In an age of constant innovation and technological advancement in nearly every aspect of our lives, there’s a counter pull to more analog, “real” things. We’ve seen upticks in physical media forms like records and books; we saw the great push into outdoor recreation during COVID that had us all on Zoom meetings for days. It’s likely in part thanks to nostalgia, as we collectively yearn for a so-called simpler time (even though that simpler time was an evolution of whatever came before it).

At any rate, we see this with the products we use for training and racing, too. There’s entire product ecosystems for vintage bikes, for instance. (We’ll leave aside the Great Wheel and Tire Battle as its own can of worms.) Nike is perhaps the greatest example for this, with retro versions of classic running shoes permeating across categories from lifestyle to golf.

It shouldn’t come as a surprise that we’re probably starting to see that pushback with the traditional running shoe market (as opposed to just the retro side). We have so many shoes with plates out there, whether carbon or nylon. We will soon have shoes that are actively measuring impact and load to then give coaching advice. It’s becoming a lot. Overwhelming, in some cases, if I’m being honest. And I do this for a living!

It’s in that context that I’ve had a pair of Diadora Cellula 2 shoes in the wear testing rotation. There is no plate. There’s nothing magical about the foam that’s going to suddenly make you faster, and the real promise in the marketing materials on the shoe is focused on comfort and fatigue instead of speed. It’s a no bullshit, somewhat simple (at least in modern times) running shoe that’s meant to be used for lots of miles.

But is it special? Yes. And no.

The Tech Stuff: Proprietary Foam, Of Course

If you’re going to have a somewhat simple shoe, you’ve got to give people something to talk about. For Diadora and the Cellula 2, that pretty much comes down to two versions of their Anima proprietary foam. Anima is an ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA) foam, which has been used in most running shoes for the last 40 years. Diadora’s spin on this foam is a claimed 20% lighter than your standard offering EVA midsole. They also claim that Anima increases responsiveness by 30%.

For the Cellula 2, that’s what is pretty much stacked from outsole to insole, and coming in north of 40 millimeters worth of stack. That, along with the shoe not appearing on the approved World Athletics list, would mean that it’s not a shoe that you’d probably wear on race day for a triathlon. That midsole also features just 5 millimeters worth of drop from heel to toe, so it’s on the low side of the equation.

I say “pretty much” above as, of course, there’s a couple of points where Anima N2 fits in. As you’d probably guess, it’s lighter and more responsive than even standard Anima is — 40% in each category, according to Diadora. You find Anima N2 concentrated in the forefoot of the Cellula 2, and intended to boost rebound and thrust, per the spec sheet.

Otherwise, the marketing material is focused on comfort:

“Cellula 2. The same performance, with an updated design to improve overall bounce and reduce muscle fatigue. Cellula is the neutral running shoe for everyday training and long-distance runs. Whether you’re a beginner or a more experienced athlete, the Cellula 2 will adapt to your pace and your goals, supporting different training sessions. A wide sole ensures superior comfort, while the introduction of Anima N2 improves bounce and propulsion when the foot strikes the ground.”

The claimed weight on a pair of Cellula 2 is 305 grams for a sample size, or just under 10.8 ounces. Me wearing my size 13 boats, it is a shoe that feels lighter than I would expect given that sample size weigh-in. Your mileage, as always, may vary.

On the Run: Speaking of Mileage

The thing the makes the Cellula 2 special is the fact that it’s just so damned simple. It’s a bunch of foam, a lightweight upper, and a somewhat grippy outsole. Lace it up and go.

Putting the shoe on brings up two things for me: first, Diadora has taken the Goldilocks approach to insole height. It’s not too high, not too low. For me, it’s most similar to slipping on a pair of Saucony’s. And then there’s the upper, which is a standout. The sockliner and mesh scream premium, in my mind. I would certainly hope so, as the shoe retails for nearly $200. But it’s a shoe that does not look out of place being worn with a pair of jeans before being laced up for a run after work.

Running in the Cellula 2, and it’s apparent that there’s some element of truth to the Anima descriptions from Diadora. This isn’t a shoe that is going to give you free speed; you need to go out there and do the work. But it’s also not like most traditional trainers, which actively feel like they’re trying to soften every mile to the point where it gives you the sensation of running in marshmallow fluff. There’s bounce. There’s plushness. It’s what you want for mile after mile on training runs.

And that’s what this shoe has done most effectively: just eaten up miles. It’s a shoe I don’t really need to think about what type of run I’m doing, or how far I’m going. I just know it’ll be good for whatever I throw at it. In that case, it’s a lot more like some older, responsive shoes that could dabble in speed, like a classic Mizuno Wave Rider. You’re going to get out of the Cellula 2 whatever you put into it.

The biggest nod to modernity? The price tag. At $185, it’s a lot to ask for a shoe that doesn’t have the kinds of bells and whistles that you see on some other footwear. Personally? I’d love to see this shoe at $160-$175, where it either undercuts or matches the premium trainer from other brands. But I also don’t think Diadora’s interested in playing anybody else’s game; they’re going to do things a little differently.

Diadora Cellula 2
Price: $185.00
Available: Now
Shop Men’s | Shop Women’s

The post Diadora’s Cellula 2 is a Throwback, No BS Training Shoe That Will Eat Up Mile After Mile first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

It should come to no surprise to you by now that I’m a big fan of carbon-plated running shoes. I held out for a long time, not putting my first pair of them on until early 2022, but since then it’s been all downhill from here. As part of my lead-in to IRONMAN Lake Placid a few years ago, I wrote up a comparison test of four of the then top options as I debated what shoe I would wear for the race. (A race that went catastrophically wrong for a whole lot of other reasons, but I digress.) In general: I respond really well to carbon plates, and most of the time I don’t experience any negative side effects unless I’ve already done something stupid to myself.

Yes, I am very aware how heavily the “unless” part of the prior sentence is carrying that outcome.

But when it comes to carbon shoes, there’s really not that much of a differentiation between them on paper. You find a proprietary hypercritical (or similar) foam, sandwiching a carbon fiber plate, and a lightweight upper to hold your foot to the platform. So choosing any of them should be the same, right? Wrong. Dead wrong. There’s far more nuance than that. And in some cases, it’s not nuance at all; it’s just an entirely different animal altogether.

Here are four overlooked components of some of these racers, that can help you better choose your next set of shoes.

Match Up Geometry With Your Preferred Running Style

There’s three elements of shoe geometry that, in my opinion, have the greatest impact on whether that shoe is going to work for you.

