tom Mallon (Central Bucks South, Warrington, PA), senior, 1:49.01, PA 3A state champ Second Team Matthew Bevil (Ft Walton Beach, FL), senior, 1:50.11,

FL 3A state champ Greg Dotson (Burbank, CA), senior, 1:49.40, CA state runner-up Mike Quercia (Marcellus, NY), senior, 1:50.27, NY state champ

1500m/1600m/MILE First Team Alex Hatz (Fayetteville-Manlius, Manlius, NY), senior, 4:08.09(mile), NY state champ Elias Gedyon (Loyola, Los Angeles, CA), junior, 3:47.65(1500m), CA state champ James Rosa (West Windsor-Plainsboro North, Plainsboro, NJ), junior, 4:07.70(mile), NJ MOC winner Second Team Kirubel Erassa (Grayson, Loganville, GA), senior, 4:08.24(1600m), GA 5A state champ Ben Johnston (North Central, Spokane, WA), senior, 4:06.54(1600m), WA 3A state champ Isaac Presson (Asheville, NC), senior, 4:08.46(mile), NC 3A state champ

3000m/3200m/2 MILE First Team Jeremy Elkaim (Livingston, NJ), junior, 8:46.08(3200m), NJ MOC champ Jake Hurysz (Eastern Alamance, Mebane, NC), senior, 8:49.76(3200m), NC 3A state champ Joe Rosa (West Windsor-Plainsboro North, Plains-

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:45 PM Page 15

All-American Teams boro, NJ), junior, 8:44.06(2mile), NJ Group 3 champ, 8th all-time, junior class record Second Team Tyler Anyan (Brookwood, Snellville, GA), senior, 8:55.86(2mile), GA 5A state champ Matt Mizereck (Leon, Tallahassee, FL), senior, 8:55.75(3200m), FL 3A state champ Sam Pons (South Pasadena, CA), junior, 8:55.40(3200m), CA state champ

110 METER HIGH HURDLES (39") First Team Jonathan Cabral (Agoura, Agoura Hills, CA), junior, 13.70, 13.54w CA state champ Eddie Lovett (Palm Beach Lakes, West Palm Beach, FL), senior, 13.46, FL 3A state champ, equal 18th alltime Tyler Stephenson (Lancaster, TX), senior, 13.81, 13.63w, TX 4A state champ Second Team Kendall Hayes (Lancaster, TX), senior, 13.73, 13.64w, TX 4A state runner-up Kenneth Minkah (DeSoto, TX), junior, 13.62, TX 5A state champ Roy Smith (Northwestern, Miami, FL), senior, 13.69, FL 4A state champ

300 METER HURDLES (36") First Team Pablo Alvarez (Belen Jesuit Prep, Miami, FL), senior, 36.73, FL 3A state champ Sir’Paul Jones (Monroe, Albany, GA), senior, 36.60, GA 3A state champ Cody Riggs (St Aquinas, Ft Lauderdale, FL), senior, 36.44, FL 4A state champ Second Team Camilo Calderon (Cypress Creek, Orlando, FL), senior, 36.85, FL 4A state runner-up Greg Coleman (Warren, San Antonio, TX), junior, 36.86, TX 5A state champ Ronald Frasier (Jesuit, Carmichael, CA), senior. 36.89 CA state champ

HIGH JUMP First Team Tanner Anderson (East Burke, Connellys Springs, NC), senior, 7’ 3.25”, NC 2A state champ, equal 27th alltime Jonathan Christensen (Southmont, Crawfordsville, IN), junior, 7’ 1”, IN state champ David Smith (Lovejoy, Hampton, GA), senior, 7’ 4.25”, GA 5A state champ, equal 12th all-time Second Team James Harris (Lanett, AL), senior, 7’ 3.25”, AL 2A state champ, equal 27th all-time Justin Hunter (Ocean Lakes, Chesapeake, VA), senior, 7’ 3”, VA 3A state champ

Maalik Reynolds (Westminster, Atlanta, GA), senior, 7’ 2.5”, GA 2A state champ

POLE VAULT First Team Paul Malquist (Gainesville, GA), senior, 16’ 9”, GA 3A state champ Logan Pflibsen (Streator Township, Streator, IL), senior, 17’ 2”, IL 2A state champ Michael Woepse (Mater Dei, Santa Ana, CA), senior, 17’ 6”, (4 17' meets before hurt), equal 17th all-time Second Team Andrew Irwin (Mt Ida, AR), junior, 17’ 0”, AR 2A state champ & MOC winner Jonathon Juilfs (Sheldon, Eugene, OR), junior, 17’ 0.75”, OR 6A state champ Jordan Yamoah (Arlington, LaGrangeville, NY), senior, 16’ 6”, NY state champ

LONG JUMP First Team Rusty Borne (South Lafourche, Galliano, LA), senior, 24’ 8.5”, LA 5A state champ Justin Hunter (Ocean Lakes, Virginia Beach, VA), senior, 25’ 8.75”, VA 3A state champ, 22nd all-time Carlton Lavong (Methacton, Norristown, PA), senior, 24’ 8.5”, PA 3A state champ Second Team Corey Crawford (Indian Hills, Oakland, NJ), senior, 25’ 0.5”w, NJ Group 2 state champ & MOC Marquis Dendy (Middletown, DE), junior, 24’ 5.25”, DE Div1 state champ & MOC Mark Jackson (Taylor, TX), senior, 24’ 8.25”, TX 3A state champ

TRIPLE JUMP First Team Marquis Dendy (Middletown, DE), junior, 52’ 7.25”, DE Div1 state champ & MOC, 15th all-time Mark Jackson (Taylor, TX), senior, 51' 5.75", TX 3A state champ Kentrell Sanders (South Dade, Homestead, FL), senior, 51’ 4”, FL 4A state champ Second Team Kasen Covington (Capital, Boise, ID), senior, 52’ 4”w, 49’10.5”, ID 5A state champ Justin Hunter (Ocean Lakes, Virginia Beach, VA), senior, 50' 8.25", VA 3A state champ Carlton Lavong (Methacton, Norristown, PA), senior, 51’ 0”, PA 3A state champ

SHOT PUT First Team Dustin Brode (Canfield, OH), senior, 71' 7.5", OH Div1 state champ, 11th all-time Davis Fraker (McIntosh, Peachtree City, GA), senior, 68’ 6”, GA 4A state champ

Nick Vena (Morristown, NJ), junior, 72’10.5”, NJ Group 3 state champ & MOC, 5th all-time, junior class record Second Team Sam Crouser (Gresham, OR), senior, 66’ 4”, OR 6A state champ Dominic Filiano (LeBanon, NH), senior, 64’ 1”, NH state champ & NEng champ 64' 1" Cody Riffle (St Johns Jesuit, Toledo, OH), senior, 68' 7.75", OH Div1 runner-up

DISCUS First Team Willy Irwin (Clovis East, Clovis, CA), senior, 208’10”, CA state champ Cody Riffle (St Johns Jesuit, Toledo, OH), senior, 203’ 5”, OH Div1 state champ Justin Welch (Eastwood, Pemberville, OH), senior, 202’ 0”, OH Div2 state champ Second Team Samuel Mattis (East Brunswick, NJ), sophomore, 197’ 3”, NJ Group 4 state champ & MOC Marcus Popenfoose (Huntley, IL), senior, 202’ 4”, IL 3A state champ Alexander Thompson (Winnebago, IL), senior, 201’ 6”, IL 1A state champ

HAMMER THROW First Team Alec Faldermeyer (Minisink Valley, Slate Hill, NY), senior, 235' 0", 9th all-time Davis Fraker (McIntosh, Peachtree City, GA), senior, 224' 8" Justin Welch (Eastwood, Pemberville, OH), senior, 245' 4", 4th all-time Second Team Jordan Arakawa (Capital, Olympia, WA), senior, 218' 3" Brad Bolton (El Toro, Lake Forest, CA), junior, 225' 8", Greg Skipper (Oregon City, OR), junior, 223' 8"

