As you can see above, I have raced in a lot of different shoes. And these are only some of the pallet of racing shoes I have used over the decade! As I have evolved my fitness and speed over the last decade, I have consistently switched shoes over time to match up with my performance. Regardless of shoes, in 2010, I was quite a different runner than in 2020. The goal has always been to see how fast I can run, and as I have gotten faster, I have made changes to my footwear. The reason is the body changes when it is running faster. A great example is how I used to race in the DS Trainer - a much heavier shoe (still lightweight compared to most) than racing flats I would use later on. Below, I write out what I ran in these shoes, and additional details about the shoes as well.
2010
Asics DS Trainer
The DS Trainer was the "supportive" racing shoe I would use to give me a bit extra muscle so that my feet wouldn't take too much of a beating from road racing. Its category was technically light stability. It was a bit heavier, but it was more efficient for me at the time. It had a bit extra stiffness to it that worked well for me combined with just enough cushioning to protect from the pavement. During this time, I was trying to get under 5:30 pace for 10 miles, and as close to that as possible for the half marathon. I was able to run 5:25 pace for 10 miles.
PRs in shoe:
10 Miles: 54:16
Half Marathon: 1:12:57 
54:16
2010 - 2011
Mizuno Wave Musha
The Mizuno rep at Potomac River Running approached me one day and gave me a pair of the Mizuno Wave Musha to try on. I tried them out in the store on the treadmill and they felt like a really nice supportive shoe but without the bulkiness of the DS Trainer. The Musha was still light stability like the DS Trainer as well - except it was lighter and more responsive for faster running. It seemed like the right direction for me because I was becoming too efficient for the DS Trainer - almost like the shoe would be holding me back. Mizuno uses a unique wave plate in the middle of the shoe that is very responsive. The idea actually isn't far off what is today's Nike Vaporfly shoe. The difference is the cushioning of course, and the plate is a plastic material instead of carbon fiber. But it felt really responsive, and I instantly loved them. I felt they would strike the perfect balance of support and lightweight. I ran some mega big PRs in them. I also was training much better though - I was starting to make big jumps in my intervals. The biggest jump in my racing was the half marathon, taking over 4 minutes off my PR in one year. I became a new runner in 2011.
PRs in shoe:
10K: 31:26
10 Miles: 52:54
Half Marathon: 1:08:39
Marathon: 2:37
Photo: 2011 Philadelphia Rock and Roll Half Marathon
1:08:39
1:08:39
2012
Mizuno Wave Ronin
Mizuno became a big brand to me. After my success in the Musha, I wanted to try a neutral shoe that had the same cushioning and similar weight. Enter the Ronin. The Ronin, to date, is one of my all time favorite racing shoes. It struck the perfect balance for the marathon distance, and I raced really well in it from anything between 10 miles to the marathon. I think at this point I was also more comfortable to race in a neutral shoe. I have never over pronated, but as I started to run faster, the neutral shoe worked more in unison with my faster feet.
PRs in shoe:
10 Miles: 51:44
Half Marathon: 1:09:30
Half Marathon: 1:09:30
Marathon: 2:35
2:35:09
2012 - 2013
Brooks T7 Racer
While I enjoyed the Mizuno shoes, I also tried Brooks out because I was on the =PR= Elite Racing Team, which was sponsored by Brooks. The Brooks T7 Racer was awesome. It was actually a bit lighter than the Ronin, but was a durable workhorse shoe that brought me some very fast times. I never PR'd in it, but I got close and ran some really good races in them. Ultimately, I felt Mizuno worked the best for me (I just really loved the wave plate!), but I am not saying the Brooks T7 was not an enjoyable shoe! I also used the Brooks T7 in my debut US Half Marathon Championship in 2012.
PRs in shoe:
Half Marathon: 1:08:51
1:08:51
2011-2013
Nike Zoom Victory Track Spike
Contrary to the road, on the track, I had always used lightweight racing spikes. The Nike Zoom Victory was the perfect spike for me in 2011 to plan an attack on the 15:00 5K barrier. It took me 3 tries: 15:13, 15:11, and then finally 14:58.