The first of these is offset. That difference between heel height and forefoot height, despite being all of a few millimeters, changes how a shoe runs significantly. In my experience, the “best” offset for an individual is typically driven by a combination of the shoe they wear on an everyday basis (outside of running), their typical run shoe, and then their preferred primary point of contact in their run stride. Example: I typically wear low to no offset shoes on a daily basis, along with run shoes that usually range from 3 to 6mm worth of offset. I typically respond most effectively to carbon racers that fall in a similar bucket. That said — it’s far easier for someone used to low offset to go up, rather than the other way around.

The second is looking at where the carbon plate actually sits in the shoe. Some plates start midfoot; some run the full length of the shoe. If you’re somebody who typically lands with a mid foot or forefoot strike, there’s little reason for you to look at a shoe that has a plate further back. If you’re more of a heel striker, you might benefit more from something that could make that transition happen faster. And maybe avoid something that is *ahem* this rounded back there.

Lastly, you’ll want to check the width of the platform itself underfoot. As shoes grow taller in stack height, they generally need to be wider underfoot in order to maintain stability. Otherwise, you’re likely losing some of the efficiency gains. Nike, famously, is pretty narrow lasted, whereas HOKA is king of the widest platform underfoot, even in most of its racing shoes.

Uppers and Sockliners (and Socks)

In order for a shoe to rip your feet to shreds, there’s two issues: friction and moisture. With a shoe, there’s really only two places friction can come from: the upper or the sockliner / insole. For the most part, uppers have gotten to the point where you shouldn’t have an issue. Exceptions exist, of course; the ASICS MetaSpeed family uppers can be a little on the stiff side, with open mesh that could grab a little bit. But with recent advances in upper materials, we’re far from the overlays or stitching that tore people apart even just a few years ago.

The other main one is the sicklier, and how well it sits in the shoe and how it meets that upper. Generally speaking, if it feels flimsy when you stick your hand in the shoe, there’s a chance that will bunch when you start putting some strides into it. Also, check to see how well the sockliner arch sits against the inside of the shoe; if there’s a little bit of space there, it’s going to slide and be a potential blister source.

Also, look. Socks are your best defense and are far too overlooked. I wear a Balega sock as my daily driver, but they aren’t form-fitting enough for me to wear when running. I opt for either a Feetures Elite or Swiftwick Aspire, and can’t remember the last time I had a blister from running.

Check the Forefoot Flexibility

In a statement that should shock exactly nobody, carbon isn’t the most flexible material. Sure, it can be laid to bend and flex in certain ways, but it’s certainly more rigid than most of the foam you’ll find in today’s shoes.

Although I respond well to carbon shoes and wind up with significant time savings on downhill, flat, or gently rolling terrain, I also find there’s significant additional cost when trying to use the same shoes going uphill. Take, for instance, the recent 5K I ran in our hometown; wearing HOKA’s Cielo X1m in downhill segments, I was flying past fellow racers, touching 5:30/mile pace. Yet when the road pivoted uphill, I struggled to hit 8:00/mile pace. I’ve found that, at least with my stride, certain plates in shoes make it harder to go up.

I should’ve worn something that had more to give up front, like Diadora’s Gara Carbon or Saucony’s Endorphin Pro.

Traction Isn’t Optional

Just ask Jamie Riddle, who fell hard while cornering at IRONMAN 70.3 Aix-en-Provence⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣, and is now awaiting results of an MRI on his knee.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by IRONMAN Triathlon (@ironmantri)

Riddle was wearing the $500 Adidas Adizero Adios Pro Evo, which features a nearly bare outsole. As Riddle said in a comment on Instagram, “the evo line have always been about pure speed. adidas don’t market them for courses like this, it’s my fault. I would have been better off using the Adios Pro 4 which have grip.”

Echoing that comment, having moved to the Pacific Northwest over the past year, road surfaces get grimy with rain. At first, it’s because of all of the oil and junk that accumulates during the dry part of the year. Then it’s because it is perpetually wet and moss will wind up growing on the road surface. It’s a completely different experience than anything I’d seen before in my running career.

And it means that I look at my shoe line-up differently depending on the weather. If it has rained recently, I’ll opt for something with a better outsole to it, like the Adios Pro 4 that Riddle mentioned. But if it’s been dry for a while, I can opt to get racier in my choice, so long as there isn’t the kind of turn in the course that Riddle dealt with.

The post Four Overlooked Features of Carbon Shoes That Can Make or Break Your Experience first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

That being said, there was some serious sticker shock when we went to register the three of us as a family. It was $45 per person before any transaction fees. $135! As former race directors, Kelly and I were extremely surprised, especially given that the race we were doing was a fundraiser for the local parent-teacher organization.

But we paid. We went. We found friends. We all had good results; I won my age group and finished in the top 10 overall. Ivy ran with one of her fellow Girl Scouts who had never raced before. And Kelly successfully ran a race for the first time since knee surgery. It was a good day.

We also realized that, in fact, the $45 price tag was probably spot-on given what was provided. It was also clear that they weren’t going to be making a ton of money on the race, either, despite 316 finishers in the field.

The Revenues: Registrations and Sponsors

As mentioned, this was a local event put on by the PTO for our local school district. It means limited overhead, in that everybody (well, most everybody — more on that in a second) in charge of putting the race on is volunteering. It’s a familiar position, as that’s what Kelly and I did for the better part of two decades.

The race offered two distances — a 5K and a 10K. Registration cost ranged from $35 to $50, depending on when you registered. Using our normal modeling for a race of about this size, accounting for when people are most likely to have registered for the race, the race likely brought in approximately $12,500 in registration fees.

The race had a fair number of sponsors and exhibitors. There were three different tiers of sponsorship available. From what I could tell as a participant, there wasn’t any real activation for a sponsor, outside of a name on the race shirt. Some of the sponsors were present on race day; more weren’t. There were some giveaways at the booth, and sign-ups, but my guess is that they’d all paid a small figure to be there.

All in, I’d say we’re looking at a maximum of $15,000 in total revenue.

The Costs: The Essentials and the Extras

Naturally, if you have a race, you need to have the things that make it a race. Namely, you need a course, you need bibs, and you need timing. In order to have a course in our town, you need to apply for a permit. Special event permits run $150 in town as a flat fee, and that’s really just the request to the town to have the event. It doesn’t include traffic control costs, for instance. Nor does it include facility rentals, like the elementary school. I’m assuming that the race didn’t pay to use the school, as the PTO was the beneficiary.

For this event, there were plenty of traffic control costs. First were city-owned barricades, placed at nearly every cross street the course ran through (it was the same course for both distances, with the 10K using the loop twice). And then there’s the actual traffic control: police, and lots of it. I counted no fewer than eight uniformed patrol members lining the course, starting about an hour before the run and continuing until the final finisher over two hours after the gun went off. There was also the lead patrol car. Running off of past police involvement, it is likely each one of these officers required a minimum of four hours of duty pay for their time.

