According to the statistics provided by my Garmin Vivoactive 4s, in 2022 I ran 1467 km (666 km below the 5 minutes / km threshold). This corresponds to a 28 km weekly and a 122 km monthly mileage. My season bests in 2022 are: 1 km - 3'36", 5 km - 20'50", 10 km - 45'46".
Here is the all-time recap, since 2011 (the year when I started running):
Here is the list of my performances on the 10 Km distance in 2022:
18 December: 45'46" (4'35"/km)
26 July: 46'14" (4'37"/km)
3 July: 47'34" (4'45"/km)
1 December: 47'59" (4'48"/km)
21 October: 48'11" (4'49"/km)
24 March: 48'31" (4'51"/km)
22 July: 48'36" (4'52"/km)
29 April: 48'37 (4'52"/km)
11 August: 48'52" (4'53"/km)
23 November: 48'53" (4'53"/km)
26 February: 50'00" (5'00"/km)
16 January: 50'00" (5'00"/km)
I have to admit it: I am sick and tired of spending hundreds of bucks (even if I've never spent more than 80 € for a pair of "technical" shoes) for the "big brands". We all know very well that a large part of that money covers marketing, shipping, insurance, distribution, design costs. At the end of the day, the "real" cost of a pair of Nike or Adidas shoes is around 15 €. Furthermore, I am not keen at encouraging the production strategy of these companies, which force their employees to work under stressful conditions over long and low-paid shifts. I'm not a marketing expert, but I would much prefer to give my money to a company based in my region (or at least in Europe), which ensures human working conditions for its employees and reduces shipping costs (and thus: prices) by distributing its products regionally. Ok, I guess that the head of this company would never become a millionaire...
Back to the topic of this post, today I've received a pair of Adidas Supernova M shoes, which I ordered from "Sportamore" website (don't let the name deceive you: the seat is not in Neaples, it's in Sweden!). In spite of the distance, the shoes have been delivered in less than 3 days. I had tried a similar version (Supernova Unite) at the Decathlon local shop, to be sure that they were true to size (I ordered a US 9,5 size, which corresponds to 43 1/3, at least according to Adidas size chart). The site offered a white model at a cost of 30 € plus 5 € shipping costs, whereas Decathlon currently sells an "upgraded" model (meaning: with a wider "boost" element on the midsole) at 65 € with a 50% [fake] Black Friday discount (the full prize should be 130 € - crazy!).
This afternoon I tested them with a 12 km easy run (4'50" / km) and here are my first impressions:
- compared to the Peg34, they feel a little bit "stiffer", most of all in the forefoot. This is probably due to the shape of the sole, which is larger and flat, whereas the Nike one is shaped according to the foot. Anyway, this Adidas doesn't have the 2 Zoom units, and I could clearly perceive that; instead, the ammortisation & reactivity should be ensured by a combination of a Boost element under the heel and the Bounce segment on the forefoot. My impression: I run twenty 500m-rings, the first 250 meters with forefoot running and the last 250 meter leaning the whole foot on the ground, and I can say that the Boost is satisfactory and the Bounce is decent. Test passed successfully!
- In spite of these differences, the shoe is comfortable, thanks to the padding around the ankle and a soft insole (made with recycled material). The minimalistic tongue and mesh (similar to the Streak 6, but not that light) don't reduce comfort and stability. Adidas official website says they weight 320 g, but they feel somehow lighter than the Peg34 (295 g), which are for sure bulkier inside (due to more padding).
- Due to the uneven sole consumption (I am a pronator), during the last runs I had with the Peg34 I started suffering from backache while running. With these brand new Adidas my running experience was a real pleasure. On the other hand, I already can perceive signs of deterioration on the rubber sole. Hopefully it won't wear out so quickly (on a post written by a customer, I read that their life expectancy is around 700 km).