JAVELIN THROW First Team Sam Crouser (Gresham, OR), senior, 255’ 4”, OR 6A state champ, National Record Derek Eager (Tahoma, Covington, WA), senior, 229’ 5”, WA 4A state champ, 10th all-time Johann Swanepoel (Shawnee Mission South, Shawnee Mission, KS), senior, 238’ 4”, KS 6A state champ, 3rd all-time Second Team Devin Bogert (Tomball, TX), junior, 221’ 8”, 19th alltime Kyle Quinn (Somerset, MA), junior, 217’11”, MA Div3 state champ Kaleb Zuidema (Midland Park, NJ), junior, 224’ 1”, NJ Group 1 state champ & MOC, 14th all-time

Girls’ High School All-America Track & Field Team 100 METERS

200 METERS

400 METERS

First Team Octavious Freeman (Lake Wales, FL), junior, 11.16, 11.11w, FL 2A state champ, equal #5 all-time Myasia Jacobs (Paramus Catholic, Paramus, NJ), sophomore, 11.44, NJ np-A group champ & MOC Ashton Purvis (St Elizabeth, Oakland, CA), senior, 11.17, CA state champ, equal #8 all-time Second Team Dezerea Bryant (Bradley Tech, Milwaukee, WI), junior, 11.59, 11.50w, WI Div1 state champ Ashley Collier (Dunbar, Ft Worth, TX), senior, 11.66, 11.37w, TX 4A state champ Jenna Prandini (Clovis, CA), junior, 11.34, CA state runner-up, equal #23 all-time

First Team Dezerea Bryant (Bradley Tech, Milwaukee, WI), junior, 23.51, 23.37w, WI Div1 state champ Octavious Freeman (Lake Wales, FL), junior, 23.24, 23.19w, FL 2A state champ Ashton Purvis (St Elizabeth, Oakland, CA), senior, 22.90, CA state champ, equal #9 all-time Second Team Jessica Davis (Highland, Palmdale, CA), senior, 23.42, CA state runner-up Olivia Ekpone (NW, Germantown, MD), junior, 23.75, 23.64w, MD 4A state champ Christi Udoh (Westbury, Houston, TX), senior, 23.62, TX 4A state champ

First Team Kendall Baisden (Detroit Country Day, Beverly Hills, MI), freshman, 52.59, MI Div2 state champ Chimere Ezumah (Serra, Gardena, CA), frehman, 52.97, CA state champ Robin Reynolds (Jackson, Miami, FL), sophomore, 53.48, FL 3A state champ Second Team Diamond Dixon (Westside, Houston, TX), senior, 52.92, TX 5A state champ Briana Nelson (Mann, Greenville, SC), senior, 53.14, SC 3A state champ Chizoba Okodogbe’ (Deer Valley, Antioch, CA), senior, 53.06, CA state runner-up

Continued on page 18

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:45 PM Page 16

Girls’ High School All-America Track & Field Team (cont) 800 METERS First Team Laura Roesler (South, Fargo, ND), senior, 2:04.34, ND 1A state champ Amy Weissenbach (Harvard-Westlake, North Hollywood, CA), sophomore, 2:07.52, CA state champ Ajee Wilson (Neptune, NJ), sophomore, 2:04.18, NJ group3 champ & MOC, #13 all-time Second Team Savannah Camacho (Templeton, CA), sophomore, 2:07.73, CA state runner-up Brittney Jackson (Columbia, Maplewood, NJ), senior, 2:08.17, NJ group4 champ & MOC runner-up Kimberly MacKay (Kellenberg, Uniondale, NY), junior, 2:07.75, NY state champ

1500m/1600m/MILE First Team Shelby Hayes (Winter Park, FL), senior, 4:43.00(1mile), FL 4A state champ, #26 all-time Cory McGee (Pass Christian, MS), senior, 4:27.98(1500m), MS 4A state champ Madeleine Meyers (Northwest, Seattle, WA), sophomore, 4:41.93(1mile), WA 1A state champ, #15 all-time Second Team Katie Flood (Dowling Catholic, West Des Moines, IA), senior, 4:44.50(1mile), IA 4A state champ Goethals (Rochester, Rochester Hills, MI), senior, 4:43.05(1600m), MI Div1 state champ Emily Lipari (Roslyn, Roslyn Heights, NY), senior, 4:24.37(1500m), NY state champ

3000m/3200m/2 MILE First Team Aisling Cuffe (Cornwall C, New Windsor, NY), junior, 10:02.49(2mile), NY state champ, #7 alltime Megan Goethals (Rochester, Rochester Hills, MI), senior, 10:01.16(2mile), MI Div1 state champ, #6 all-time Emily Lipari (Roslyn, Roslyn Heights, NY), senior, 9:29.49(3000m), NY state runner-up Second Team Katie Flood (Dowling Catholic, West Des Moines, IA), senior, 9:27.25(300m), IA 4A state champ, #25 all-time Joanna Stevens (Blacksburg, VA), senior, 10:17.47(2mile), VA 4 state runner-up Kathleen Stevens (Blacksburg, VA), senior, 10:16.03(3200m), VA 4 state champ

100 METER HURDLES First Team Lauren Blackburn (Sunset, Dallas, TX), senior, 13.39, TX 5A state champ, equal #20 all-time Kori Carter (Claremont, CA), senior, 13.54, 13.33w, CA state champ Trinity Wilson (St Marys, Berkeley, CA), sophomore, 13.49, 13.35w, CA state runner-up, equal #25 all-time Second Team Bridgette Owens-Mitchell (Southfield, MI), senior, 13.74, MI Div1 state champ & Midwest MOC Madalayne Smith (Saratoga Springs, NY), senior, 13.72, NY state champ Kendell Williams (Kell, Marietta, GA),freshman, 13.71, 13.57w, GA 5A state champ

300 METER HURDLES First Team Kaila Barber (Midpark, Middleberg Heights, OH), junior, 40.88, OH Div1 state champ, #12 all-time

Kori Carter (Claremont, CA), senior, 40.44, CA state champ, #6 all-time Thandi Stewart (Logan, Union City, CA), senior, 40.45, CA state runner-up, #7 all-time Second Team Lauren Blackburn (Sunset, Dallas, TX), senior, 41.08, TX 5A state champ, equal #18 all-time Ellie Grooters (West Fargo, ND), senior, 59.82(400h), 42.51, ND 1A state champ Kendell Williams (Kell, Marietta, GA), freshman, 41.30, 58.77(400h), GA 5A state champ, #28 all-time

HIGH JUMP First Team Taylor Burke (Medina, OH), junior, 5'11", OH Div1 state champ Moira Cronin (Andover, MA), junior, 5’10”, MA all-state runner-up & NEng champ Hannah Willms (Dike-New Hartford, Dike, IA), senior, 6' 1", IA 2A state champ, equal #23 alltime Second Team Lydia French (Thousand Oaks, CA), senior, 5'10", CA state champ Fiona Paladino (Montgomery, Skillman, NJ), junior, 5'10", NJ Group4 state champ & MOC Tara Richmond (Poly, Long Beach, CA), senior, 5'10", CA state runner-up Ashley Smith (Millikan, Long Beach, CA), senior, 5'11.5", CA state runner-up

POLE VAULT First Team Morgann LeLeux (Catholic, New Iberia, LA), junior, 14' 0", LA 3A state champ, equal #2 all-time Kortney Ross (Westview, San Diego, CA), senior, 13' 6", CA state champ, equal #17 all-time Merritt Van Meter (Country Day, Metairie, LA), senior 13' 8.25", LA 1A state champ, #9 all-time Second Team Ellie McCardwell (Pendleton Heights, Pendleton, IN), senior, 13' 7", IN state champ, equal #11 alltime Elizabeth Powell (Henry, Ashland, VA), senior, 13' 3", VA 3A state champ, equal #26 all-time Shaylah Simpson (Desert Vista, Phoenix, AZ), senior 13' 4", AZ 5A1 state champ & MOC, equal #22 all-time