That, alone, would likely set the event back a few thousand dollars.

There’s then timing and any race day logistical services. The race contracted with a local timing company, which appears to have provided:

• Custom bibs, along with the timing tag;
• Course distance measurement and certification to USATF standards;
• Start / finish timing mat;
• Start / finish inflatable arch;
• Start / finish line announcing and music;
• Course marking;
• Timing of the two events; and
• Two iPad kiosks for immediate results.

The timing company (Huber Timing) did, in my opinion, a very good job with most things. The final stretch was not as well marked as I think it probably could have been; I wound up finishing my race and wound up back down on the course directing runners as it was a little confusing. Otherwise, things worked much as you would hope they would. I received a text message about 5 minutes after finishing with my race time. I was able to quickly see how I placed in the overall and in age group standings. There weren’t many glitches to speak of.

There were a couple of things I would do differently, sure; for instance, I would have had a color coded bib for those running the 5K versus the 10K, and I would have assigned bibs pre-race as opposed to on race day. Those are choices, as opposed to hard and fast rules. But all in, again, we’re talking about a set of services that is a four figure sum at a minimum, and these are table stakes to put on an event. The PTO had also pre-purchased water bottles for participants for post-race; it’s nice to have an individual water for participants, although it’s not ideal from a sustainability pursuit to have single-use plastic out there.

And then there’s swag; yes, the race came with a t-shirt. It’s a pretty decent technical T, with laser printing instead of screen printing. The advantage of laser prints like this is that they are easier to have multi-color designs without the print getting heavy and it’s less expensive. The downside is that laser prints don’t tend to hold up to repeated washings, but then I will just wind up with a white T. If I really don’t like it, I wound up with a decent bike rag. Given the number of participants and the type of printing utilized, I’d hazard that shirts ran around $2,500.

Adding it all up, and I’d put expenditures between $8,000 and $10,000 for the race, leaving the PTO having raised somewhere between $5,000 to $7,000. Not bad for a quick non-profit event. But this calculus does make some decent assumptions; the margins are much smaller if there were no sponsors. And, outside of race shirts, you didn’t see much in athlete services like post-race food or snacks.

This is why the math gets far more complicated when you start extending distances out, and why you start seeing pricing jump significantly when you get to half marathon distance and above. And heaven forbid you’re trying to put on a triathlon, which easily triples your logistical and cost burdens. It’s just a hard environment to produce an event in.

The post Race Prices Are Still Rising, But They Aren’t a Cash Cow first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

We really tried. We reached out to pro runners, pro triathletes, coaches, amateur runners, discussed it during our meetings and no one could top the Steve Prefontaine classic: 30/40 track workout. 

In case you’re un-run-cultured, Prefontaine was, and still is, a beloved American distance runner. He was fourth at the 1972 Munich Olympics in the 5K and, at the time of his death, held every American distance record from two miles to the 10K. He died at the young age of 24, after crashing his vehicle while impaired. He was known for his “all out” approach to racing and famously said, “A lot of people run a race to see who is fastest. I run to see who has the most guts.” His mental toughness and mindset toward running left an impact on the sport which brings us to the other thing he left behind: a workout that will make you cry, at least his name out in vain. 

Pre Run

There are a few stress points that make the 30/40 workout so difficult. There is constant loading, speed work, and an undefined end point. The physiological and psychological stress makes it incredibly difficult but the purpose is to teach your body how to recover under load so that during races you can go above threshold and recover while still at speed. More specifically, your body learns how to recycle lactate from your muscles to use as fuel more quickly. It’s a discomfort that is hard to endure and then add in an undefined amount of reps and your brain will start pushing back. At some point you will need to stop or you will start to fail but how far you can push yourself is up to you. 

The other thing that makes this workout such a ball ache? It looks a lot easier than it is. Don’t underestimate it. Even when you treat it with respect it will beat you down. 

The Workout

The workout itself is pretty simple. On a track running continuously, complete 200 m in 30 seconds followed by 200 m in 40 seconds, and repeat until you can’t. Those times were Prefontaine’s, or “Pre’s,” putting him through the 5K mark at 14:35. His record for the workout was 18 laps (7.2K). Not only is that fast but the variable speed makes the time even more impressive. 

Warm up: 10-15 min of easy running with a few accelerations or strides. 

Continuous repetitions of:

• 200 m at 30 seconds (over threshold)
• 200 m at 40 seconds (under threshold)

Cool down: 10 min of easy running

Execution Tips 

If you’re going to try this–and we definitely recommend you give it a bash–adjust the times to your abilities. Set your times as above and below your threshold speed (yep, this is an over/under) but remember the 200 isn’t full recovery. For example, if your threshold speed is around 4 min/km (6:26 per mile), try 45 seconds and 55 seconds. If your threshold is around 6 min/km (9:39 per mile) try 70 and 80 second splits. If you’re not sure of your threshold, use your best 5K time pace. 

Stop when you miss the split by more than 1 second more than once or when the paces feel out of control. Don’t be tempted to over run at the start and don’t adjust the recovery time as you go or you will miss out on the purpose and physiological gains of the workout. 

Remember you will be running continuously so ensure you have adequate fueling and you’re warmed up and ready to perform. Even though you should be absolutely spent, take time after to warm down thoroughly so you can wipe away your tears. 

The post Workouts That Will Make You Cry: Run first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

As I wrote in a review of the Kipride Max training shoes last month, I am a recent Kiprun convert. I had never tried a Kiprun shoe before the Kipride Max, and I was pleasantly surprised by how much I loved them. Since then, I have solely run in my Kiprides, other than when testing different shoes for reviews — a task that eventually included trying out the Kipstorm Elite.

I won’t be running in the Kipstorm Elite every day like I do with its Kiprun cousin, but that’s because this shoe is carbon plated and designed for fast efforts. With that in mind, I will be wearing the Kipstorm in any races I enter this summer, as it is a remarkably fast and comfortable ride that I am certain will lift me to my best possible performances, whether I’m racing a 5 km, half-marathon or any other distance.

While I went into my first run in a Kiprun shoe with next to no expectations, that was not the case with the Kipstorm. I had already recorded many pleasant runs in the Kipride Max by the time I tried the Kipstorm Elite, so the bar was high as I set off to test it. The shoe matched — and even exceeded — my expectations run after run, and if I wasn’t already a Kiprun fan after wearing the Kiprides, I certainly became one after confirming that the company is the real deal with a second straight top-tier product in the Kipstorm Elite.

