PUMA HYROX Footwear for Elite Competitive Racing

Executive summary

PUMA’s current HYROX footwear strategy (as of early 2026) is best understood as a race-day running supershoe platform (Deviate NITRO Elite 4) that has been re-engineered to tolerate—and exploit—HYROX station mechanics, plus two “hybrid running” options (Deviate NITRO 4 and Velocity NITRO 4) that sit closer to conventional trainers while still emphasizing traction and forward propulsion. The centerpiece is Deviate NITRO Elite 4 HYROX, described by PUMA as the first shoe engineered specifically for HYROX, with deliberate changes aimed at grip, stability under load, and outsole durability during sled work, while keeping a traditional supershoe stack and carbon-plate propulsion for the 8 × 1 km run segments. [1]

Across models, the primary differentiators are (a) foam formulation and firmness, (b) plate presence and tuning, and (c) outsole rubber coverage + tread geometry. PUMA’s own design narration is explicit that the HYROX-specific Elite variant moved to full-coverage PUMAGRIP and a new traction pattern to “dig into turf” for sled pushes/pulls, alongside a slightly firmer foam durometer to increase stability in loaded stations (lunges, farmer’s carry, wall balls). [2]

From the research literature, three evidence-backed principles matter most for elite/competitive HYROX footwear decisions:

1. Running economy is sensitive to shoe system properties (mass, midsole compliance/resilience, geometry, and the foam–plate interaction), with advanced “supershoe” constructions frequently producing measurable metabolic savings in steady running (classic example: ~4% lower energetic cost vs conventional racing footwear). [3]
2. Added shoe mass reliably worsens running economy and performance (e.g., experimental additions of 100 g per shoe impair running economy and performance in trained runners), implying that “grip-driven” outsoles must justify their mass via station time savings and reduced traction-limited pacing. [4]
3. Traction is not only a “don’t slip” minimum: controlled testing shows that increasing outsole traction can improve performance in tasks involving accelerations and direction changes, even when the baseline shoe already prevented obvious slips—an important analogy for HYROX where athletes repeatedly accelerate out of stations and negotiate turns indoors on variable surfaces. [5]

Empirically, elite HYROX outcomes are driven primarily by the ability to sustain high-speed running between stations, but high-friction stations (especially sled push/pull) can swing rankings when traction is limiting. For example, the BOXROX[6] recap of the Melbourne[7] Major (Elite 15 men) shows a tightly clustered podium range (~54–55 min) where small station-specific deltas and penalties decided the title (54:09–54:15 for 1st–2nd). [8] PUMA’s own athlete-facing reporting claims that Joanna Wietrzyk[9] set the women’s HYROX world record in the new HYROX-specific Elite shoe, and includes direct athlete feedback emphasizing traction + stability improvements. [10] (This is a high-value signal about intended use, but it remains brand-mediated evidence rather than an independent equipment audit.)

A key competitive inflection is that other brands are now building hybrid race shoes explicitly for events like HYROX—e.g., adidas[11]’s Adizero Dropset Elite concept (Lightstrike Pro + Continental rubber + stability rim) positioning itself as “speed + stability” for hybrid racing. [12]

PUMA HYROX models and official specifications

Current PUMA × HYROX lineup for competitive athletes

PUMA’s 2026 HYROX shoe architecture uses three tiers:

• Deviate NITRO Elite 4 HYROX: HYROX-specific supershoe (carbon plate + elite foam + modified outsole) meant to preserve race-day running efficiency while stabilizing and gripping through stations. [13]
• Deviate NITRO 4 HYROX: plated “fast trainer/racer” configuration (carbon plate + NITROFOAM, heavier than Elite) positioned as a propulsive hybrid shoe for athletes who want more structure or durability than a pure supershoe. [14]
• Velocity NITRO 4 HYROX: non-plated daily-trainer style option emphasizing NITROFOAM cushioning and PUMAGRIP traction with a more conventional build (and typically greater stability than high-stack plated racers). [15]

To interpret “HYROX-specific,” it’s useful to compare the HYROX Elite 4 directly against the standard road Deviate NITRO Elite 4, because PUMA describes the HYROX version as built by reimagining the same fast race platform with intentional updates (not just new colors). [16]

Visual reference: outsole patterns and platform cues

The actionable HYROX difference is often easiest to see at the outsole and platform geometry (rubber coverage, lug layout, and edge stability “outriggers” for lateral control).