LONG JUMP First Team A’Lexus Brannon (Ozen, Beaumont, TX), senior, 20' 3", TX 4A state champ LaQue Moen-Davis (Central, Omaha, NE), junior, 20' 2.75", NE A state champ Jenna Prandini (Clovis, CA), junior, 20' 2", 20' 7.75"w, CA state champ Second Team Kaila Barber (Midpark, Middleberg Heights, OH), junior, 19' 8.25", OH Div1 state champ LeTristan Pledger (Washington, Kansas City, KS), junior, 19' 9", KS 5A state champ Jasmine Todd (Chandler, AZ), sophomore, 19'11", AZ 5A1 state champ & MOC

TRIPLE JUMP First Team A’Lexus Brannon (Ozen, Beaumont, TX), senior, 42' 0.75", 42' 3.5"w, TX 4A state champ Ciarra Brewer (Logan, Union City, CA), junior, 41' 5.25", 41'10.25"w, CA state runner-up Jenna Prandini (Clovis, CA), junior, 41' 9.25", 42' 7.25"w, CA state champ

Second Team Melissa Mays (Harker Heights, Killeen, TX), senior, 40'11.5", 41'10"w, TX 5A state champ LaQue Moen-Davis (Central, Omaha, NE), junior, 42' 4"w, NE A state champ 6, Marlene Ricketts (Westbury, Old Westbury, NY), junior, 41' 6", NY Div1 state champ

SHOT PUT First Team Tori Bliss (Portage, IN), junior, 48' 8", IN state champ Jessica Maroszek (Seymour, WI), senior, 49' 4.25", WI Div1 state champ Kearsten Peoples (Ottawa, KS), senior, 51'10.75", KS 4A state champ, #14 all-time Second Team Baillie Gibson (Natrona County, Casper, WY), senior 48'10.5", WY 4A state champ Melissa Kurzdorfer (Lancaster, NY), senior, 49' 9.5", NY Div1 & Fed runner-up Vanessa Stewart (North Babylon, NY), senior, 48' 5", NY Div1 & Fed state champ

DISCUS First Team Kelsey Card (Carlinville, IL), senior, 167' 4", IL 1A state champ *Alex Collatz (Stockdale, Bakersfield, CA), junior, 180' 9", CA state champ, #11 all-time Baillie Gibson (Natrona Cty, Casper, WY), senior, 171' 4", WY 4A state champ Second Team Jessica Maroszek (Seymour, Wi), WI Div1 state champ Kearsten Peoples (Ottawa, KS), senior, 166' 7", KS 4A state champ Jessica Sharbono (West, Billings, MT), senior 169' 1", MT 2A state champ

HAMMER THROW First Team Shelby Ashe (Pius X, Atlanta, GA), junior, 214' 3", NATIONAL RECORD Casey Kraychir (29 Palms, CA), senior, 194'11", #5 all-time Melissa Kurzdorfer (Lancaster, NY), senior, 192' 8", #7 all-time Second Team Patrice Gates (Villa Rica, GA), senior, 192' 4", #8 all-time Daina Levy’ (Kennesaw Mtn, Kennesaw, GA), sophomore, 191' 8", #9 all-time Olivia Midles (Capital, Olympia, WA), senior 175'10", #24 all-time

JAVELIN THROW First Team Hannah Carson (Chandler, AZ), junior, 171' 9", Christine Kirkwood (Othello, WA), junior, 162'10", WA 2A state champ, #12 all-time Allison Updike (Tamaqua, PA), junior, 167' 2", PA 2A state champ, equal #6 all-time Second Team Haley Crouser (Gresham, OR), freshman, 162' 6", OR 6A state champ, #13 all-time Avione Allgood (Legacy, North Las Vegas, NV), sophomore, 163' 1", #11 all-time Laura Loht (Indian Valley, Lewistown, PA), senior, 154'11", PA 3A state champ

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/14/11 9:53 PM Page 17

SHOE REVIEWS: Performance—20 • Neutral—22 • Motion Stabilizing—22

F

rench philosopher Jean-Baptiste Karr’s oft-quoted words “Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose” is usually translated “The more things change, the more they remain the same,” and that’s certainly true with the shoe offerings in Spring 2011.

We’ve had some new thinking and some new companies evident in every season for as long as I’ve been reviewing shoes. The changes we’re seeing this spring are merely a broadening of the shoes offered; the old reliables continue to be there.

More lightweight and performance shoes are being introduced than in several decades (they represent fully half of the shoes in this review), more new brands are launching, new technologies continue to be introduced, and there’s more parity in the industry than perhaps ever. New thinking that’s been percolating in shoemakers’ minds for some time has finally flooded out, prompted by barefoot enthusiasts, as well as the emerging ranks of minimalist supporters.

But never fear, the well-cushioned neutral category and motion stabilizing shoes continue to roll along, meeting the requirements of runners with specific biomechanical needs and fitness levels who aren’t yet ready for or interested in less shoe.

So for those runners looking for something new—we have it. For those who prefer to stick with their tried-andtrue, we have those, too.

—Cregg Weinmann, Running Network Footwear Reviewer

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:46 PM Page 18

WELCOME TO THE RUNNING NETWORK’S 2011 SPRING SHOE REVIEW At our recent Running Network meetings, one of the publishers asked why we review brands that are, well, hard to find. That question launched us into a discussion about what our responsibilities are as publishers.

While most think there are only about a dozen running shoe companies, our footwear and apparel reviewer Cregg Weinmann noted that he keeps tabs on 43 brands, if you include trail running companies. Cregg and I have always been united in what his mission is: to provide you, the consumer, with knowledge of the best products, whether they come from large companies or small ones, whether 750 stores carry those products or just 50, or even whether they advertise in our publications or not.

We review far more shoes than actually make it into these pages. In fact, we weartested 35 shoes to get to the 20 you see in this issue. Shoes from Scott, On, and Li-Ning did well enough to make the cut. While relatively new, these are brands we’ve been following for some time, and they’re available at some run specialty stores. While they don’t have the distribution of adidas, ASICS, Brooks, Mizuno, New Balance, Nike, Puma, and Saucony, in our business, good shoes rise to the top. Run specialty stores carry what sells and what you demand. That’s why brands like K-Swiss, Karhu, and Newton are filling more and more spots on shoe walls across the country. In fact, K-Swiss was brand new to the party just 2 years ago. We feel it’s our responsibility to let you know the full array of what’s available. If we don’t, how will we ever see something other than the status quo? Competition is a good thing, and so is an informed customer.

In the end, of course, what you buy and wear is your choice. We provide our reviews as the beginning of your journey to find the just-right shoe for your activity level and needs. Read our reviews, then go to your run specialty store, try on six or seven brands and discuss them with the store staff. After all, they live the footwear battle, one pair at a time, 6 days a week, 52 weeks a year.

Please note that www.runningnetwork.com and www.runblogrun.com now have iPhone apps, and that most of the 23 titles in our network are available as digital versions, so now you can take us with you on the go! You’ll find details at www.runningnetwork.com.

Finally, if you have any comments or questions about a review, please email me at larry@runningnetwork.com or call me at 608.239.3785. I’d love to hear from you.

AWARD WINNERS

Neutral

SP

RIN G

1 201

New Balance 1080

Motion Stabilizing

SP

RIN G 201

Performance SP

RIN G 201

1

BEST NEW SHOE SPRING 2011

1

Brooks Ravenna 2 BEST RENOVATION SPRING 2011

Nike Lunar Elite+ 2

BEST SHOE

Saucony ProGrid Mirage

BEST SHOE

American Track & Field www.american-trackandfield.com Athletes Only www.atf-athlete.com Athletics (Canada) www.athleticsontario.ca Austin Fit www.austinfitmagazine.com California Track & Running News www.caltrack.com Club Running www.rrca.org/publications/club-running Coaching Athletics Quarterly www.coachingathleticsq.com Colorado Runner www.coloradorunnermag.com Get Active! www.healthclubs.com Greater Long Island Running Club’s Footnotes www.glirc.org Latinos Corriendo www.latinoscorriendo.com Marathon Guide www.marathonguide.com

Larry Eder President, Running Network LLC

BEST SHOE

RUNNING NETWORK LLC PARTNERS

Puma Faas 500

Reviewer: Cregg Weinmann Project Coordinator/Editor: Christine Johnson Designer: Kristen Cerer Proofreader: Marg Sumner, Red Ink Editorial Services Shoe Photography: Daniel Saldaña, Cregg Weinmann Advertising Sales: Running Network LLC, Larry Eder, President, 608.239.3785, larry@runningnetwork.com Publisher: Larry Eder, 608.239.3785 Website: www.runningnetwork.com For a Media Kit, please visit our website.