PRs in shoe:
Mile: 4:26
5,000m: 14:58
5,000m: 14:58
Photo: 2011 MCRRC Midsummer Night's Mile
4:27
2012-2014
Mizuno Wave Universe
As my times continued to drop on the roads, I began to experiment with lighter weight shoes. I was used to my lightweight track spikes obviously, which don't have any cushioning, but they were not meant for the road obviously. Bill Bowerman invented the Nike Waffle for his runners at Oregon with the goal to have them run in something as light as possible. Extra weight was unnecessary to carry. I began to look at what would be the lightest racing flat I could use on the road. The Mizuno Universe was an astounding 3 ounces...the same weight as my track spikes! This was more than half the weight of my Ronin. So this was also a risky move. I felt like the maximum I could race in this shoe would be 10 miles (in the Ronin I would race a minimum of 10 miles). But even that may be pushing it. I ended up having to make a tough decision between the Ronin and the Universe to compete in the 2012 Cherry Blossom 10 Miler. I went with the Universe, and although I PR'd with a 51:57, my feet felt pretty bad and I had some bad blisters afterwards. I concluded that 10 miles was a bit too far to race in this shoe. I did feel though, that this shoe could extend up to 10K. I ended up using it at Pikes Peek, and broke 31:00 for the first time. The shoe seemed to go maximum 30 minutes for me. For 10 mile races, however, I went back to the Ronin. The following fall, I then lowered my personal best at the Army 10 Miler to 51:44 (harder course than Cherry Blossom too). So I learned a lot by using this shoe by understanding weight has its limits if it sacrifices too much cushioning.
Interesting fact: My 10K PR today still remains from the Wave Universe.
PRs in shoe:
10K: 30:43 (current PR)
10 Mile: 51:57
Photo: 2012 Pikes Peek 10K
30:56
30:56
2013-2014
Mizuno Wave Ekiden
The in between sweet spot was found in Mizuno's Wave Ekiden. When I found out about this shoe, I was super excited. It had the lightweight advantage that the Universe had (just a little bit heavier - close to 4.5-5 ounces), but also just a little bit more cushioning. Could this hold up for me in distances up to the half marathon? In 2013, I ran the Army Ten Miler and PR'd again in 51:35, and my feet felt fine. I got a bit scared to use it at the Richmond Half Marathon, so I used the Ronin for that to run a 1:09. But I then decided to give it a go at the 2014 Houston Half Marathon, which was host to the US Half Marathon Championships. Perhaps my body was ready to use the shoe for the 13.1 now, whereas I held back from using it at Richmond. I was also really fit for Houston, and it was the perfect opportunity to drop a new PR. I ended up running what still is one of the best races of my career, finishing in 1:07:29 for 56th in the US. It was my first time under the 1:08 barrier. The shoe was perfect for the distance. I felt amazing that day.
PRs in shoe:
10 Miles: 50:57
Half Marathon: 1:07:29
Photo: 2014 US Half Marathon Championships, Houston, Texas
1:07:29
1:07:29
2014
Mizuno Wave Hitogami
The Ronin was unfortunately discontinued by Mizuno. I was pretty bummed out about this. However, they introduced a new shoe called the Hitogami. It basically replaced the Ronin, so the weight and feel was similar. I really enjoyed this shoe, although I definitely liked the Ronin better. I didn't run any PRs in this shoe, but it was nice to take the win at the 2014 Annapolis 10 Miler, and I took 4th in the Navy/Air Force Half Marathon. I missed the Ronin, though. Mizuno also changed the Ekiden and it wasn't what it used to be. I was beginning to be at a loss with shoes. In 2015, I moved away from Mizuno for an opportunity to run for a shoe company.
The Ronin was unfortunately discontinued by Mizuno. I was pretty bummed out about this. However, they introduced a new shoe called the Hitogami. It basically replaced the Ronin, so the weight and feel was similar. I really enjoyed this shoe, although I definitely liked the Ronin better. I didn't run any PRs in this shoe, but it was nice to take the win at the 2014 Annapolis 10 Miler, and I took 4th in the Navy/Air Force Half Marathon. I missed the Ronin, though. Mizuno also changed the Ekiden and it wasn't what it used to be. I was beginning to be at a loss with shoes. In 2015, I moved away from Mizuno for an opportunity to run for a shoe company.