Specification table: key construction variables that matter in HYROX

Interpretation note: weights and stacks are typically listed at a specific reference size and can vary by market page and gender sizing. The table below uses PUMA-published values as shown on the cited pages, and flags where the HYROX version diverges materially from the road version.

Chart: how the “HYROX-specific” changes show up in weight and stack

A practical takeaway from the official numbers is that the HYROX-specific Elite 4 keeps the same stack as the road Elite 4, but is heavier, consistent with PUMA’s stated shift to full outsole rubber coverage and lugged traction for sled work. [16]

Download chart: PUMA road vs HYROX models—weight vs heel stack

Legacy and transitional HYROX-branded PUMA models

Before the Elite 4 HYROX was framed as purpose-built, PUMA sold HYROX-branded versions of its established plated models (effectively HYROX co-branded variants). For elite athletes, these matter because they clarify what changed in the new “HYROX-specific” concept: PUMA now claims it diverged from the marathon chassis to prioritize stability and outsole durability under sled stress, not just grip branding. [28]

• PUMA x HYROX Deviate NITRO Elite 3 included NITROFOAM ELITE + full-length carbon fiber PWRPLATE + ULTRAWEAVE + PUMAGRIP, with the supershoe stack (40/32) and an 8 mm drop stated on the official product page. [29]
• PUMA x HYROX Deviate NITRO 3 (co-branded) was framed as traction-capable for sled push, using NITROFOAM, a carbon PWRPLATE, and PUMAGRIP; one UK product page lists a 10 mm drop and a sample women’s weight. [30]

How PUMA technologies map to HYROX performance needs

HYROX is structurally dominated by repeated transitions: run → decelerate/enter station → produce high horizontal force under fatigue → re-accelerate and run again. Official race descriptions emphasize the repeated 1 km run + station format indoors. [31] A HYROX shoe for elite competitors therefore must manage four competing tasks:

Grip for high horizontal-force stations

PUMA explicitly frames the Elite 4 HYROX redesign around outsole–ground interaction: full-coverage PUMAGRIP and a new traction pattern intended to “dig into turf during sled pushes and pulls,” plus durability improvements to prevent outsole element tearing observed when testing earlier designs under sled loads. [2]

Mechanistically, this is about increasing available shear force at the shoe–floor interface: higher frictional capacity and better mechanical “keying” into carpet/turf reduces micro-slip and helps convert athlete-generated force into sled motion.

Stability under load and multi-planar tasks

PUMA’s internal design story is unusually direct: the HYROX version altered midsole durometer (slightly firmer) to enhance stability during loaded movements (lunges, carries) that expose different joint angles and mediolateral demands than straight running. [10]

This aligns with known practical stability constraints of high-stack supershoes: tall compliant foams and aggressive rockers can feel unstable when athletes are fatigued and performing non-sagittal tasks.

Energy return and running efficiency for the 8 × 1 km runs

Across its HYROX models, PUMA retains its core “NITRO” narrative: nitrogen-infused foams designed to provide energy return (Elite variant positioned as pinnacle responsiveness). [32] For elite/competitive HYROX athletes, running economy is still decisive because running is repeated and cumulative, and elite races are often decided by seconds. [33]

Plate tuning: propulsion vs station controllability

PUMA states the HYROX Elite 4 uses a carbon composite PWRPLATE engineered for propulsion while maintaining flexibility for faster running, and third-party reviewing suggests the HYROX plate geometry may be modified to be more flexible than a typical marathon supershoe plate. [34]

From a performance lens, this is consistent with a “hybrid stiffness” objective: enough longitudinal stiffness and lever-like behavior to improve running economy, but not so rigid that the athlete loses station control or incurs excessive calf/foot loading during repeated accelerations.