This 2011 Spring Shoe Review is produced independently by Running Network LLC for its partner publications. All shoes reviewed were tested by experienced, competitive runners who were matched to the biomechanical purpose of each shoe model.

Copyright © 2011 by Running Network LLC. All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be stored, copied, or reprinted without prior written permission of Running Network LLC. Running Network LLC and its partner publications suggest that, as with all fitness activities, you meet with a healthcare professional before beginning or changing your fitness regimen.

Michigan Runner www.michiganrunner.net Missouri Runner & Triathlete www.morunandtri.com Running Journal & Racing South www.running.net RunMinnesota www.runmdra.org RUNOHIO www.runohio.com Track & Field News www.trackandfieldnews.com USATF’s Fast Forward www.usatf.org USATF–New England’s Exchange Zone www.usatfne.org The Winged Foot www.nyac.org The Winged M www.themac.com Youth Runner www.youthrunner.com

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:46 PM Page 19

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:46 PM Page 20

PERFORMANCE adidas adiZero Aegis 2

$110

Round 2 of the adiZero Aegis features some changes, along with many familiar features. The midsole is virtually the same: underfoot a soft, adiLite layer that’s atop a layer of adiPrene+ with the stabilizing ForMotion cassette in the heel. The outersole has received some minor alterations but still provides good durability and traction. The upper shows the most significant changes while maintaining its original objective: Align the foot over the low-profile sole while offering a touch of support. The original featured a tongue that opened only on the lateral side to shore up the overpronating foot. This version features two woven fabrics—stiffer, nonstretch on the medial side, open airmesh laterally—to achieve the same objective. The result is breathability and support. Overall, the lightweight and responsive Aegis 2 features flexibility and efficiency with a measure of stability that’s enhanced by the low profile, making it ideally equipped for faster-paced running.

“Close, racer-like fit. Low profile makes them very stable, and improves reaction to the ground. Very light trainer; I’d say light and snappy.

[Compared to the original] it is good, though not an improvement.”

Updates the adiZero Aegis • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics to mild overpronation • Sizes: Men 6.5–13,14,15; Women 5–12 • Weight: Men 10.3 oz. (size 11); Women 9.0 oz. (size 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel sliplasted • www.adidas.com

Karhu Fast2 Fulcrum_ride

$130

In its second time out, the Fast Fulcum_ride features an update to the Karhu Fulcrum technology. The Fulcrum component has been reshaped slightly into a lower profile that now tips the foot forward at a gentler pitch. Up top, the new upper offers more room in the forefoot making it better suited to high-volume feet and keeps it open across the metatarsals to accommodate bunions or a wide forefoot. The midsole is still resilient and responsive EVA, though the Strobel board has an added layer of EVA to improve the level of full-length cushioning. The outersole is typical carbon and blown rubber, here in a reconfigured layout with a U-shaped heel and forefoot ridge of the more durable carbon rubber, with the softer blown rubber on the medial and lateral forefoot. The shoe is surprisingly light, providing neutral-footed runners another shoe choice for faster training.

“I was surprised at the amount of cushion [it] seemed to have when there didn’t seem to be much of it. Very light weight. I liked it a lot.”

Updates the Fast Fulcrum_ride • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics • Sizes: Men 8–13,14; Women 6–11 • Weight: 11.2 oz. (men’s 11); 9.9 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, EVA Strobel board • www.karhu.com

K-Swiss Kwicky Blade Light

$130

The Kwicky Blade Light is a sibling to the Blade Light, but with a personality of its own. The midsole features the Blade-Light design of angled EVA blades for cushioning and energy transfer; however, here it’s enhanced with a second density for stability. A heel crashpad aids touchdown and is topped off with GuideGlide foam against the foot for comfort. Minimal outersole rubber in high-wear areas keeps the shoe lightweight but durable enough for racing and faster training. The upper features welded thermoplastic overlays in a saddle-like framework with a mesh of extra support on the medial side. The “secret weapon” of the upper is a treatment of Ion Masking, which makes a molecular mask on the surface smaller than water molecules, so they just run off. Perforations through the innersole, Strobel board, and midsole allow water to drain from the interior, a plus for triathletes. If this sounds like your cup of tea (which would also drain off), give the Kwicky Blade Light a look.

“Snug fit through the arch and roomy in the toes. Well cushioned with each layer of foam, and the ‘skoosh’ of stability was just right. Another fine example of quality begetting quality. K-Swiss has really impressed me.”

NEW • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics to mild overpronation • Sizes: Men 6.5–13; Women 5–11,12 • Weight: 10.6 oz. (men’s 11); 9.3 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, EVA Strobel board • www.kswiss.com

Li-Ning Fremont

$85

Li-Ning is China’s largest domestic sports footwear brand and the Fremont represents its first foray into the U.S. market. The shoe has a low profile with a very slight heel-to-forefoot drop, which means you should count on an adaptation period to minimize the chances of injury. The upper is supported minimally in the heel and features just enough midfoot support to keep the foot lined up over the midsole. The midsole is a well-cushioned, injection-molded EVA with a large lateral crashpad from heel to midfoot. The TPU shank support is vented to allow air to circulate into the shoe and is aided by the perforated innersole. The Fremont’s light weight makes it suited for faster-paced running—even racing for some runners—but the effect of activating the muscles in the foot also makes the Fremont a good additional tool for runners looking to get stronger.

“Nice form fit, moccasin-like. Not a lot of cushioning, but very responsive and fast feeling. Very low to the ground, so any tippy feeling is really reduced. Very interesting approach. A valuable tool for running fitness and racing performance.”

NEW • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics • Sizes: Men 7–12,13,14; Women 6–11 • Weight: 10.0 oz. (men’s 11); 8.8 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted • www.li-ningusa.com

Mizuno Wave Elixer 6

$110

The Wave Elixer 6 is an update that respects the strengths of its predecessor. Version 5 featured a major overhaul of the midsole compound and the outersole configuration, so Round 6 merely draws attention to the heel crashpad with a bright green color-up and leaves well enough alone—a smart move. It’s the upper that receives the attention in this update. Overlays have been slightly modified, as is typical in an update, but here the Dynamotion Fit has been redefined from a stretchy overlay to a hinged tab as the first eyelet, which moves better with the foot and allows the lacing to better secure the upper. Runners in need of lightness, stability, and good cushioning will find it in the Elixer 6.

“I love the cushioning in this shoe! It provided a great bouncy feel. With each step I took, I felt balanced and secure” and “I love the weight.

If the weight could be maintained with a slightly thicker heel, it would be the perfect speed shoe.”

Updates the Wave Elixer 5 • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics to mild overpronation • Sizes: Men 7–13,14,15; Women 6–11 • Weight: 10.9 oz. (men’s 11); 9.1 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted • www.mizunorunning.com

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:47 PM Page 21

PERFORMANCE Nike Lunar Elite+ 2

$100

The Lunar Elite+ 2 does the original at least one better in several areas, and winds up a better shoe as a result. The original midsole and outersole benefitted from earlier Lunar series shoes and the effectiveness of the Dynamic Support platform, so both have been retained in their original configuration. The original upper lacked the close tailoring needed for a really good performance fit. Round 2 changes to a breathable, open mesh and remedies the tailoring issue by welding on a supportive saddle with Flywire strands running from the midsole to the lace eyelets. The saddle consists of a zigzag of welded straps that function like independent fingers to snug the midfoot, while keeping the weight down. The fit is outstanding and lines the foot up over the midsole, overcoming the weakness of the original. The improved fit, quality, and comfort of the materials, as well as its outstanding ride, earned the Lunar Elite+ 2 our Best Renovation honors.

BEST RENOVATION SPRING 2011

“I think Nike has finally figured out a good Flywire configuration. The shoes snug down nicely without producing any uncomfortable pressure points. They roll nicely with my feet as I strike and then toe off (no slapping whatsoever). Cushioning is very good. I can feel the ground without feeling every pebble.”