Kipstorm Elite Specs

• Weight: 7.6 oz (U.S. men’s size 9), 6.5 oz (U.S. women’s size 7.5)
• Drop: 5 mm
• Stack Height: 39 mm (heel) / 34 mm (forefoot)
• Price: US$260

One of the first things you will notice when putting on the Kipstorm Elite is its weight. At 7.6 ounces for a men’s size 9, the Kipstorm rivals most other top carbon-plated shoes on the market. This is a wildly light shoe, and its featherweight build is especially noticeable after spending the winter running in trainers.

The shoe’s stack height is 39 mm down to 34 mm from heel to toe, giving it quit a tame drop compared to the likes of the Nike Alphafly, Saucony Endorphin Elite and many other carbon-plated super shoes that feature drops of up to 8 mm. While those other shoes rely on a steep drop to create more of a rocker effect with each step, the Kipstorm Elite pulls this off with close to half of that same drop total at 5 mm. At no point in any runs in the Kipstorm Elite did I wish there was more of a drop, as it always felt like the 5 mm was more than enough to propel me and promote forward momentum.

The foam underfoot making up that stack in the midsole is Kiprun’s Fastech+ — a cushioning system that “provides a soft, dynamic ride that reduces fatigue while maintaining propulsion,” according to the company. Kiprun engineers say this foam is 25 percent softer than previous version they have produced, and it also boasts 21 percent more energy return.

Running in the Kipstorm Elite

This is a fast shoe. My first time wearing the Kipstorm Elite was on an easy five-miler. I was painfully aware that I was being that guy taking his carbon-plated shoes on an easy run, but I was too keen and really wanted to test them out. Right from the get-go, it was clear that my run was going to be faster than I had anticipated.

After the first kilometre, I looked at my watch and saw I had completed it in just over four minutes. This is right around 6:30 mile pace, and while this time wouldn’t win me any races, it was still a much quicker opening split than I had expected my watch to read. The time came as a surprise mainly because I was not trying to go that quickly at all. I had set out with eight-minute mile pace in mind, and although I knew early on that I was running faster than that, I did not think I was anywhere close to 6:30. The shoe simply made that pace easy, and it continued to feel like light work for the rest of that session.

After that run, I was very excited to take the Kipstorm Elites for a proper workout. A couple of days later, I did just that, and I was not disappointed. As I already touched on, the shoe has a great rocker feel that encourages you to go faster with each step. I have not had the opportunity to race in these shoes yet, but I did run a couple of solo time trials, and they helped me reach quick paces with relative ease, whereas other shoes would have left me struggling to hit and hold these times.

Kiprun had elite runners test the Kipstorm as they developed the shoe, and the consensus on the shoe was unanimous: it’s great. The team asked these elite runners if they would choose to run in the Kipstorm on race day, and “100 percent answered yes.”

As I said, I haven’t raced in the shoes yet, but that is definitely on my to-do list.

Maximal Comfort

I admit that, when I first pulled on the Kipstorm Elites, I was worried they wouldn’t be comfortable. They have a very snug sock-liner that made it tough to get on right away. (This could be a downside for T2 if you choose to use them at a triathlon, but I imagine you’ll have no problems if you simply loosen the laces before leaving transition on race day.) As I tried to maneuver my foot into the shoe, I thought it might be uncomfortably tight, but once it was on, I knew those worries were unfounded. The sock-liner is remarkably soft, and the snug knit upper hugs your foot comfortably.

As for the Fastech+ foam, this also adds to the shoe’s comfort. You might think that a shoe that weighs only 7.6 ounces would have to make sacrifices in the comfort or plush departments, but that is not the case at all with the Kipstorm Elite. I have taken it for hard runs, long runs and hard long runs, and at no point have I felt anything but comfortable. I’m not a marathon runner, but based on my experiences in these shoes, I have to imagine they would not only help you reach your time goals over 26.2 miles, but also that they would keep you running comfortably the whole way to the finish line.

The Kipstorm Conclusion

I have recommended these shoes to many of my friends. Everyone knows about Nike, Adidas and Asics, even if they’re not in the running world. More and more people are learning about Hokas and On Running shoes. Not enough know about Kiprun.

If you are in the market for a fast and comfortable race day shoe, the Kipstorm Elite is a must try. It will help you do what you want to do in fast training sessions and at races, and I believe it will even lift you to new levels. I haven’t looked back since trying out my first two pairs of Kiprun shoes, and I don’t think you will, either.

The post Could the Kipstorm Elite Be Your Next Race Day Shoe? first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

Throughout our collective running history, there have been a few landmark shoes that have been transformative to the industry and shaped the way nearly every company offered a shoe. From the original Nike Waffle Racer to the iconic Air Pegasus to the birth of the super shoe in the Vaporfly, these shoes wiped the slate clean on what a shoe could or should be doing for you.

Arguably, we don’t ever get to the Vaporfly and carbon-plated footwear without talking about that strange transitory period from minimalism to near-maximalism in shoes. When Born to Run released in 2009, nearly overnight every runner was interested in running barefoot. Well, nearly barefoot, anyways; everybody remembers the sudden surge in Vibram FiveFingers, right? It caught the entire industry by surprise, with manufacturers and retailers scrambling to try to bring out product that would fill consumer demand. Merrell was one of the first to respond, with their Glove series of shoes.

Some brands, though, took a slightly different approach. What if we took the geometry of minimal shoes, but added lightweight cushioning to the platform? And the first of those shoes was the original generation Saucony Kinvara, which hit store shelves in 2010. Weighing in at 7.7 ounces for men, it combined a low heel-toe offset geometry like minimal shoes, but with a plush (at the time) cushioning experience and an open, wide, airy upper.

It was, in many respects, a best of both worlds approach. And it worked — the Kinvara franchise is still here, 16 years later, and is still routinely one of Saucony’s best-selling shoes. I also think it’s somewhat fair to say that without the Kinvara, we don’t then get to HOKA, or then onward into the modern super shoe. We, as an industry, needed a shoe that was lightweight and really well cushioned. Because before the Kinvara, it was an either/or statement.

Of course, as time has evolved, so, too, has the Kinvara. Over time it got softer, with more weight, as more competition entered the fray. The latest generation, the 16, feels like a return to roots: it’s 7.3 ounces in a men’s sample size, with a new version of Saucony’s proprietary foam that promises a more responsive ride.

But there might be a shoe on the market that might be a better tribute to that original generation Kinvara than what even Saucony has come up with. Something that maintains lightweight, an airy forefoot, and may just disrupt things a little bit along the way. It’s Mount to Coast’s C1 — a so-called “super trainer built for ultra distances.”