Photo: 2014 Annapolis 10 Miler
2015-2017
Saucony Type A
In 2015, I got the unique opportunity to run for Saucony. Saucony used to have a program called the Saucony Hurricanes. It was a mid-level sponsorship program that had qualifying standards to achieve such as 1:09:00 in the half marathon. It was a unique way to connect athletes all over the country. I was able to meet a lot of different runners in different championship races held by USATF. We got singlets, all kinds of apparel, and plenty of shoes. It was awesome! Unhappy with Mizuno discontinuing the Ronin and changing the Ekiden, this was a perfect opportunity to switch brands. I got a shoe called the Type A racer. It had a bit more cushioning to hold up for the marathon, but it was only 5-5.5 ounces. It was an amazing shoe that I ran several PRs in. It wasn't that much heavier than the Mizuno Ekiden, but could go farther. On January 3, 2016, I was one of 60 men recruited to run in Jacksonville, Florida, for an elite half marathon race set up by Richard Fanning. The race was set up for a chance to qualify for the Olympic Trials Marathon (in the half marathon) to run the 1:05:00 half marathon standard. While I didn't qualify, I ran a superb PR of 1:06:50 in the half marathon. After I ran 1:06, I began to really focus on the marathon distance. I wasn't sure how much faster I could go in the half, so I wanted to begin applying my faster paces to the full marathon. In 2017, after 5 years, I got back into the marathon (the last marathon I did was in 2012 - a 2:35). I started back at the longer distance with a 2:32.
PRs in shoe:
PRs in shoe:
10 Miles: 50:32
Half Marathon: 1:06:50
Marathon: 2:32
Photo: 2016 Jacksonville Half Marathon
1:06:50
1:06:50
2016 - 2017
Saucony Endorphin
Saucony came out with its own version of the Mizuno Universe shoe. The Endorphin was the lightest racing flat I have ever used. I couldn't believe how much better it felt than the Universe though. It had a lot more traction. I raced in it in any distance from the mile to the 10K on the road. In this shoe, I ran an awesome road mile race called the Loudoun Street Mile in Winchester, VA. I ran my current PR there of 4:21.0.
PRs in shoe:
1 Mile: 4:21 (current PR)
Photo: 2015 Loudoun Street Mile
4:21
4:21
2015-2018
Saucony Endorphin Track Spike
PRs in shoe:
5,000m: 14:39 (current PR)
10,000m: 30:55 (current PR)
Photo: 2015 Swarthmore College 5,000m
14:49
2018-2019
14:49
2018-2019
Nike Vaporfly 4% (Part I)
No longer attached to Saucony, I was looking for new shoes that could possibly work better for me. By 2018, I had begun to hear about the Vaporfly. One thing that initially held me back from getting the shoe was actually the weight. This sounds funny I know because of how light it is....but it is a full ounce heavier than my Saucony Type A Racer (5.5 ounces), and over 2 ounces heavier than my Mizuno Ekidens (4.0-4.5 ounces), and over twice the weight of the Saucony Endorphin (but that shoe is really just for 10K or shorter). Why would I run faster or better in this shoe? After understanding the brilliant combination (not just the carbon plate - but also the zoom x foam that is so lightweight but cushiony) that Nike used to make this shoe so good, it made sense to me to invest in it. The benefits of the shoe offset the added 1-2 ounce weight for me. I saw a few opportunities. 1) Impact and Protection. Why not get a shoe that would help reduce the stress on the body from the pounding of the pavement? After all, a lot of runners from the 70s have had trouble running later because the footwear beat up their bodies. Why not have shoes that could extend the life of our running more? 2) Speed. The carbon fiber plate combined with the lightweight Zoom X Foam seemed to be a better combination to run fast than having a lighter shoe without as much responsiveness. The best racing shoes are all about having the best response. The better a shoe responds, the better and faster we can run. But the Vaporfly doesn't work for all runners. It is made for very fast racing, and some slower runners may not benefit at all or might get injured even running in it. We have to run in what is efficient for us. A 1:05 half marathoner (under 5:00 per mile) is completely different than a 2:05 half marathoner (9:30 per mile). If they both wear Vaporflys, you would see multiple big differences in how they move in the shoe.