Updates the Lunar Elite+ • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics to very mild overpronation • Sizes: Men 6–13,14,15; Women 5–12 • Weight: 11.0 oz. (men’s 11); 9.6 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, EVA Strobel board • www.nike.com

On Cloudsurfer

$149

A new brand from Switzerland, On employs a unique running technology called CloudTec. The outersole of the shoe features nine CloudTec lugs in the forefoot and four in the heel which, when viewed from the side, have an oval-shaped negative space.

Under pressure, the lugs compress to cushion, but since they have small teeth on the inner surface they grip each other to aid forward motion. The sensation is a nicely cushioned ride with a responsive, bouncy feel to it. The lugs are attached to a traditional, though low-profile, midsole and when combined with the lugs, it’s roughly the height of a typical running shoe. The upper is a quality built, simple design of airmesh and synthetic suede that fits securely and has a plush feel. The technology is effective, the shoe is light and efficient, and the durability and cushioning are very good.

“The fit was good, though more routine than anything amazing. The cushioning was outstanding, the responsiveness of the lugs and midsole was more than expected. The impression of the testing was thoroughly aligned with the expectation. Except for the upper (which was OK) the shoe promised, then delivered.”

NEW • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics • Sizes: Men 8–12; Women 5.5–9.5 • Weight: 11.4 oz. (men’s 11); 10.1 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted • www.on-running.com

Puma Faas 500

$100

The Faas 500 is the top-end of a series of Puma shoes designed with less materials and a simpler ethos. Performance is the goal so it’s not surprising that the name derives from the Jamaican pronunciation of the word “fast.” The upper is a thin mesh and synthetic suede with an ankle collar of memory foam that’s not exactly Spartan. It has a snug feel, and the EVA Strobel board and Ortholite innersole contribute to great step-in comfort. The ride is responsive, thanks to the flexible midsole, and is aided by well-placed grooves underfoot. The thin outersole offers good traction and uses more durable (and heavier) carbon rubber only where needed. The combination of light weight, comfort, and responsive performance earned the Faas 500 honors as our Best New Shoe.

BEST NEW SHOE SPRING 2011

“They fit snug, the cushioning was great, the balance and durability of these shoes were awesome. I used them for most of my long runs.

I’m sad to wear them out because they were so good.”

NEW • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics • Sizes: Men 6–12,13,14,15; Women 5.5–11,12 • Weight: 10.6 oz. (men’s 11); 9.2 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, EVA Strobel board • www.puma.com

Saucony ProGrid Mirage

$100

The Mirage follows in the footsteps of last season’s innovative Kinvara, so it shares more than a few similarities. Its weight belies its durable nature and it has a more traditional feel in both the upper and the outersole. The midsole shares the small heel-to-toe drop found in the Kinvara, but an EVA Strobel board adds a few millimeters of foam to up the ante on the cushioning. A TPU support shores up the medial side of the shoe, unobtrusively adding a touch of stability. The outersole is largely exposed midsole, but key wear areas are XT-900 in the heel, blown rubber in the forefoot. The upper has a familiar heel design and a well-padded ankle collar with an open airmesh for breathability and supportive midfoot welded overlays. The performance is unexpectedly good, whether for faster running or daily running. Its performance, versatility, and outstanding design earned the Mirage distinction as our Best Shoe in the Performance shoe category.

“Snug-fitting heel with good toe room. Very comfortable and that only got better with time. Great on roads, decent off-road. Lightweight for a training shoe, and the heel-to-toe slope was really great. Worked well for training, long races, fast or easy—well done.”

NEW • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics to mild overpronation • Sizes: Men 7–13,14,15; Women 5–12 • Weight: 10.4 oz. (men’s 11); 8.9 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, EVA Strobel board • www.saucony.com

Scott eRide Trainer

$115

Scott continues to refine the products in its expanding line of running shoes. Proven in earlier Scott shoes, the ErgoLogic Fit upper, a two-layer, midfoot support/lace system, secures the foot effectively. The midsole has a low profile but doesn’t sacrifice much, as the ride is responsive and resilient, even in regular training. The outersole reveals the performance nature of the shoe with a polyurethane tread over more than half of the outersole, greatly reducing weight without losing anything in traction or durability. High-wear areas of the outersole feature carbon rubber, primarily at heel contact and toe-off. Versatility may be the eRide Trainer’s greatest strength, as it’s light enough for faster running, whether in training or longer races, and holds up to daily runs with equal ease.

“Very secure fit in the midfoot, with room for your toes. Good cushioning, nice and responsive, light, actually really light for a daily trainer.

These have a great combination of fit, responsiveness, and light weight.”

NEW • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics • Sizes: Men 8–12,13; Women 6–11 • Weight: 10.9 oz. (men’s 11); 8.5 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, EVA Strobel board • www.scott-sports.com

BEST SHOE Performance SP

RIN G 201

1

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:47 PM Page 22

NEUTRAL/MOTION STABILIZING

column name

Brooks Defyance 4

$100

The Defyance has earned an important spot in the Brooks lineup as a dependable, neutral performer. The upper is an open mesh and the saddle-like midfoot overlays have been beefed up on the medial side to improve support. The midsole has received the typical minor adjustments, but they haven’t affected the overall ride for which the shoe is known. The shank support has been reworked for more effective midfoot support without any unnecessary plastic. The outersole features slightly shortened longitudinal flex grooves to smooth the forefoot flexibility. These changes add up to a good solution for neutralfooted runners.

“Comfortable fit, just like last year’s model. The ride has a bouncy feel to it, good cushioning. Fairly light weight feel (love that). I loved the light feel and support.”

Updates the Defyance 3 • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics • Sizes: Men 7–13,14,15 (B,D,2E); Women 5–12,13 (2A,B,D) • Weight: Men 11.9 oz. (size 11); Women 9.7 oz. (size 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, S-257 Cushsole (EVA Strobel board) • www.brooksrunning.com

New Balance 1080

BEST SHOE Neutral

SP

RIN G 201

1

$135

With the 1080, New Balance leads into a numerical reset, establishing numbers that correspond to their category. The 1080 represents the pinnacle of neutral cushioning in the NBx performance running line. Though it bears a resemblance to the 1064, which it replaces, the upper now features an airier, two-layer mesh, as well as more substantial overlays positioned for better flexibility where the foot flexes. The midsole is much the same as before, but there’s a new crashpad under the cuboid bone to soften a midfoot landing. Redesigned flex grooves and Stability Web allow an improved transition from heel to toe. The outersole features tougher rubber on the lateral side, softer blown rubber medially. The attention to detail and fit, as well as its plush ride, earned the 1080 top honors in the Neutral shoe category.

“These shoes cradle my feet and help me confidently land each strike with my foot. No noticeable wear even @ 200 miles” and “I think New Balance went a little overboard with the cushioning on these, though overall they have been really pretty good.”

Replaces the 1064 • Recommended for: medium-arched feet with neutral biomechanics • Sizes: Men 7–13,14,15 (B,D,2E,4E); Women 5–11,12 (2A,B,D) • Weight: 13.0 oz. (men’s 11); 11.1 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, polyurethane Strobel board • www.newbalance.com

Saucony ProGrid Triumph 8

$130

The Triumph series has always specialized in cushioning and protection. The Triumph 8 trims some weight from Round 7 while retaining most of the protection and plushness. The upper has noticeably less bulk, a move in the right direction, but it’s still on the heavy side. One improvement is the open area at the first metatarsal, which gives a roomy feeling and accommodates a wide forefoot, hallux rigidus, or bunions. The midsole features minor changes to the molding but offers much the same ride as before—well cushioned without being mushy. The outersole continues with the combination of blown rubber in the forefoot and carbon rubber in the heel, but more separation between the heel lugs gives better articulation in the touch-down. The Triumph continues to offer Saucony’s best cushioned ride.

“Lots of room in the toes. They are comfortable but a little stiff, but with plenty of cushion throughout the whole shoe. Heavier feeling than most shoes I wear now, but I probably don’t need all the pampering these provide.”