The Tech Stuff

Mount to Coast is a newcomer to the running world, with their first prototype shoe only starting design in August 2022. The following November, their prototype (which eventually became the R1 racing shoe) won the ISPO Award for its design. Justin Montague then went on to wear a single pair of R1s on his way to shattering the stage and course records at URL JOGLE, an 854-mile multi-stage event. The R1 has continued to gain marketshare in the ultra marathoning world, setting world records for two days, six days, and at Backyard Ultras.

It’s not totally dissimilar from how HOKA was founded — they started with the specific needs of ultra marathoning and have then evolved that technology into other footwear. The team at Mount to Coast identified three particular areas of footwear that they felt needed addressing:

• Midsole degradation was forcing athletes to need multiple pairs of shoes during events.
• Upper fit needed to support foot swelling during the race, as otherwise athletes would be forced to select larger sizes or cutting the shoe upper, creating the potential for injury.
• Outsoles would last a few weeks, seeing significant wear long before the midsole had given out.

Mount to Coast first focused on foam. They turned to, of all places, car racing suspensions for a material that they dubbed ZeroSag. It’s supposedly anti-degrading and, according to Mount to Coast, “ensures consistent cushioning and support over hundreds of miles of running.” Logically, though, it makes sense; if it’s a material that can handle endurance racing like Le Mans, it probably can handle a human body for a few hundred miles.

On the C1, Mount to Coast uses two different blends of foam to provide the cushioning. Closest to the foot is called CircleCELL, and it’s their supercritical foam. If you’ve heard that term before, it’s what every super shoe on the market uses today. Mount to Coast claims it provides the energy return of a traditional PEBA-based foam, while providing double the running lifespan of PEBA. Underneath CircleCELL is a “rubberized EVA” bottom layer. If that sounds mostly like an exposed midsole as an outsole, I’d be inclined to agree with you.

For my money, the coolest innovation they have is what they call TUNEDFIT. It’s a dual lacing system that has its own adjustment for the forefoot and the midfoot. For the forefoot, it is a pull tag based system, which allows for quick adjustment on the fly. The midfoot features a more traditional lacing, with the now ubiquitous flat elastic laces. Paired with a relatively free formed upper, and it means you can fit more foot shapes into a Mount to Coast shoe, and be able to account for foot swelling and still allow for proper forefoot splay.

Specific to the C1, you find a manufacturer claimed 42mm stack height and a 6mm drop. It technically does not sit on the World Athletics approved list for footwear, so you’d wear it at your own risk for triathlon competition. The reported weight is 9.4 ounces in a sample size.

How Does it Run?

There’s a reason why I led off with all those Kinvara comparisons at the start, and it’s because of this: the C1 is, stride-for-stride, a shoe that woke from my memory banks. If you like the intersection of cushioning, responsiveness, and lightness, you came to the right place.

Slipping on the C1 for the first time, and there’s three things that I noticed. First is that TUNEDFIT lacing system. It’s an honest-to-God revelation that allows you to dial in fit without ever creating pinch points somewhere else. I like a very broad forefoot and aggressive midfoot wrap in my uppers. My wife, on the other hand, needs more depth over the top of her foot while retaining a wider forefoot. Each can be accommodated without much trouble, and it also doesn’t then require constant re-adjustment.

Once in, you notice one key difference between a Mount to Coast shoe and, say, a HOKA — you definitely are on top of the midsole, and not in it. That’s where my first Kinvara thought came from; it’s a decidedly different way to make a shoe platform. Typically, with so much midsole stack, that might make it unstable, but Mount to Coast uses a full contact patch on the outsole and plenty of width in the overall platform. This is a shoe that’s planted.

The arch height in here tends toward the lower side. I like that, though some may feel it is too flat for their taste. I did toss a pair of Superfeet in to see just how receptive the shoe was to an orthotic, and it seemed to seat itself quite well in there. The heel collar is soft touch, and there’s nothing for you to really rub on to create a blister in the upper. You can tell that the Mount to Coast team thought about wearing this shoe for a long time in one go.

Running in the C1 gives a shoe that I liken to the Goldilocks zone. It’s soft, not spongy. It’s bouncy, but not propulsive. It’s flexible without being flimsy. And it’s simply comfortable. It’s a shoe that tackles a mix of surfaces and terrain extremely well. It also feels much lighter than its published weight; I think this is in part because of the somewhat exposed outsole. The weight is just so close to your foot that you don’t really feel like you’re having to lug it around.

It’s also a shoe that I adored running up hills in. Although I respond extremely well to carbon plated shoes, one thing I have noticed is just how hard those shoes are to run in going uphill; it feels like you’re fighting them the entire time. The C1, meanwhile, simply wants to eat up the mileage without question. Now, to be clear, this isn’t a shoe that is going to make you run faster. You’re going to have to earn your pace in the C1. But it’s an enjoyable experience to do so in.

The only major criticism I have? The outsole traction here in the mossy, still somewhat boggy and sad Pacific Northwest does leave a little to be desired. It’s a shoe I’m a little more careful in if I’m running after a little bit of rain. But considering we’re about to enter the dry season, it probably won’t be an issue anymore.

And then there’s the price and availability. Mount to Coast is available online, but unfortunately their return policy is somewhat stringent; must be within 30 days and in new, unworn condition with all original packaging. If you’re thinking about them, I would highly recommend using their Retail Store Locator instead to try and find an outlet for purchase. The C1 will set you back $180. I think it’s worth it. But if we’re doing a Kinvara comparison, it’s $50 more than that. Your mileage may vary.

The post The Mount to Coast C1 is an Original Generation Saucony Kinvara for the Modern Age first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

And then, of course, there was this past weekend in London, where Sabastian Sawe and Yomif Kejelcha smashed through the two hour window for the marathon. Sawe set the new world record, running an astonishing 1:59:30; Kejelcha followed a mere eleven seconds later. They did it wearing the $500 Adidas Adizero Adios Pro Evo 3 – the latest and greatest version of the three-stripe brand’s super shoe.

It has been an arms race with shoes for the past decade. Nearly every brand has some staple racing shoe that follows along the formula that Nike innovated with the Vaporfly: light but rebounding foam; carbon-plate; upper that holds you to it as best as it can. And by every brand, I quite literally mean it; new brands are sometimes starting with their racing shoe and then moving to the everyday footwear. I’m in the process of testing a couple of pairs from Mount to Coast, where innovation started in their racing platforms before moving to their training shoes.