- I confirm the reviews I read and heard on the pace you can hold with these shoes: pretty stable and reactive when I kept a 4'45" - 5'00" pace, less performing when I pushed them beyond the 4'30" limit. But I still have 3 Nike Streak pairs for that :)
All in all, I can say I am satisfied, most of all considering the price-quality ratio: I would have never spent 100 and more bucks for the new model of the Nike Pegasus this round. Of course, my evaluation of the Supernova M will be updated regularly. Only time will tell...
*** UPDATES: 100 KM TEST ***
This is my verdict after 100 km covered with the Adidas Supernova M:
The "Adis" are quite comfortable and "soft"; however, as perceived by other runners who shared their comments online, I can feel a certain "stiffness" on the instep, more precisely on the spot where the tongue is fixed to the upper. This sensation tends to fade away after a few steps, though.
Another drawback is caused by the collar: even if it's quite padded, for reasons which still I have to understand, it scratched my left ankle (probably because I run clockwise when I do my interval training and running sessions around a square - this means that my left foot bend leftwards at every curve, and this could explain the contact between ankle and collar).
Yesterday, due to a rainy day which could have spoiled my brand-new white Supernova, I decided to brush up my old Pegasus and this gave me the chance to compare the two models. Surprisingly, I felt the Peg much more reactive, more comfortable and lighter than the Supernova. And I could feel again the difference when it comes to the Zoom units. However, I confirm the opinion I had when I first wear those shoes: the Peg are less ideal for speedy sessions, but they are more protective during long sessions or when the wheather is nasty.
Conclusions: in terms of quality, shape and comfort The Nike Pegasus 34 are superior than the Adidas Supernova, which I consider still a good pair of shoes for distances from 5K to 15K at a medium pace under good wheather conditions.
2 years ago, I started running with my Nike Pegasus 34, a pair of robust running shoes which I used mostly for my long and medium running (keeping a pace between 4:45 and 6:00 minutes per km). In the last 6 months, I rotated them with my Nike Streak 6 and I can say that this method ensured a longer life to both shoes. However, I think that now it's about time to put them on the shelf: after around 1100 km covered along 24 months, the outsole, especially in the right and central area, is totally worn out, not to mention on the front. I think that this might lead to injures, so I ordered a new pair of trainers for my longer sessions, which are due to arrive today. Looking forward to trying them on!
The upper and the whole shoes (laces, mesh, insoles, padding) are still in a very good condition, though. It is true that they are quite heavy, but their comfort, durability and resistence cannot be questioned.
There is no doubt about it: pizza & pasta are the best carbs and energy providers, at least here in the Medi-area. After a family dinner eating pizza and drinking beer (just a couple of glasses), and a spaghetti + omelette lunch, I hit the road at the end of the afternoon and improved my PB on the 5K distance by 11 seconds. The second good news is that the margin of improvement is wide: firstly, I didn't run on a ring, but on a bycicle path that now and then forced me to cross the road and lose some seconds; secondly, the weather was dramatically hot (30° at 20:00), due to the heatwave which has been affecting the whole Mediterraneum Sea since May. In more ideal track and weather conditions, there are chances to break the 20 minutes threshold. Here are the details of the performance:
Time: 20'43"
Laps and progression:
1 km 4:08; 2 km 4:00 (8:08); 3 km 4:12 (12:20); 4 km 4:16 (16:36); 5 km 4:07 (20:43)
Since 2016, on the day of my birthday (a few days earlier or later) I've been doing a 10k flat run to test my fitness status, which, woe me, should get worse over time. However, I was surprised when I noticed that my current performance is not worse than those registered along the last 7 years. I remember that in three occasions I skipped the test due to poor conditions or job duties. In a couple of cases, I had to postpone the run to 1 or 2 months. Here is a table that recaps my performances from 2016 to 2022.