Updates the ProGrid Triumph 7 • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics • Sizes: Men 7–13,14,15; Women 5–11,12 • Weight: 13.1 oz. (men’s 11); 11.7 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, EVA Strobel board • www.saucony.com

ASICS Gel-DS Trainer 16

$110

The DS Trainer has always represented the ASICS philosophy of balancing engineering and minimalism. Version 16 has locked onto this concept with proven technologies and lightweight materials. This time out, the upper is much the same from the toes to the midfoot, but between the arch and the heel there are now two layers of material securing the heel to prevent slipping. The result is a heavier shoe than in the past but it has a much better-fitting heel. The midsole has seen the usual minor tweaks without noticeably affecting the ride, though the articulation in forefoot flexion is a little more pliable thanks to the addition of ASICS’ Guidance Line. The result is a midweight shoe with a great balance of stability and cushioning that holds up to the demands of high mileage.

“They felt perfectly snug and are the lightest shoes I have worn with this much great support” and “Cushion was good, with a good feel around the ankles and from the tongue. Overall, heavier than I expected but with a good, balanced feeling.”

Updates the Gel-DS Trainer 15 • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with mild to moderate overpronation • Sizes: Men 6-13, 14,15; Women 5–12 • Weight: Men 11.9 oz. (size 11); Women 10.2 oz. (size 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, two-density Solyte Strobel board • www.asicsamerica.com

ASICS Gel-Kayano 17

$140

As the flagship of the ASICS motion stabilizing contingent, Version 17 of the Kayano maintains the plush ride, fit, and stability that has long defined it. The familiar profile has been well dialed in for at least 5 years, so the faithful have been consistently served and that continues here. Though the differences appear to be cosmetic, they’re actually upgrades: the upper has a bit less Bio-Fit, but what’s there is used more precisely on the medial and lateral sides; and replacing the synthetic leather overlays with HF-welded overlays saves weight without compromising support. The midsole geometry with its precise shaping has been maintained from the flex grooves to the decoupling of the heel and, with the generous Gel cushioning all but identical, the ride is indistinguishable from recent versions. The good news—make that great news—is that the Kayano 17 continues to be as consistent a performer as ASICS delivers.

“The Kayano is always snug and comfortable. The cushioning is great, the shoe is very stable, and my feet are secure in them while running at any speed.”

Updates the Gel-Kayano 16 • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with mild to moderate overpronation • Sizes: Men 6-14,15,16 (D), 8-14,15,16 (EE), 8-14,15,16 (EEEE); Women 5–13 (B), 6-13 (AA,D) • Weight: Men 13.0 oz. (size 11); Women 11.4 oz. (size 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, two-density Solyte Strobel board • www.asicsamerica.com

Kswiww_Layout 1 3/11/11 9:50 AM Page 1

KWICK TIME

9 oz. – from start to finish. The new Kwicky Blade-Light features revolutionary Ion-Mask™ technology. Waterstation. Rain. Sweat.

Nothing gets in. Now that’s gonzo. kswiss.com/kwicky

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:48 PM Page 24

MOTION STABILIZING Brooks Ravenna 2

BEST SHOE Motion Stabilizing

SP

RIN G 201

1

$100

The Ravenna has moved up in the food chain. While it was a peppy performer, it now has a bit more muscle to it, thanks to the incorporation of Brooks’ DNA cushioning element. The Ravenna is still peppy, but the extra boost in cushioning makes it even better equipped for high mileage. The upper is ever so slightly altered (the usual few millimeter shift in overlays), but the elastic straps to the eyestay remain, allowing the upper to move with the foot. The midsole sports minor adjustments to the forefoot, but the lateral heel has much more articulation in the crashpad, and rests over a more concentrated outersole element and altered heel flex grooves. The remaining outersole is much as it was, with carbon rubber in the heel and blown rubber up front.

The combination of its accommodating fit, good stability, and lasting cushioning earned the Ravenna 2 the Best Shoe honors in the Motion Stabilizing category.

“Nice roomy toe box. They are very comfortable. The heelstrike is one of the most comfortable I’ve ever felt. There is nice bounce to the shoes on the run. Good stability and the lacing is great. This is a great light-feeling shoe. Much better than all the brands I’ve tried.”

Updates the Ravenna • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with mild to moderate overpronation • Sizes: Men 7–13,14,15; Women 5–12 • Weight: 12.1 oz. (men’s 11); 10.1 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, S-257 Cushsole (EVA Strobel board) • www.brooksrunning.com

Brooks Trance 10

$140

The Trance has undergone a transformation that is both substantive and visual. The more resilient DNA cushioning, new in the Trance 10, is an upgrade, and midsole shaping (smaller pods on the lateral side) broadens the base of the shoe. The result is better stability, though the full-length DNA and increased foam contribute to a weight gain of over 10%. The upper is designed for the same effective support with new overlays and a TPU heel cradle doing the job. One of the more significant improvements is the fit, as stretchy straps in the eyestay flex with the foot for more security and an extra eyelet at the top of the tongue holds it in place. The outersole features a bit more rubber surface, though with variation in height for sufficient flexion. Runners with a need for extra stability and cushioning owe it to themselves to try out a pair of Trance 10s.

“Good fit, cushioning, and stability. I hadn't worn Brooks shoes before, and I discovered that they know how to make shoes!”

Updates the Trance 9 • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with mild to moderate overpronation • Sizes: Men 7–13,14,15 (B,D,2E); Women 5–12 (B,D) • Weight: 13.4 oz. (men’s 11); 11.2 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, S-257 Cushsole (Strobel board) • www.brooksrunning.com

Mizuno Wave Inspire 7

$100

The Inspire has been one of Mizuno’s most dependable motion stabilizing shoes. Though not flashy, it’s a performer and Round 7 focuses on improving its fit and transition. The upper is now a more open airmesh and there have been slight shifts to the overlays which, along with a stretchier feel to the mesh over the toes, open up the metatarsal area for a bit more room. The first eyelet is now hinged on the lateral side to allow more adaptable lacing in securing the foot.The midsole contours look different but offer the smoothest transition of all the new Mizuno training shoes. The stability of the asymmetrical Wave plate is rock solid. The outersole features some reshaping of flex grooves but is as effective as ever for traction and durability. The fit and performance are the real value of the Inspire, perhaps as aptly named a shoe as any on the market.

“The Inspire has been a reliable training shoe for me. The 7 may be even more so than earlier versions; fit really well, durable, plenty of cushioning, and plenty of stability. No downside as far as I’m concerned.”

Updates the Wave Inspire 6 • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with neutral biomechanics to moderate overpronation • Sizes: Men 7–13,14,15,16 (D,2E); Women 6–12 (2A,B,D) • Weight: 12.7 oz. (men’s 11); 10.1 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted • www.mizunorunning.com

Nike Zoom Structure Triax+ 14

$100

The Structure Triax has been updated with several mantras in mind, including “Don’t mess with success.” Round 14 stands pat on the effective dual-density Phylon midsole (one of Nike’s last shoes with the compound) and its well-executed crashpads and flex grooves, which provide great cushioning, stability, and an unobtrusive transition. The upper of the Structure Triax 14 benefits from Nike’s innovative Flywire as some of the strapping and overlays of previous versions have been replaced by supportive Flywire strands welded to the midfoot of the shoe. The forefoot has an open feel with plenty of room over the metatarsals and a clean look to go with the smooth functioning. If the Structure Triax has been your shoe, rest assured that they didn’t change what you love about it.

“Good toe room, but not quite as snug as I would have liked. Good balance and stability. Not as cushiony as other Nikes I have tested in the past” and “My feet were secure and balanced—the shoes felt stable. My overall impression is, there are shoes on the market that are more comfortable and cost less.”

