The Race
Who won the men's race at the 2026 London Marathon?
Sabastian Sawe (Kenya).
What is the plate inside the shoe made of?
Carbon (a curved carbon plate).
Which company made the shoe?
Adidas.
What two-word phrase does Lieberman use to describe the sub-2 record?
Hint : "...the shoes have had a major effect on the ability to do it. This is [_____ _______] ... "
Technology-assisted
What was Sabastian Sawe's winning time?
1:59:30.
The article says the shoe's sole makes it look like the bottom of what?
A rocking chair.
Besides its labs in Germany, where did Adidas test the shoe?
High-altitude camps in Kenya and Ethiopia.
Wilkins predicts that soon, if you're not running under 2 hours, you won't be considered what?
Hint : "...you’re no longer in the [___] kind of category. "
Elite.
Name the other two runners who set huge times in London, and what all three had in common.
Yomif Kejelcha (2nd, 1:59:41) and Tigist Assefa (women's record, 2:15:41).
All three wore the Adidas Adizero Adios Pro Evo 3.
Why does running on your forefoot save energy compared to landing on your heel?
Landing on your heel can push you backward, so you waste energy getting moving forward again. The curved plate keeps you on your forefoot.
The article describes shoe companies as being at war. Who's fighting, and over what?
Athletic wear companies, racing to design shoes that make long-distance runners faster.
Name one course concept this issue connects to, and use something from the article to explain it.
Any one: fair play and ethics (a technology-assisted record), commercialization (the shoe company war, Adidas testing with athletes), equity and access (only runners with the newest shoe get the boost).
Three runners set record-level times in one race, all in the same brand-new shoe. Does that prove the shoe matters more than the runner?
Shoe side: same new shoe, three huge times, hard to call that luck. Runner side: Wilkins says runners are faster because of gear AND belief AND training. Prompt: would they have done it in regular sneakers?
Lieberman estimates the newest shoes save 4 to 6% of your energy per stride. If the shoe is doing that much, is the athlete still the one doing the work?
Yes: they still ran a whole marathon at record pace, the shoe only gives back energy they put in. No: Lieberman describes it as adding a spring to your foot. Prompt: is that different from an e-bike? Why?
Adidas tested the shoe at camps in Kenya and Ethiopia, and the top three were Kenyan and Ethiopian runners in Adidas. If you're sponsored by a different brand, was that a fair race?
Unfair: those runners got a shoe built and tested with athletes like them. Fair: every company works with its own athletes, and they're all in the same race to make faster shoes. Prompt: should everyone in a race get access to the same shoes?
Wilkins says times will keep dropping as technology and training improve. Should there be a limit on how much a shoe can help, or should tech keep going?
Limit it: otherwise records turn into whose shoe is best. Let it go: faster times grow the sport, and every era had better gear than the last. Prompt: who should decide the limit, the athletes, the companies, or the sport's governing body?
Lieberman compares the record to Roger Bannister's first sub-4-minute mile in 1954 and says it isn't really the same achievement. Is he right?
Agree: Bannister had no tech help, and Lieberman calls this record technology-assisted. Disagree: Lieberman also says these athletes are exceptional, and training improved for everyone. Prompt: should records from different eras even be compared?
Lieberman says nobody can tell how much of the improvement is the shoe versus better training and nutrition. Does that make the shoe fair, or is it a reason to be suspicious?
Fair: you can't punish something you can't prove, and training and nutrition are help too. Suspicious: he also says study after study shows these shoes make people faster.
Prompt: is a shoe different from a training plan because you buy it instead of earning it?
Who benefits most from a sub-2 marathon: the athlete, Adidas, or the sport?
Athlete: the record and the history. Adidas: the article opens by talking about the shoes, not just the runners. The sport: Wilkins says the bar has been changed for good. Prompt: Adidas says it measured details down to the nanogram. Is a record that tied to a product still fully the athlete's?
Where is the line between innovation and an unfair advantage? Give a rule that would tell you when gear has gone too far.
Open. Good answers name a test, like "if the gear does the work instead of the athlete" or "if not everyone can get it." Use this as your discussion closer.