I never saw this shoe as a cheating shoe as some people call it. It's still just foam and carbon fiber. The material carbon fiber has been around for decades. What's new is the brilliant idea of Nike combing the 2 materials of Zoom X Foam and Carbon Fiber. Shoes are made to help athletes perform better. Otherwise we would all run, jump, and sprint barefoot. The first Nike track spike was better than other spikes. It's not like the shoe has an engine in it doing the running for you. If it truly did all the work (like a car does - the engine takes us to whatever mph we decide by pressing on the pedal), then we would all run the exact same time as Eliud Kipchoge - effort would not exist. Kipchoge was the best runner on the planet before the Vaporfly. He is still the best runner on the planet with the Vaporfly. The world record by Dennis Kimeto was 2:02:57 in Berlin, run in Adidas (no carbon plate in it). Kipchoge's world record, also in Berlin, is 2:01:39, run in the Vaporfly. Let's say for argument's sake that Kimeto is on the same exact level as Kipchoge (which clearly we all know who would be the best of these 2 athletes). If Kipchoge had run in Adidas, then given the same ability, he would not run faster than 2:02:57 on the same course. So, even if the above were true, Kipchoge gets an extra 1:18 off his marathon time in the Vaporfly for "cheating." If we label that 1:18 improvement of time as cheating, then what about when the world record in the marathon by Abebe Bikila was lowered by over 3 minutes when he went from barefoot running to shoes? Isn't that cheating as well, if we define it this way? The way I've looked at it, it was just the next best racing shoe for me to use. Just like when I switched from the DS Trainer to the Mizuno Wave Musha (for the reasons I explained above).
So, a few weeks after I raced the Portland Track 10,000m in 30:55, I gave the Vaporfly my debut race at the Peachtree 10K in Atlanta, also known as the 2018 US 10K Championships. I ran 31:09 to finish 27th in the championship. It was awesome racing in the Vaporfly. They felt great and that's what told me it was the right shoe for me. After Saucony discontinued its sponsorship, I found my new favorite racing shoe and returned to Nike. I only used to run in Nike in High School and College. Everything came full circle. The only thing I didn't like about the Vaporfly was the upper material - which changed during the second half of the year.
PRs in shoe:
10K: 31:09
No longer attached to Saucony, I was looking for new shoes that could possibly work better for me. By 2018, I had begun to hear about the Vaporfly. One thing that initially held me back from getting the shoe was actually the weight. This sounds funny I know because of how light it is....but it is a full ounce heavier than my Saucony Type A Racer (5.5 ounces), and over 2 ounces heavier than my Mizuno Ekidens (4.0-4.5 ounces), and over twice the weight of the Saucony Endorphin (but that shoe is really just for 10K or shorter). Why would I run faster or better in this shoe? After understanding the brilliant combination (not just the carbon plate - but also the zoom x foam that is so lightweight but cushiony) that Nike used to make this shoe so good, it made sense to me to invest in it. The benefits of the shoe offset the added 1-2 ounce weight for me. I saw a few opportunities. 1) Impact and Protection. Why not get a shoe that would help reduce the stress on the body from the pounding of the pavement? After all, a lot of runners from the 70s have had trouble running later because the footwear beat up their bodies. Why not have shoes that could extend the life of our running more? 2) Speed. The carbon fiber plate combined with the lightweight Zoom X Foam seemed to be a better combination to run fast than having a lighter shoe without as much responsiveness. The best racing shoes are all about having the best response. The better a shoe responds, the better and faster we can run. But the Vaporfly doesn't work for all runners. It is made for very fast racing, and some slower runners may not benefit at all or might get injured even running in it. We have to run in what is efficient for us. A 1:05 half marathoner (under 5:00 per mile) is completely different than a 2:05 half marathoner (9:30 per mile). If they both wear Vaporflys, you would see multiple big differences in how they move in the shoe.
I never saw this shoe as a cheating shoe as some people call it. It's still just foam and carbon fiber. The material carbon fiber has been around for decades. What's new is the brilliant idea of Nike combing the 2 materials of Zoom X Foam and Carbon Fiber. Shoes are made to help athletes perform better. Otherwise we would all run, jump, and sprint barefoot. The first Nike track spike was better than other spikes. It's not like the shoe has an engine in it doing the running for you. If it truly did all the work (like a car does - the engine takes us to whatever mph we decide by pressing on the pedal), then we would all run the exact same time as Eliud Kipchoge - effort would not exist. Kipchoge was the best runner on the planet before the Vaporfly. He is still the best runner on the planet with the Vaporfly. The world record by Dennis Kimeto was 2:02:57 in Berlin, run in Adidas (no carbon plate in it). Kipchoge's world record, also in Berlin, is 2:01:39, run in the Vaporfly. Let's say for argument's sake that Kimeto is on the same exact level as Kipchoge (which clearly we all know who would be the best of these 2 athletes). If Kipchoge had run in Adidas, then given the same ability, he would not run faster than 2:02:57 on the same course. So, even if the above were true, Kipchoge gets an extra 1:18 off his marathon time in the Vaporfly for "cheating." If we label that 1:18 improvement of time as cheating, then what about when the world record in the marathon by Abebe Bikila was lowered by over 3 minutes when he went from barefoot running to shoes? Isn't that cheating as well, if we define it this way? The way I've looked at it, it was just the next best racing shoe for me to use. Just like when I switched from the DS Trainer to the Mizuno Wave Musha (for the reasons I explained above).