Updates the Zoom Structure Triax+ 13 • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with mild to moderate overpronation • Sizes: Men 6–13,14,15 (B,D,2E,4E); Women 5–12 (A,B,D) • Weight: 12.5 oz. (men’s 11); 10.0 oz. (women’s 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel slip-lasted, EVA Strobel board • www.nike.com

Reebok Premier Road Supreme 2

$100

The Premier Road Supreme 2 takes a good shoe and makes it even better. The upper opens up the forefoot for a roomer fit across the metatarsals, with a snugger fit laterally provided by a large Kinetic Fit panel. A reshaped heel tab and more memory foam in the ankle collar give a form fit to the rearfoot. The DMX foam Strobel board and generous Ortholite innersole, along with the injection-molded EVA, make for a cushy ride. The medial second density offers just enough extra stability to make the shoe effective for a large group of runners, from the mild to moderate overpronator to the fairly neutral runner looking for extra support, especially on long runs. Holding the price while improving the comfort adds to the value.

“This shoe fits great, they just hug my foot with nice toe room. Well cushioned, just a bit bouncy, very smooth from heel to toe. Nice. Lots of good running miles for me with this shoe.”

Updates the Premier Road Supreme • Recommended for: medium- to high-arched feet with mild to moderate overpronation • Sizes: Men 6.5–13,14; Women 5–11,12 • Weight: Men 12.4 oz. (size 11); Women 10.6 oz. (size 8) • Shape: semi-curved • Construction: Strobel sliplasted, DMX Foam Strobel board • www.reebok.com

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:48 PM Page 25

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:31 PM Page 26

Review

Track & Field Spikes by Cregg Weinmann T

he 2011 track season is upon us. As in other pre-Olympic years, there are some new products being rolled out to serve the annual championships, as well as the anticipation of what will be coming out for the 2012 London Olympic Games. The usual players have new and updated products; only Reebok stands pat. adidas and Mizuno have minor updates, while ASICS, Brooks, New Balance, Puma, and Saucony present new offerings for athletes at all levels. Here we review 8 of the best, most representative shoes, and highlight 8 more to give a well-rounded overview of what’s available.

adidas adizero Avanti 1—$110

ASICS Prima Diva Sprint 2—$100

The Avanti is a name familiar to athletes from a generation ago when it was the adidas entry-level offering found in abundance on tracks across the U.S. The 2011 offering is designed for high-end performance and is now the pinnacle of adidas distance spikes. The airmesh upper lines up the foot over the spike plate to maximize traction, and the green colorway suggests Oregon’s influence in the track & field world. The effective, 6-spike distance plate has been proven over several seasons. This update is largely the same as the original adizero Avanti, with minor adjustments to the upper to center the foot over the full-length EVA, which offers a touch of cushion. The mesh upper and perforations in the midsole and spike plate allow for water to drain quickly. The overall result is a quality product that delivers performance.

The Prima Diva Sprint emerges in Round 2 with a major renovation and ugraded features. Developed in cooperation with Olympic hurdler Lolo Jones, it’s designed to be ASICS’ best women’s sprint spike. The Diva 2 trades up from the Turbo Phantom spike plate to the same plate as the Japan Lite-ning, ASICS’ top-of-the-line sprint shoe—which is to say, from a stiff, 7-spike plate to the nimble 6-spike plate. It also saves some weight while better accommodating the female foot for which the shoe is intended. The zippered shroud both improves aerodynamics and snugs the fit for improved performance. A thin, full-length layer of EVA adds its measure of comfort to the shoe.

UPDATED Sizes: unisex 4–13,14,15 Weight: 5.9 oz. (w/spikes, men’s 11) Spikes: 6, replaceable Upper: mesh, synthetic overlays Innersole: sheet EVA Midsole: full-length CM-EVA Outersole: fulllength thermoplastic spike plate Recommended for: 1500–10,000 meters, steeplechase; synthetic surfaces

UPDATED Sizes: women’s 5–11,12 Weight: 6.4 oz. (w/spikes, women’s 8) Spikes: 6, replaceable Upper: mesh, synthetic leather shroud Innersole: sheet EVA Midsole: full-length EVA Outersole: full-length thermoplastic spike plate Recommended for: 100–400 meters, hurdles; synthetic surfaces

Brooks PR MD—$60

Mizuno Geo-Silencer 3—$110

The PR series replaces the entry-level spikes that Brooks has offered for the past decade. Here each component has been upgraded which explains the price nudge of $5. The PR MD features a new 6-spike, Pebax plate with a sharkskin TPU outersole, each providing performance-enhancing grip. A thin, full-length layer of EVA is capped by a slightly built-up heel pad for protection in the jumping events or when fatigue causes a less-than-efficient footstrike on the track. The improvement in its entry range—which also includes a PR Sprint and PR LD— boosts Brooks track & field to a new level, and is well worth the price.

The Geo-Silencer has been Mizuno’s top middle distance shoe for almost 5 years. The Geo Silencer 3 is a color-up from last season’s Silencer 2, which debuted an update to the upper that has been maintained in version 3. The spike plate is 3⁄4-length nylon with a PUimpregnated polyester laminate. It creates a hard-toothed, grippy heel that’s been proven in numerous Mizuno spikes from past seasons. Six spike wells and three permanent pins provide the forefoot traction, and this season features newly shaped spikes with fluted ridges to improve the response on synthetic rubber tracks. The synthetic leather upper snugs the foot nicely with traditional lacing and internal webbing and features a hook-and-loop strap at the top of the laces for extra security.

NEW Sizes: men’s 5–13,14,15; women 6–12 Weight: 5.7 oz. (w/spikes, men’s 11); 4.7 oz. (w/spikes, women’s 8) Spikes: 6, replaceable Upper: mesh, synthetic overlays Innersole: sheet EVA Midsole: fulllength sheet EVA Outersole: combination Pebax spike plate, thermoplastic sharkskin (heel) Recommended for: 400–1500 meters, hurdles; synthetic surfaces

UPDATED Sizes: unisex 5–13 Weight: 6.6 oz. (w/spikes, men’s 11) Spikes: 6, replaceable; 3, permanent Upper: synthetic leather Innersole: sheet EVA Midsole: full-length CM-EVA Outersole: full-length thermoplastic spike plate Recommended for: 400–1500 meters, hurdles; synthetic surfaces

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:48 PM Page 27

Review

New Balance MD800—$100 The introduction of the MD800 rounds out the top-end track offerings for New Balance, where the middle distances had been a bit overlooked until it added some top-flight competitors, including Maggie Vessey. The MD800 is built on a new full-length spike plate of Pebax nylon and carbon fiber that’s light, strong, and responsive. The midsole is molded ActEVA Lite that provides better cushioning than expected for a middle-distance shoe. In fact, the midsole makes it suitable for events from 800 meters on up to 5000 meters. The seamless upper is fully lined with lightweight synthetic suede for sockless use. The exterior has HF-welded overlays in the forefoot and a tough woven mesh that combine to supply good support to the racing foot.

NEW Sizes: men 4–13,14; women 5–10,11 Weight: 5.7 oz. (w/spikes, men’s 11); 4.6 oz. (w/spikes, women’s 8) Spikes: 6, replaceable Upper: mesh, welded synthetic overlays, full synthetic suede lining Innersole: sheet EVA Midsole: full-length molded ActEVA Lite (EVA) Outersole: full-length Pebax spike plate, carbon fiber insert Recommended for: 800–5000 meters & up, hurdles; synthetic surfaces

Nike Zoom Superfly R3—$120 The Superfly was once the epitome of sprinting technology and it continues to heavily influence the industry because it works. The spike plate is the same power sprint platform Nike developed around a decade ago molded from Pebax nylon for its light weight, responsive feel, and durability. The midsole is a wedge of Phylon for just enough cushioning. The upper is where the real changes can be seen. Fuse technology—HF-welded supports across the entire upper that create a web of ultra light support—and a hook-andloop lock-down strap over the metatarsals make the upper equally supportive with considerably less bulk. The result is a responsive sprint spike that manages both power and speed.

UPDATED Sizes: unisex 5.5–13,14 Weight: 7.3 oz. (w/spikes, men’s 11) Spikes: 8, replaceable Upper: mesh, welded synthetic overlays Innersole: sheet EVA Midsole: full-length Phylon (EVA) Outersole: full-length Pebax spike plate Recommended for: 100–400 meters, hurdles; synthetic surfaces

Puma SLX Zone—$110 The SLX Zone is a new relative to the well-established Harambi. It shares the same upper pattern— though here it’s a new open mesh—and the same midsole: a nice, cushy layer that softens the effects of synthetic tracks. The outersole shows divergence from its sibling, as the plate provides a weight savings by eliminating much of the thermoplastic and using only three small sharkskin patches that cover about 30% of the outersole. The perimeter of the forefoot features 4 spike wells that encircle a forefoot of polyester-backed TPU embossed with dozens of tiny, plus-sign–shaped lugs for additional grip. The combination of light weight, cushioning, great flexibility, and effective traction make the SLX Zone a good distance spike choice.