Grip-driven shoe biomechanics in hybrid racing

What “grip-driven” means in HYROX

A grip-driven HYROX shoe is one whose performance advantage is primarily realized when the athlete’s output is limited by traction capacity, not by aerobic power or muscular force. In HYROX, this condition is most likely during:

• Sled push / sled pull (high horizontal force on carpet/turf)
• Burpee broad jumps and sharp turns (high shear + directional changes)
• Transitions (rapid acceleration from low speed under fatigue)

PUMA’s HYROX-specific Elite 4 design pillars (“stability and grip”) are a direct acknowledgment that the shoe–ground interface becomes a limiting factor during stations, not merely a “nice-to-have.” [2]

Traction mechanisms that matter indoors

Research on footwear friction commonly distinguishes:

• Adhesive friction (rubber compound interacting with surface asperities)
• Hysteretic friction (viscoelastic energy losses as rubber deforms over surface roughness)
• Mechanical interlocking (tread blocks/lugs engaging with deformable surfaces like turf/carpet)

Studies measuring the required coefficient of friction (RCOF) show that friction demand varies by gait phase (absorption vs propulsion) and by locomotion mode (walking vs running), and that local friction demand can exceed global averages at specific outsole regions. [35] This is relevant to HYROX because sled/carry movements can shift contact toward forefoot edges and create unusually high local shear demands compared with steady treadmill running.

Do grip-oriented outsoles “cost” running efficiency?

A grip-driven outsole typically increases one or more of the following:

• Mass (more rubber coverage, denser compound, deeper lug geometry)
• Longitudinal bending stiffness (extra rubber/tread can stiffen the forefoot)
• Energy dissipation (rubber hysteresis losses, especially as contact patches increase)

Evidence strongly supports a mass penalty effect: adding 100 g per shoe worsens running economy and running performance in trained runners. [4] This provides a useful scaling heuristic for HYROX footwear design: any traction system that adds ~20–30 g per shoe is unlikely to be metabolically decisive in isolation, but heavier outsole packages (or heavier “hybrid trainers”) can meaningfully affect the run segments over 8 km.

For the Elite 4 platform, PUMA’s published weights imply a practical example of this tradeoff: the HYROX Elite 4 lists 194 g vs 170 g for the road Elite 4 at the same reference size, consistent with added outsole rubber and traction structure. [16] If one were to apply the “~1% economy per +100 g per shoe” experimental finding as a rough scaling, the ~24 g delta would correspond to a small fraction of a percent in running economy—often smaller than the time swing of a single traction-limited sled segment in competitive fields. [4]

The deeper question is whether high-grip outsoles ever improve performance beyond simply preventing falling. The best available controlled data suggests yes for certain tasks: a University of Calgary–led study (modified outsole material to increase traction) found faster performance on a short maximal running course on asphalt even though athletes did not exhibit gross slipping in the control shoe. [5] This supports a plausible HYROX inference: traction can reduce micro-slip and improve force direction control during accelerations and turns—both ubiquitous in HYROX—without necessarily harming running efficiency enough to offset station gains.

Evidence from peer-reviewed biomechanics and physiology

Carbon plates and advanced footwear: what the literature supports

The foundational modern evidence for “supershoe” benefits is that certain highly cushioned racing shoes lower energetic cost of running; a seminal laboratory study reported ~4% reduction in energetic cost in prototype marathon racing shoes compared with conventional racing shoes. [36] Subsequent literature reviews emphasize that performance benefits likely arise from interactions among foam resilience, geometry, and plate stiffness rather than the plate acting alone. [37]

Crucially for HYROX shoe selection, plate-specific effects are still debated. Experiments that manipulated plate/forefoot bending stiffness within a supershoe platform have found minimal independent effects on running economy in certain conditions, suggesting the plate alone is not a universal “free speed” lever. [38] This lends credibility to PUMA’s choice to tune the HYROX plate for controllability—because maintaining the foam–plate–geometry synergy matters more than maximizing stiffness in isolation. [39]

Shoe mass: why outsole decisions matter

Multiple lines of evidence converge on shoe mass as a robust determinant of running economy. A controlled trained-runner intervention showed that adding 100 g per shoe impaired running economy and performance. [4] This provides a strong scientific rationale for why HYROX shoes cannot simply bolt a heavy “turf outsole” onto a racer: traction must be achieved efficiently, ideally via compound selection + strategic geometry rather than only “more rubber everywhere.”