|
YEAR |
DATE |
TIME |
|
2022 |
24 March |
48’30” |
|
2021 |
Postponed to
20 June |
49’50” |
|
2020 |
Postponed to
3 July |
47’39” |
|
2019 |
9 March |
49’15” |
|
2018 |
Skipped |
/ |
|
2017 |
28 March |
n.a. (< 50’) |
|
2016 |
11 March |
47’57” |
Since I've started running, I've been using cheap, simple devices with stopwatch function, costing up to 10 €. It was enough to keep track of my performances, but I always felt the need of something advanced, capable to provide extra details, such us calories burned during the run, GPS, altitude, heart beat and so on. Yes, out there there were many fitness trackers that would have met my needs, but I wanted a full-optional device. And finally I found it: the Garmin Vivoactive 4s, bought online at a cost of 179 € (actually I had a 100 € Decathlon voucher, but the French retailer sold it at 335 €!).
Here is a list of the good and not-that-good sides of my choice.
VERY GOOD
The Vivoactive 4s is also a MP3 player! I love running free, without carrying devices in my pockets and without feeling the uncomfortable wires of the earbuds around my arms. It's true, the setting of the wireless earphones gave me a hard time (I learned that I must disconnect the watch when I want to pair it with my earphones), but the game is worth the candle.
Another useful feature is the possibility to pay using the watch through Garmin Pay, without carrying the smartphone. I've never used it so far, but it is a great option in case of need or emergency (paying a taxi when injured, for example).
Very comfortable. After one week of "adaptation", now I wear it during the night and I feel as I have nothing on my wrist. It's indeed very light and the armband is soft. I am particularly happy of having chosen the small version, as it perfectly fits my wrist and the larger one would have looked "out of size" for sure.
One of the features I like most is the possibility to watch videos with the training (including fitnees and yoga sessions). This allows me to practice exercises without using a tutorial on a laptop, smartphone or tablet screen. The videos are clear, their definition is good and a gentle vibration informs you about the beginning and the end of a session. In addition to that, it is possible to customise your training sessions, including the running ones. I set a couple of training sessions which I am using constantly and I have to say that I am very satisfied.
It is possible to upload several additional widgets, watchfaces and apps. Some of them are for free and can be first downloaded on the laptop or smartphone, and then redirected to the smartwatch. So far, I've downloaded a couple of watchfaces (but I still prefer the standard one), a calculator and a very useful "emergency info" app, where I registered my name, phone number, emergency number and blood type.
The smartwatch can be paired with a smartphone, so I can receive notifications directly on the screen on my watch.
NOT SO GOOD
Honestly, I am a bit disappointed about the GPS, but this probably depends on the fact that my expectations were too high. I use to run around a ring near where I live, which is exactly 500 meters long (at least, this is what internet distance calculators say). Now, when I run slowly, the GPS (no matter which combination: Glonass or Galileo) confirms that distance, but when I run faster, it measures 20 or 30 meters more for each lap. If I run 5K, this means a 300-meter difference which messes up my potential records. I tried to install an application which counts each lap, detecting the exact starting spot, but 2 big drawbacks make it useless: the data of each lap (speed, time) are not displayed and stored; and often the lap is not counted! I will try different combinations and strategies, but at the end of the day I think I will resort to use the "lap button" manually.
All in all, the GPS is not that useful and reliable in a ring, but it can be handy if used for the "Sunday long run", especially in unexplored territories: at the end of the run, the smartwatch will display the total distance (although not completely reliable, I guess) and many useful details, plus a very simple map of the path. By pairing the watch to a smartphone, the Garmin Connect app will show extra infos.
I had hoped that with this watch it would be possible to contact an emergency number without having the smartphone in your proximity, but this option is not available with this watch (and with any Garmin, I think).
I really hope 2022 will be the right year to resume a decent running standard, after the disappointing performance registered in 2021, due to injuries and bad shape. It seems my legs and feet are doing a good job now, but I knock on wood...
Here below, a review of the last 3 years' performances
|
YEAR |
KM
TOT |
KM
< 5m/km |
|
2021 |
658 |
277 |
|
2020 |
1148 |
626 |
|
2019 |
1047 |
478 |