But is that innovation coming at a price? According to a lawsuit filed by two-time world champion and four-time NCAA champion Abby Steiner, the answer is yes — that price can be catastrophic injury.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Abby Steiner, CSCS (@abby_steiner)

Steiner, who won gold at the 2022 World Athletics Championships as part of the 4 x 100 and 4 x 400 relay teams, filed suit against Puma and its subsidiaries on Friday, April 24th, in Massachusetts Superior Court. The suit alleges that Steiner was “seriously injured by products designed, engineered, tested, developed, manufactured, advertised, marketed, promoted, imported, sold and distributed” by Puma. Specifically, the suit calls out “running shoes that had carbon fiber plate…and/or NITROFOAM…technology.” The suit gives examples as the Deviate Nitro Elite 2 and 3, the evoSpeed Tokyo Nitro, and the evoSpeed Tokyo Nitro 400M.

The suit alleges that Puma was “aware that the…shoes had defects that made them unsafe, unreasonably dangerous, defective and capable of causing injury and harm to consumers during ordinary, anticipated and foreseeable uses” and that they were under obligation to report these defects to the U.S. Consumer Products Safety Commission.

Steiner signed with Puma following her breakout 2022 campaign, where she earned the double gold in relays at the world championships. She’d also taken two golds at the NCAA Championships that year, and added another win in the 200 meters at the USA Outdoor Track and Field Championships. The deal was reported to be valued at the time in the vicinity of $2 million.

Shortly thereafter the signing with Puma, Steiner suffered her first foot injury and surgery. She attempted a return for the 2024 Olympic Trials, where she would finish sixth. Shortly thereafter, though, she would undergo additional surgeries for bone a torn Achilles, a Haglund’s deformity, and other injuries. The suit alleges that “her use of the Puma Shoes for training and in competition” resulted in “severe and permanent injuries resulting in multiple surgeries, rehabilitations, and recovery.”

The suit cites eleven different factors that make Puma’s shoes defective. They are:

• “They alter the biomechanics of runners predisposing them to risk, injury and harm;
• They alter the manner in which the stresses of running impacts the human body;
• They cause bone stress injuries;
• They increase the risk of suffering injury, harm and damage;
• They cause extreme, abnormal and irregular stresses and strain on the body and feet of runners;
• They change a person’s foot and ankle mechanics resulting in an increased risk of injury, harm and damage;
• They cause extreme strain and stresses on the feet, bones and connective tissue in the feet;
• They cause fractures, stress fractures, inflammation, the development of bone spurs, Haglund’s and other injuries;
• Any alleged benefits of their design are outweighed by the risks and dangers associated with the design;
• Safer alternative designs existed that do not present the same risks associated with the Puma shoes; and
• The likelihood that runners were aware of the risks associated with the…design is low given they were designed, developed, marketed, promoted, advertised and sold to be appropriate for running and had no warning or indication these risks existed…”

Steiner is the largest name to have sued a shoe company over their carbon-plated footwear. Former Division I athlete Heather Cerney sued Nike in November, alleging injury over her use of that brand’s AlphaFly shoe. That case was referred to private alternative dispute resolution in February of this year, with a trial date set for May 10th, 2027 if a resolution is not otherwise reached.

The post Are We In the “Find Out” Phase of Super Shoes? first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

Remember how, in the mid-2010s, Skechers went from being something of an unknown brand in the running world to a company that actually made good running shoes that could lift you to personal bests? Skechers was to running what Buick is to cars — their ads were always trying to convince the younger generation that their products weren’t only for senior citizens. Unlike Buick (which I still think of solely as a car for grandparents), Skechers climbed out of that hole, eventually finding decent success with serious runners.

The brand teamed up with legit stars of the sport, like Meb Keflezighi (who won the 2014 Boston Marathon in Skechers), world championship silver medallist Kara Goucher and 17-time NCAA champion Edward Cheserek (whose surname made him a near-perfect Skechers-signee, as it is almost a complete anagram of the company name). Skechers also made waves in the world of triathlon, as the likes of Lionel Sanders and Lucy Charles-Barclay — among other top pros — wore them in IRONMAN-winning performances around the world.

Then Skechers sort of disappeared from running for a while. The company has still been making running shoes, but in recent years, it seemed to put more focus on other lines, like lifestyle, golf and even pickleball.

In late 2025, I got the chance to speak with some Skechers team members who said the company was eager to dive back into the running space as seriously as it had been a few years ago. They pointed me to a few of their latest models, including the Skechers Aero Tempo, a “high-performance race day shoe” that they were excited to share. I was equally excited to test the Aero Tempo out, but I was sorely disappointed just a few steps into my first run. Unfortunately, my opinion on the shoe didn’t improve much from there, and after many miles logged in the Aero Tempo, I have to say I would not be recommending it to anyone looking for a personal best at their next race.

Aero Tempo Specs

• Weight: 8.5 oz (U.S. men’s size 9), 7.6 oz (U.S. women’s size 7)
• Drop: 4 mm
• Stack Height: 37mm (heel) / 33 mm (forefoot)
• Price: US$160

The Aero Tempo specs and design all look great. The shoes are not too heavy at 8.5 ounces for a men’s size 9 and 7.6 ounces for women’s size 7. They don’t have the biggest drop, but their rocker design and carbon plate are designed to offer plenty of speed. The Goodyear rubber outsole offers great traction and durability. The midsole is listed as being lightweight and highly cushioned.

All of that looks great — on paper. When I took them for a run, however, I didn’t feel like this design delivered the fast and comfortable ride that it promised. Let’s get into the positives and negatives I experienced during my runs in the Aero Tempo.

The Pros of the Aero Tempo

My favourite feature on these Skechers is the upper and sock-liner. The upper has a lightweight TPU makeup with the company’s HyperBurst Pro sock-liner. This was very comfortable, and even on a couple of runs for which I wore shorter socks, I didn’t experience any rubbing or irritation. The shoe was snug, but not too tight, and the mesh upper provided nice breathability.

If you like a stiff ride in your running shoes, the Aero Tempo could be the shoe for you. Personally, I did not enjoy this feel from the shoe (more on that in a bit), but there are runners out there who are not fans of the ultra-plush options on the market today. It does seem like that is where most companies are headed with their running shoes — maxing out plushness and trying to deliver on energy return and bounce at the same time. Skechers delivers a stiffer option with this model, and it could be exactly what you’re looking for.

Another positive is the shoe’s price. At US$160, this is a great deal for a carbon-plated racing shoe. So many other brands charge well over $200 for their racing shoes and carbon plate technology, so if you are in the market for a more budget-friendly race shoe, the Skechers Aero Tempo could be for you. Before you jump at this deal, though, consider the shoe’s cons.