NEW Sizes: unisex 5.5–12,13,14 Weight: 5.0 oz. (w/spikes, men’s 11) Spikes: 4, replaceable Upper: mesh, synthetic suede overlays Innersole: sheet EVA Midsole: full-length CM-EVA Outersole: polyester-backed thermoplastic perimeter (forefoot), sharkskin (center forefoot, heel) Recommended for: 1500 meters & up, steeplechase; synthetic surfaces

Saucony Showdown—$100 The Showdown is both a new shoe and a new category for Saucony track & field. Developed in collaboration with Olympian Wallace Spearman, the Showdown is Saucony’s first high-end sprint spike.

The upper is a minimesh enclosed in a zippered shroud, which offers a supportive fit and provides some “speedy” aesthetics. The midsole and outersole combine Saucony’s Flexion plate, a TPU device that aids touchdown and propulsion, with a Pebax spike plate that offers light weight and durability. Here it’s configured for power sprinting with a brawny 10-spike arrangement of Christmas tree elements to maximize traction.

This is a quality addition to the well-rounded Saucony track lineup.

NEW Sizes: men 7–13,14; women 5–11,12 Weight: 9.0 oz. (w/spikes, men’s 11); 7.4 oz. (w/spikes, women’s 8) Spikes: 10, replaceable Upper: mesh, zippered synthetic leather shroud Innersole: sheet EVA Midsole: Flexion Plate TPU Outersole: full-length Pebax spike plate Recommended for: 100–400 meters, hurdles; synthetic surfaces Continued on page 28

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:48 PM Page 28

Review

THE REST OF THE SHOES WE PREVIEWED FOR SPRING 2011

Brooks PR LD—$60 NEW Sizes: men 5–13,14,15; women 6–12 Weight: 5.7 oz. (w/spikes, men’s 11); 4.7 oz. (w/spikes, women’s 8) Spikes: 6, replaceable Upper: mesh, synthetic overlays Innersole: sheet EVA Midsole: full-length sheet EVA Outersole: combination Pebax spike plate (forefoot), thermoplastic sharkskin (heel) Recommended for: 1500 meters & up, hurdles & jumps; synthetic surfaces

Puma TFX Distance 3—$65

UPDATED Sizes: men 7–12,13; women 6–11,12 Weight: 7.1 oz. (w/spikes, men’s 11); 6.7 oz. (w/spikes, women’s 8) Spikes: 7, replaceable Upper: mesh, synthetic overlays Innersole: sheet EVA Midsole: full-length sheet EVA Outersole: 3⁄4–length thermoplastic spike plate, rubber (heel) Recommended for: 800–5000 meters & up, hurdles & jumps; natural & synthetic surfaces

Puma TFX Sprint 3—$65

Brooks PR Sprint—$60 NEW Sizes: men 5–13,14, 15; women 6–12 Weight: 6.3 oz. (w/spikes, men’s 11); 5.2 oz. (w/spikes, women’s 8) Spikes: 6, replaceable Upper: mesh, zippered shroud, synthetic overlays Innersole: sheet EVA Midsole: full-length sheet EVA Outersole: combination Pebax spike plate, theromoplastic sharkskin (heel) Recommended for: 100–400 meters; synthetic surfaces

UPDATED Sizes: men 7–12,13; women 6–11,12 Weight: 6.8 oz. (w/spikes, men’s 11); 6.1 oz. (w/spikes, women’s 8) Spikes: 7, replaceable Upper: mesh, synthetic overlays Innersole: sheet EVA Midsole: full-length sheet EVA Outersole: 3⁄4-length thermoplastic spike plate, rubber (heel) Recommended for: 100–400 meters; natural & synthetic surfaces

Nike MaxCat 3—$110 UPDATED Sizes: unisex 4–13, 14,15 Weight: 6.5 oz. (w/spikes, men’s 11) Spikes: 5, replaceable Upper: mesh, welded synthetic overlays Innersole: sheet EVA Midsole: full-length Phylon (EVA) Outersole: Pebax spike plate (forefoot), TPU matrix (heel) Recommended for: 100–400 meters, hurdles; synthetic surfaces

Saucony Spitfire— $65

NEW Sizes: men 7–13,14; women 5–11,12 Weight: 7.9 oz. (w/spikes, men’s 11); 6.4 oz. (w/spikes, women’s 8) Spikes: 7, replaceable Upper: mesh, synthetic overlays Innersole: sheet EVA Midsole: full-length EVA Outersole: full-length Pebax spike plate Recommended for: 100–400 meters; synthetic surfaces

Nike Zoom W 3 $75 UPDATED Sizes: women 5.5–12 Weight: 5.4 oz. (w/spikes, women’s 8) Spikes: 5, replaceable Upper: mesh, welded synthetic overlays Innersole: sheet EVA Midsole: full-length Phylon (EVA) Outersole: full-length Pebax spike plate Recommended for: 800–5000 meters & up, hurdles; synthetic surfaces

Saucony Velocity 4— $60

UPDATED Sizes: men 7–13,14; women 5–11,12 Weight: 7.7 oz. (w/ spikes, men’s 11); 6.3 oz. (w/spikes, women’s 8) Spikes: 7, replaceable Upper: mesh, synthetic overlays Innersole: sheet EVA Midsole: full-length sheet EVA Outersole: Pebax spike plate, carbon rubber (heel) Recommended for: 800–3200 meters, hurdles & jumps; natural & synthetic surfaces

CREGG WEINMANN is footwear and running products reviewer for Running Network LLC. He can be reached via e-mail at shuz2run@lightspeed.net.

Copyright © 2011 by Running Network LLC. All Rights Reserved. No part of this article may be stored, copied, or reprinted without prior written permission of Running Network LLC. Reprinted here with permission.

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:48 PM Page 29

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/13/11 9:59 PM Page 30

Meb’s Amazing Story

M

ebraton Keflezighi was one of 10 children born to a family in Asmara, the capital city of Eritrea, one of the two or three poorest nations in the world. When he was a few months old, the family left their home and moved 50 miles away to a village to escape the invading Ethiopian army. The family lived in a two-room house—one room for cooking, the other for eating and sleeping—without electricity or running water. They herded livestock, scrounged for firewood, scraped for food; sometimes Meb was so hungry he ate dirt. When they needed to go somewhere, they walked—30 miles, 100 miles, once even 250 miles.

The children went to school whenever there was a school to go to. They studied hard. They dreamed of America, where “everyone had a villa.” And the family stuck together.

When they arrived in San Diego in 1987, Meb was put into sixth grade, a 12-year-old who spoke no English. Yet he and his brothers and sisters became top students (their parents told them the only acceptable grade was an A).

Meb started to run as a seventh grader, went on to become a state champion, an NCAA champion at UCLA, an American citizen in 1999, an Olympic Silver medalist in 2004, and a winner of the New York City Marathon in 2009. All these races and many more, and many ups and downs, are chronicled in Run to Overcome, the book Meb has written with our own Dick Patrick. The most important parts are not what he accomplished, but how he and his family and friends did it.

There are many, many important things about running in Meb’s book that you won’t find in any other book about running. About character. About persistence. About belief in oneself.

If you’ve forgotten know how lucky you are to be an American, Meb Keflezighi’s book, Run to Overcome, will remind you … unforgettably.

If you think that being dirt-poor can prevent you from becoming what you want to become, Run to Overcome will make you think again.

If you think that the American Dream is a thing of the past, Run to Overcome will show you it’s alive and well.

I can’t imagine that there’s a single coach or athlete who couldn’t profit by reading it.

— James Dunaway

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/14/11 9:53 PM Page 31

ATF_Spring11-2:ATF_XC 09 3/10/11 10:48 PM Page 32