Traction, tread, and performance

The clearest performance-focused traction evidence relevant to HYROX-style movement comes from controlled traction manipulation:

• In an outsole-modification study using the same shoe model with higher-traction forefoot rubber, available traction increased on asphalt and course time improved on the asphalt surface (with no significant differences on a tartan track surface where traction did not differ). [40]
• The authors interpret this as traction benefiting “high-traction tasks such as accelerations and changes in direction,” even when baseline traction was adequate to prevent gross slips. [41]

This is a strong conceptual analog for HYROX because athletes repeatedly accelerate out of stations and navigate corners on indoor surfaces. It also supports PUMA’s choice of an engineered lug pattern and full-coverage outsole for HYROX. [42]

University research and applied studies in other sports (basketball/tennis/turf) further reinforce that tread geometry and outsole design significantly influence slip resistance and traction performance, and that footwear can swing performance and injury-risk-relevant rotational traction measures. [43]

HYROX-specific physiology: what the best open evidence says

Direct HYROX-specific peer-reviewed work is emerging. Open-access research characterizes HYROX as a running-focused high-intensity functional fitness modality with strong emphasis on endurance capacity and comparatively moderate requirements for maximal strength, coordination, and mobility (relative to other HIFT formats). [44] This supports the elite-footwear implication: a shoe that preserves running economy and allows fast 1 km repeats is still likely to dominate performance, provided station execution is not traction-limited.

Empirical HYROX evidence and elite shoe-choice behavior

Elite race outcomes: small margins, station sensitivity

The Tim Wenisch[45] vs Hunter McIntyre[46] duel at the Melbourne Elite 15 singles illustrates how small time swings can decide elite titles: 54:09 vs 54:15 for 1st–2nd, with the narrative emphasizing station micro-events (a penalty, wall-ball breaks) as decisive. [8] In races decided by seconds, outsole traction and stability that prevent micro-slips—especially on sled work—can plausibly matter as much as incremental running economy differences.

PUMA’s athlete-facing evidence about the HYROX Elite 4 redesign

PUMA’s interview-driven technical article quotes its Running Footwear Senior Product Line Manager describing divergent design requirements for HYROX vs marathon running and highlights two specific engineering moves:

• Slightly firmer foam (durometer change) to enhance stability under load
• Full-coverage PUMAGRIP outsole with a new traction pattern designed to “dig into turf,” plus durability upgrades to eliminate outsole stress points identified during sled testing [10]

The same source claims that Linda Meier[47] described the new shoe as “really fast” and “also a very stable shoe,” and asserts that Wietrzyk broke the women’s HYROX world record in the new shoe. [10]

From an evidence-weighting standpoint: this is not independent equipment verification, but it is valuable because it identifies the exact performance constraints PUMA found during testing (heel rubber pod tearing in prior versions during sled work) and the concrete design responses (continuous full-coverage outsole). [10]

Independent commentary on HYROX supershoes: performance vs practicality debate

Men's Health[48] reviewed the Deviate Nitro Elite 4 HYROX concept and argued that while the base Elite 4 is an excellent distance racing shoe, supershoes may be a poor choice for many HYROX athletes; the review nonetheless acknowledges specific HYROX-oriented changes (textured outsole for turf grip and a different plate shape purported to be more flexible). [49]

This “debate line” matches what coaches observe in practice: elite athletes may extract net gains from supershoes because they run faster, tolerate stiffness better, and lose less from instability—whereas sub-elite athletes may pay a coordination/stability cost during stations.

Competitive landscape and cross-brand comparison

Emerging category: hybrid racing shoes (not just cross-trainers)

A meaningful shift is that brands are now building hybrid race shoes, not only cross-training shoes:

• adidas[11] announced Adizero Dropset Elite as a hybrid fitness racing concept combining Adizero speed with Dropset stability, using Lightstrike Pro foam, an “Energy Rim” stability element, and Continental rubber for grip; the report states that Tim Wenisch[45] wore it to victory in Melbourne. [12]
• Runner's World[50] reviewed the R.A.D[51] RAD-1 as a HYROX-appropriate hybrid running/training shoe (full-length foam, ~10 oz, 8 mm drop, multidirectional outsole), emphasizing versatility rather than pure running economy. [52]

PUMA’s Elite 4 HYROX sits at the other end of this spectrum: it begins with a modern race-day supershoe chassis and adds stability/grip features. [13]

Comparison table: how leading approaches trade off grip, stability, and running speed

Design recommendations and future testing standards

Recommendations for elite/competitive HYROX athletes choosing among PUMA models

For elite/competitive competitors, the decision is best framed as a net-time optimization across two domains: (a) 8 km of repeated running, and (b) traction/stability-limited stations.