The Cons of the Aero Tempo

I did not like running in these shoes. To be fair, I have seen other reviews in which people said they loved the Aero Tempo, so if the lower price point and racing design intrigue you, they very well could be worth testing out. Based on my experience running in them, however, I would encourage you to try them in-store for more than just a few steps — a run shop with a treadmill would be ideal.

My biggest complaint with the shoes is that they are not comfortable. The upper is great, but nothing in the midsole and lower made me want to go for another run in these shoes. Skechers says the carbon plate provides a “high stiffness-to-weight ratio,” which is often the case with carbon-plated shoes. However, Skechers also says this stiffness “promotes stability and next-level energy return,” which I did not find at all in any of my runs.

Every stride that I took in these shoes felt dead as soon as my foot made contact with the ground. Something in the midsole — the HyperBurst cushioning, or the carbon plate, or the combo of the two — both sucked the energy out of each step and delivered a bit of a jarring shot of impact into my feet and legs. While most shoes will give you a spring of energy return with each step, it felt like with the Aero Tempo, all of that energy was lost in the ground.

This was a stark contrast with other shoes I have reviewed recently — all of which are trainers that are not made specifically for racing. Personally, I would much rather race in any of those training shoes than in the Skechers Aero Tempo. Not only would they be more comfortable, but I also think they would be faster at baseline.

The lack of spring and responsiveness in the Aero Tempo means you are losing any momentum you might build throughout each stride. The stiff impact you feel with every step will eventually take its toll on your body, and I have to imagine that any race longer than a 10K is going to be unpleasant in these shoes. The Aero Tempo even felt heavier than the other shoes I have worn recently (despite being a full one or even two ounces lighter).

Conclusion

I wanted to like these Skechers. I won a pair of Skechers trainers back in 2017 at a triathlon, and I ran those shoes into the ground. I loved them, and when I heard that the company was putting more emphasis on the running and performance line again, I was very keen to fall back in love with the brand.

Sadly, that didn’t happen. I have another Skechers shoe — the brand new Aero Razor — that I have yet to test out. Perhaps that will be the shoe that convinces me that the company is, in fact, back to compete in the running game and square up against the likes of Nike, Hoka, Asics and so on. Based on the Aero Tempo, though, I have to say that I think Skechers should stick to lifestyle, golf and even pickleball shoes instead.

The post Is the Skechers Aero Tempo Going to Be Your New Favorite Shoe? Probably Not. first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

Kenyans John Korir and Sharon Lokedi took the wins at the 130th Boston Marathon on Monday, both defending their titles from 2025. Korir secured the win thanks to a blazing fast closing quarter, breaking the tape in a new course record of 2:01:52. Lokedi was unable to break her own course record, but still posted the second-fastest time in Boston Marathon history on her way to her 2:18:51 win. In the wheelchair races, Great Britain’s Eden Rainbow-Cooper grabbed her second title in Boston after her win in 2024, while Swiss legend Marcel Hug won for the ninth time at the storied race.

Korir’s Course Record

As is often the case at the world’s biggest marathons, there wasn’t too much separation in the opening miles of the men’s race on Monday. A group of 25 men cruised through the 5K checkpoint around 14:20. American CJ Albertson (the current 50K world record holder) led that pack, followed closely by Korir, his fellow Kenyan and former Boston Marathon champion Benson Kipruto (he won the race in 2021) and more big names.

A few miles later, at the 10 km checkpoint, that big group was still pretty much together. The leaders passed through 10 km in 29:02, averaging 4:40 per mile for the first quarter of the race. Six miles later, at the 20 km mark, the group of more than 20 men had dwindled to seven, and over the next mile, Ethiopia’s Lemi Berhanu (the 2016 champion in Boston) put in a surge to break away from his competitors. Berhanu passed halfway with a seven-second lead over the next-closest runners.

That gap didn’t last too long, as the chasers reeled Berhanu in. For a few minutes, the group remained together, but then it was Ethiopian Mikesa Mengesha’s turn to try for a breakaway. Mengesha (winner of the 2024 Berlin Marathon) did a better job than his compatriot while at the front of the race, opening up a gap of 12 seconds over the first chase group (which had shrunk to six men).

Mengesha ran solo for a little over three miles, steadily holding that 12-second gap, but then Kenya’s John Korir (the 2025 Boston Marathon champion) laid down an incredible surge, first catching and then blowing by his Ethiopian competitor. Over the course of a bit more than a mile, Korir had moved from 12 seconds back to six seconds ahead, and that gap only continued to grow for the rest of the race.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by World Athletics (@worldathletics)

Korir flew along the course toward the finish line for the closing six miles, showing his experience after last year’s win. At 23 miles, he was 32 seconds ahead of Kipruto and Tanzania’s Alphonce Felix Simbu (who finished second to Korir last year in Boston), who were battling for second place. Further back, Mengesha had faded hard, dropping to more than 90 seconds behind the lead.

With a mile to go, Korir’s lead had grown to 45 seconds. Despite having no one nearby to push him, Korir still closed out the marathon at a blistering pace, rocketing to the finish line in 2:01:52 to shatter the previous course record of 2:03:02. Further back, the race for second was tight to the end, with Simbu ultimately getting the better of Kipruto to finish runner-up for the second straight year. He crossed the line in 2:02:47, three seconds ahead of Kipruto. All three podium finishers broke the course record.

The top American was Zouhair Talbi, who crossed the line in fifth place in 2:03:45.

Lokedi Goes Back to Back

Like the men’s race, there was a large group of women sharing the lead from the start, with 19 passing through 5 km together in 16:43. There were many Americans in the mix at that point, including Sara Hall and Emily Sisson. Also running comfortably in that group was the reigning champion in Boston, Sharon Lokedi, who ran a course record of 2:17:22 in 2025.

After six miles, those 19 women were still running in a tight pack, and over the next chunk of racing up to the half-marathon checkpoint, only a few women fell off the pace. There were many Americans still in that lead group, and while the crowds lining the course were cheering them on in the hopes of seeing the first home-soil champion since Des Linden’s win in 2018, it really felt like it was only a matter of time before Lokedi and her fellow Kenyan’s dropped the hammer.

Over the course of the next five miles, several more women dropped off the lead pace, leaving nine athletes running shoulder to shoulder. Jess McClain and Annie Frisbie were the lone Americans left in the hunt for the podium, as Hall and Sisson had faded outside the top 10.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Boston Marathon (@bostonmarathon)

Within the next couple of miles, any hope for an American win had disappeared, with McClain dropping to seventh place. Soon enough, it was clear that a Kenyan would win the race, with Lokedi leading the way alongside two-time World Cross-Country champion Irine Cheptai and Loice Chemnung.

