journal article·2023-10-26Open access

A Review of the Potential Effects of the World Athletics Stack Height Regulation on the Footwear Function and Running Performance

Santiago A. Ruiz-Alias, Diego Jaén-Carrillo, Luis Enrique Roche-Seruendo, Alejandro Pérez-Castilla, Víctor M. Soto-Hermoso, Felipe García-Pinillos

Applied Sciences· Volume 13· Issue 21

Abstract

This review aims to synthesize and discuss the potential effects of a stack height modification on the function of the different footwear features and their effects on running performance. Peer-reviewed studies were identified from electronic databases using a structured keyword search and a screening process. Complementary sources were used to illustrate and discuss the current racing footwear constructions. With regard to the shoe mass, it is suggested that a stack height difference of 20 mm could induce a meaningful effect on performance. With respect to the midsole properties, it seems that reducing the stack height does not alter the energy returned, given that the lower midsole deformation is counteracted with an increased stiffness. However, it should be noted that this might affect the timing of the midsole deformation and restitution, which should be matched with the mid and propulsive stance phases. Lastly, the curved geometry of the forefoot sole needed to create the teeter-totter effect could be affected by the stack height reduction. However, current racing footwear designs have counteracted this modification by proximately placing the rocker axis and increasing the toe spring.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies · Sports Performance and Training · Sports injuries and prevention

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Physical Education and Sport, University of Granada, Carretera de Alfacar s/n, 18011 Granada, Spain

Sport and Health University Research Center (iMUDS), University of Granada, C/. Menéndez Pelayo 32, 18016 Granada, Spain

Department of Sport Science, University of Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria

Faculty of Health Sciences, Campus Universitario, University of San Jorge, Auotv A23 km 299, 50830 Villanueva de Gállego Zaragoza, Spain

Department of Education, Faculty of Education Sciences, University of Almería, 04120 Almería, Spain

SPORT Research Group (CTS-1024), CERNEP Research Center, University of Almería, 04120 Almería, Spain

Department of Physical Education, Sport and Recreation, Universidad de La Frontera, Temuco 01145, Chile

Funding

Spanish Ministry of Universities

References (41)

Show source-provided references
1. The two-hour marathon: Who and when?10.1152/japplphysiol.00563.2010 ↗
2. Effect of advanced shoe technology on the evolution of road race times in male and female elite runners10.3389/fspor.2021.653173 ↗
3. Physiological demands of running at 2-hour marathon race pace10.1152/japplphysiol.00647.2020 ↗
4. Performance enhancement: What are the physiological limits?10.1152/physiol.00052.2014 ↗
5. Critical power: An important fatigue threshold in exercise physiology10.1249/MSS.0000000000000939 ↗
6. A comparison of the energetic cost of running in marathon racing shoes10.1007/s40279-017-0811-2 ↗
7. Effects of course design (curves and elevation undulations) on marathon running performance: A comparison of Breaking 2 in Monza and the INEOS 1:59 Challenge in Vienna10.1080/02640414.2020.1843820 ↗
8. Impact of advanced footwear technology on elite men’s in the evolution of road race performance10.1080/02640414.2023.2183103 ↗
9. World Athletics (2023, September 01). Technical Rules. Available online: https://www.worldathletics.org/about-iaaf/documents/book-of-rules.
10. Is it the shoes? A simple proposal for regulating footwear in road running10.1136/bjsports-2018-100480 ↗
11. No evidence of a performance advantage attributable to midsole thickness10.1080/19424280.2019.1690327 ↗
12. More isn’t always better10.1080/19424280.2019.1710579 ↗
13. Effects of running shoe construction on performance in long distance running10.1080/19424280.2020.1778799 ↗
14. Teeter-totter effect: A new mechanism to understand shoe-related improvements in long-distance running10.1136/bjsports-2020-102550 ↗
15. Influence of advanced shoe technology on the top 100 annual performances in men’s marathon from 2015 to 201910.1038/s41598-021-01807-0 ↗
16. Honert, E.C., Mohr, M., Lam, W.K., and Nigg, S. (2020). Shoe feature recommendations for different running levels: A Delphi study. PLoS ONE, 15.10.1371/journal.pone.0236047 ↗
17. The influence of footwear midsole thickness on running biomechanics and running economy in female and male runners10.1080/19424280.2023.2218321 ↗
18. Effects of midsole stack height and foam on the metabolic cost of running10.1080/19424280.2023.2202942 ↗
19. Influence of shoe mass on performance and running economy in trained runners10.3389/fphys.2020.573660 ↗
20. Metabolic cost of running barefoot versus shod: Is lighter better?10.1249/MSS.0b013e3182514a88 ↗
21. Altered running economy directly translates to altered distance-running performance10.1249/MSS.0000000000001012 ↗
22. Jakob-Andersen, J. (2023, August 24). Runrepeat. Available online: https://runrepeat.com/.
23. A test of the metabolic cost of cushioning hypothesis during unshod and shod running10.1249/MSS.0b013e3182a63b81 ↗
24. Running shoe cushioning properties can influence oxygen consumption10.1080/19424280.2013.799566 ↗
25. A comparison of running economy across seven highly cushioned racing shoes with carbon-fibre plates10.1080/19424280.2022.2038691 ↗
26. Puig-Diví, A., Escalona-Marfil, C., Padullés-Riu, J.M., Busquets, A., Padullés-Chando, X., and Marcos-Ruiz, D. (2019). Validity and reliability of the Kinovea program in obtaining angles and distances using coordinates in 4 perspectives. PLoS ONE, 14.10.1371/journal.pone.0216448 ↗
27. Biomechanical and orthopedic concepts in sport shoe construction10.1249/00005768-199205000-00014 ↗
28. Energy aspects associated with sport shoes10.1055/s-2000-7867 ↗
29. Gray, A., Andrews, M., Waldron, M., and Jenkins, D. (Sports Biomech., 2020). A model for calculating the mechanical demands of overground running, Sports Biomech., Online ahead of print.10.1080/14763141.2020.1795238 ↗
30. Creating footwear for performance running
31. Effect of the upward curvature of toe springs on walking biomechanics in humans10.1038/s41598-020-71247-9 ↗
32. The foot’s arch and the energetics of human locomotion10.1038/srep19403 ↗
33. The effect of footwear on running performance and running economy in distance runners10.1007/s40279-014-0283-6 ↗
34. A systematic review of the effect of running shoes on running economy, performance and biomechanics: Analysis by brand and model10.1080/14763141.2022.2089589 ↗
35. Can we quantify the benefits of “super spikes” in track running?10.1007/s40279-022-01657-4 ↗
36. Running economy: Measurement, norms, and determining factors10.1186/s40798-015-0007-y ↗
37. Influence of midsole bending stiffness on joint energy and jump height performance10.1097/00005768-200002000-00032 ↗
38. Athletics: Increased shoe bending stiffness increases sprint performance10.1080/14763140408522830 ↗
39. Variability in Running Economy of Kenyan World-Class and European Amateur Male Runners with Advanced Footwear Running Technology: Experimental and Meta-analysis Results10.1007/s40279-023-01816-1 ↗
40. Running shoes and running injuries: Myth busting and a proposal for two new paradigms: ‘Preferred movement path’ and ‘comfort filter’10.1136/bjsports-2015-095054 ↗
41. Forefoot bending stiffness, running economy and kinematics during overground running10.1080/19424280.2015.1130754 ↗