• If your race outcomes are primarily run-limited (strong stations, minimal sled slip, great movement control under fatigue), the Deviate NITRO Elite 4 HYROX is the PUMA model explicitly designed to preserve supershoe run benefits while hardening the platform for HYROX loads. [13]
• If you need a more forgiving hybrid racer (still plated, but less “knife-edge” than a pure supershoe), Deviate NITRO 4 HYROX offers a plated, high-stack build with PUMAGRIP and official HYROX positioning. [14]
• If you prioritize stability and training durability over maximal run speed, Velocity NITRO 4 HYROX (non-plated) provides NITROFOAM cushioning and PUMAGRIP traction in a more conventional daily trainer format. [15]

A practical “elite heuristic” from the literature is to watch weight: even moderate mass increases can impair running economy, so full-coverage traction solutions must remain mass-efficient and performance-validated in station contexts. [4]

Recommendations for PUMA: design and evidence upgrades that would benefit elites

PUMA’s HYROX-specific Elite concept is unusually well-justified in narrative engineering terms (durometer change, full-coverage outsole, durability fixes under sled strain). [10] For elite adoption and trust, the next improvements should be measurement transparency and sport-specific validation:

Publish a HYROX-relevant traction spec

PUMA could publish standardized traction metrics on common HYROX surfaces (dry/wet turf, carpet, rubberized expo flooring), analogous to “available coefficient of friction” testing used in traction research. [53]

Quantify stability under load

Given PUMA’s explicit durometer firming for stability, publish torsional stiffness and lateral deformation under load protocols (e.g., single-leg lateral shear + compression tests), consistent with modern footwear mechanical testing frameworks. [54]

Optimize plate for multi-domain stiffness

The best research-based posture is that plate benefits depend on foam–plate interaction rather than plate stiffness alone; HYROX-specific plates should therefore target adaptive stiffness (longitudinal propulsion + torsional compliance + controlled forefoot flex for stations). [55]

Recommendations for all brands: HYROX-specific testing protocol blueprint

A rigorous HYROX shoe test battery—useful for PUMA and competitors—should include:

• Surface-specific traction mapping (forefoot vs heel; straight vs turning; dry vs humid/wet), informed by RCOF literature demonstrating local friction demands vary across the outsole. [56]
• Sled push/pull durability testing that replicates the stressor PUMA reported (outsole element tearing under sled forces), including repeated high-shear cycles and inspection for delamination. [10]
• Run–station transition economy (metabolic cost during repeated accelerations and decelerations), because traction studies suggest gains can appear in acceleration/change-of-direction tasks even when steady running is not slip-limited. [57]
• Rotational traction safety limits (high traction can increase twisting loads at the knee/ankle), using established rotational traction measurement approaches from field/court sport research adapted to indoor HYROX surfaces. [58]

Bottom-line product direction for “next-gen” hybrid race shoes

The competitive direction implied by the literature and by PUMA’s own HYROX redesign story is that the winning HYROX shoe category will likely converge on:

• Supershoe-level foam resilience with perimeter stability (firmer sidewalls or stability rims) [59]
• A plate that is not maximally stiff everywhere, but tuned for propulsion + station control [60]
• Traction systems engineered for “high-traction tasks” (accelerations, turns, and sled work) with minimal added mass—supported by controlled traction-performance evidence [61]

This framing clarifies the key strategic question for elite athletes and brands alike: HYROX performance is won by running speed unless traction or stability becomes the limiter—so the shoe must be engineered to avoid being the limiter in any race segment, without sacrificing the very running economy gains that decide podiums. [62]

[1] [13] [16] [17] [18] [32] [34] [39] [47] https://us.puma.com/us/en/pd/puma-x-hyrox-deviate-nitro-elite-4-mens-running-shoes/312959?srsltid=AfmBOopLQrMTe-14iU843HL58lA8Glan_oLOJdCXLNkE37_7944xShfv

https://us.puma.com/us/en/pd/puma-x-hyrox-deviate-nitro-elite-4-mens-running-shoes/312959?srsltid=AfmBOopLQrMTe-14iU843HL58lA8Glan_oLOJdCXLNkE37_7944xShfv

[2] [10] [45] [59] https://www.puma-catchup.com/sports/how-the-first-ever-hyrox-specific-shoe-came-to-life/

https://www.puma-catchup.com/sports/how-the-first-ever-hyrox-specific-shoe-came-to-life/

[3] [36] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-017-0811-2

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-017-0811-2

[4] https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/physiology/articles/10.3389/fphys.2020.573660/full