In the end, Lokedi’s experience and grit made the difference. With a little over three miles to go, she gapped her compatriots and ran to the front of the race. With one mile to the line, she was 30 seconds clear of second place, and she broke the tape in 2:18:51.

Chemnung held on for second place (her biggest result to date) in 2:19:35. Although Cheptai had been in a great position to reach the podium with only a few miles to go, she slowed considerably near the end of the race and dropped to sixth, opening the door for Mary Ngugi-Cooper to slot into third and round out an all-Kenyan podium.

McClain finished in fifth place in 2:20:49, followed by three more American women in the top 10 (Frisbie, Sisson and Carrie Ellwood finished eighth, ninth and 10th).

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by World Athletics (@worldathletics)

Hug and Rainbow-Cooper Repeat

The first athletes across the line were in the wheelchair race. Hug entered the race as a top favourite, and he wasted no time showing spectators why. After six miles of racing, he had a minute over second place. At the half-marathon mark, he was three minutes clear of the next athlete.

That gap continued to grow and grow and grow until he finally hit the line, stopping the clock in 1:16:06 and finishing more than six minutes ahead of second-place Daniel Romanchuk of the U.S. (Romanchuk is the only athlete not named Marcel Hug to win the men’s wheelchair race in Boston in the past decade.) Third place went to Paralympic triathlon champion Jetze Plat of the Netherlands.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Boston Marathon (@bostonmarathon)

The women’s race was much closer than the men’s, but it could hardly be considered tight. Like Hug, Rainbow-Cooper jumped to an early lead and never looked back. Six miles into the race, she had a lead of 43 seconds over second-place Catherine Debrunner of Switzeralnd. Over the next 15 miles, that jumped up to a gap of more than a minute.

Rainbow-Cooper finished strong, boosting her lead to two minutes before breaking the tape in 1:30:51. Debrunner held on for second, followed by five-time Boston champion Tatyana McFadden, who was almost six minutes back in third.

The post John Korir, Sharon Lokedi Defend Boston Marathon Crowns first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

The running world has seen a lot of big stories in recent days. Olympic triathlon gold medallists Cassandre Beaugrand of France and Great Britain’s Alex Yee made headlines with some extracurricular fun outside of multi-sport racing, a world record came oh-so close to falling, and Wicked star Cynthia Erivo announced a lofty goal for this month’s London Marathon. We’ve got all that and more with a look at one of the biggest weeks of running news so far in 2026.

Beaugrand Sets French Record

Racing the Urban Trail de Lille in France on Saturday, Beaugrand added yet another accolade to her already impressive resume, setting a new French 10K record. She ran 30:52 in Lille, smashing the previous national best by eight seconds and becoming the first Frenchwoman to run under 31 minutes in the event. The result also puts her in the top 20 of all time among European women.

This is not the first national record that Beaugrand has run. Last year, coming off of the incredible 2024 season that saw her win Olympic gold and the WTCS world title, Beaugrand carried on her winning ways, breaking the French 5K record in February. Her time of 14:53 still stands more than a year later, making her a dual national record holder in a sport that is just one-third of her primary focus.

Gressier’s World Record Attempt

Beaugrand’s compatriot Jimmy Gressier also raced the Urban Trail de Lille on Saturday. Unlike Beaugrand, Gressier (the 2025 10,000m world champion) opted for the shorter option on the day, racing the 5K. The race was billed as an official world record attempt for the Frenchman as he aimed to beat the fastest 5K in history: Ethiopian Berihu Aregawi’s 12:49 best from 2021.

Gressier had a stellar performance in Lille, coming extremely close to the world record. All alone in first place, he charged down the finishing straight to the line, breaking the tape just two seconds shy of Aregawi’s mark. It was a valiant effort and, although Gressier missed the world record, his new PB of 12:51 shattered the European best by 14 seconds, and it puts him in a tie with Uganda’s Joshua Cheptegei (the 5,000m and 10,000m world record holder) for the third-fastest 5K of all time.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by World Athletics (@worldathletics)

Yee’s Back in London

Last April, Yee made his marathon debut with a 2:11:08 showing in London. At the end of 2025, racing in Valencia, he ran the second-fastest marathon in British history (behind only distance-running legend Mo Farah), posting an amazing time of 2:06:38. This was all in a quick year away from triathlon, and although Yee is ready to return to the WTCS this season, he has announced that he won’t be leaving the marathon completely behind just yet.

In a press release from the London Marathon, organizers listed Yee as a pacer for this year’s race. Yee will be pacing the second elite group in London, and he will be present specifically to lead his fellow Brit, Emile Cairess.

Cairess paced Yee in Valencia last year, helping the triathlete fly by him in the record books. (Up until Yee’s 2:06 performance, Cairess was the second-fastest Brit in history with a PB of 2:06:46. He is now third behind Farah and Yee). Cairess finished fourth at the 2024 Olympic marathon in Paris, and he will be looking for another big performance in London on April 26.

“Emile is a great runner, and he was a massive help to me at last year’s Valencia Marathon, both during my training block beforehand and pacing on the day,” Yee said in the London Marathon press release. “My hope is that I can repay him for that help by supporting him as much as I can [this year] and play some part in helping him achieve his ambitions.”

Yee was slated to race in Abu Dhabi in late March at the kick-off of the 2026 World Triathlon Championship Series, but the event was postponed due to the war in Iran. His WTCS season opener will have to wait a bit longer with the announcement of his pacing duties, as WTCS Samarkand in Uzbekistan is the same weekend as the London Marathon. The next WTCS event on the calendar after London is in Yokohama on May 16.

Cynthia Erivo Eyes London

Many celebrities have dipped their toes into the world of running, but for most, it’s just a quick detour into endurance sports before they return to their singing, acting or whatever else they do for a day job. For Erivo, once wasn’t enough.

In 2016, the Wicked star ran the New York City Marathon in 3:57:07. In 2022, she ran her hometown race, the London Marathon, beating her personal best by more than 20 minutes and crossing the line in 3:35:36. Now, as she recently told Runner’s World, she is planning a return to the London Marathon with a big goal: 3:15.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Cynthia Erivo (@cynthiaerivo)

This will be a huge PB if she can pull it off, and it would be among the fastest marathon times ever run by a celebrity — man or woman. To make the attempt even more impressive, Erivo is juggling training while performing a one-woman show of Dracula in London’s West End — a production in which she plays 23 different roles. The play runs through May, so Erivo will have very little recovery time after her marathon on April 26, as she is set to return to the stage the following day.

The post A Busy Week in Running: Beaugrand and Yee Hit the Road, World Record Under Attack and Wicked Marathon News first appeared on Slowtwitch News.