So, a few weeks after I raced the Portland Track 10,000m in 30:55, I gave the Vaporfly my debut race at the Peachtree 10K in Atlanta, also known as the 2018 US 10K Championships. I ran 31:09 to finish 27th in the championship. It was awesome racing in the Vaporfly. They felt great and that's what told me it was the right shoe for me. After Saucony discontinued its sponsorship, I found my new favorite racing shoe and returned to Nike. I only used to run in Nike in High School and College. Everything came full circle. The only thing I didn't like about the Vaporfly was the upper material - which changed during the second half of the year.
PRs in shoe:
10K: 31:09
Photo: 2018 PeachTree 10K/US 10K Championships
31:09
31:09
2018-2019
Nike Vaporfly 4% Knit (Part II)
The Vaporfly 4% Knit is currently my all time favorite racing shoe. The fit was exactly what I was looking for. I tend to obsess a lot over tying my shoes before races. The knit material eliminated that problem as it felt like a sock around the foot. It also felt a smidge lighter than the original 4%. The toughest PR of mine to beat was 1:06:50 when I ran in Jacksonville 2016. I thought I would never run faster. In November of 2018, at the Indianapolis Monumental Half Marathon, I finally beat that time, running 1:06:37. The fall of 2018, I had some big breakthroughs in my training. In October, I did a 20 miler in 1:47, the fastest I have averaged in training, which I also did in regular training shoes and not my racing shoes. So I knew I was very fit and would drop some big times. I almost ran 2:17 in the marathon in December 2018. I went through 20 miles in 1:45, but couldn't quite hold 5:15 pace the rest of the way. I ended up running 2:25:05, a PR. But then the biggest breakthrough of my running career happened. I dropped a gigantic PR of 1:05:25 at the 2019 Houston Half Marathon, averaging 4:59 miles for the first time in that distance. It is currently the best performance of my career. I am working on transforming that performance to the marathon. If I can do this, I believe I am capable of a 2:15 marathon.
PRs in shoe:
10 Miles: 49:54 (current PR)
Half Marathon: 1:05:25 (current PR)
Marathon: 2:25:05 (current PR)
Photo: 2019 Houston Half Marathon
1:05:25
2019-2020
1:05:25
2019-2020
Nike Next %
So, obviously I loved the Vaporfly 4% Knit, but when Nike came out with the Next %, I figure I'd give them a try. I ran some really good races in these. I repeated my 2:25 Marathon PR again at the Houston Marathon in 2020, which I think I needed to get another mid 2:20's in before making that jump to a new level. I have started to feel more experienced in the marathon. I also ran a 1:06:18 half marathon in the Next %, my second fastest half marathon time ever. But overall, after racing in these shoes, my all time favorite racing shoe is the Vaporfly 4% Knit. This year, I bought another pair of Vaporfly 4% Knit, which I have yet to use. As of now, the COVID-19 has put racing on hold. I am curious to try out the new Alphafly, but it doesn't look as appealing to me. It looks a bit over engineered in my opinion, and just too much shoe maybe. Perhaps it might be too bulky for me as well. I always want to make the best decision on what will work for me, and that's what you should do too, when choosing racing shoes. If Nike does not continue to make the Vaporfly 4% Knit, I may have to switch to something else. It is a possibility that I will go back to Saucony, once they release the Endorphin Pro, a competitor to the Vaporfly 4%.
But for now, I just miss racing and running fast.
PRs in shoe:
5K: 14:41 (current PR)
Half Marathon: 1:06:18
Marathon: 2:25:14
Photo: 2019 Parks Half Marathon