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/physiology/articles/10.3389/fphys.2020.573660/full

[5] [11] [40] [41] [48] [53] [57] [61] https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Fausto-Panizzolo/publication/299501946_Increasing_Running_Shoe_Traction_can_Enhance_Performance/links/56fdd35208ae650a64f55341/Increasing-Running-Shoe-Traction-can-Enhance-Performance.pdf

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Fausto-Panizzolo/publication/299501946_Increasing_Running_Shoe_Traction_can_Enhance_Performance/links/56fdd35208ae650a64f55341/Increasing-Running-Shoe-Traction-can-Enhance-Performance.pdf

[6] [19] [20] [50] https://us.puma.com/us/en/pd/deviate-nitro-elite-4-mens-road-running-shoes/312127

https://us.puma.com/us/en/pd/deviate-nitro-elite-4-mens-road-running-shoes/312127

[7] [44] [62] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11994925/

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11994925/

[8] [33] [51] https://www.boxrox.com/tim-wenisch-wins-the-elite-15-male-singles-hyrox-melbourne-major/

https://www.boxrox.com/tim-wenisch-wins-the-elite-15-male-singles-hyrox-melbourne-major/

[9] [15] [22] [23] [24] https://us.puma.com/us/en/pd/puma-x-hyrox-velocity-nitro-4-womens-running-shoes/312916?srsltid=AfmBOorC1Rb-s6HEJ6Lys87Sn8HKzCBwFn5GErhgvUTmMbXi70PdF_sQ

https://us.puma.com/us/en/pd/puma-x-hyrox-velocity-nitro-4-womens-running-shoes/312916?srsltid=AfmBOorC1Rb-s6HEJ6Lys87Sn8HKzCBwFn5GErhgvUTmMbXi70PdF_sQ

[12] https://www.t3.com/active/adidas-adizero-dropset-elite-announcement-0226

https://www.t3.com/active/adidas-adizero-dropset-elite-announcement-0226

[14] [21] https://us.puma.com/us/en/pd/puma-x-hyrox-deviate-nitro-4-mens-running-shoes/312906?srsltid=AfmBOopgoFsJM4cgGYRCW0xi7wOnUJGQYhCcbkjRp37X_X6ipobvaAtv

https://us.puma.com/us/en/pd/puma-x-hyrox-deviate-nitro-4-mens-running-shoes/312906?srsltid=AfmBOopgoFsJM4cgGYRCW0xi7wOnUJGQYhCcbkjRp37X_X6ipobvaAtv

[25] [27] https://us.puma.com/us/en/pd/velocity-nitro-4-mens-road-running-shoes/311140

https://us.puma.com/us/en/pd/velocity-nitro-4-mens-road-running-shoes/311140

[26] https://eu.puma.com/gr/en/pd/velocity-nitro-4-running-shoes-men/311140.html?srsltid=AfmBOoqQm11epriZADOuKCqOF4zBDY2GBgtAfXILZ-9jBRNIj0P7tXCR

https://eu.puma.com/gr/en/pd/velocity-nitro-4-running-shoes-men/311140.html?srsltid=AfmBOoqQm11epriZADOuKCqOF4zBDY2GBgtAfXILZ-9jBRNIj0P7tXCR

[28] [29] [46] https://us.puma.com/us/en/pd/puma-x-hyrox-deviate-nitro-elite-3-mens-running-shoes/312291?srsltid=AfmBOooZOftmYsrKxioMa2ywLUyZfiFWXmRtVeK3OC-vb0xyZqmvebDs

https://us.puma.com/us/en/pd/puma-x-hyrox-deviate-nitro-elite-3-mens-running-shoes/312291?srsltid=AfmBOooZOftmYsrKxioMa2ywLUyZfiFWXmRtVeK3OC-vb0xyZqmvebDs

[30] https://uk.puma.com/uk/en/pd/puma-x-hyrox-deviate-nitro-3-running-shoes-women/311413

https://uk.puma.com/uk/en/pd/puma-x-hyrox-deviate-nitro-3-running-shoes-women/311413

[31] https://hyrox.com/the-fitness-race/

https://hyrox.com/the-fitness-race/

[35] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31070107/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31070107/

[37] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12821614/

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12821614/

[38] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2095254621000739

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2095254621000739

[42] https://mediahub.puma.com/articles/puma-unveils-first-of-its-kind-deviate-nitro-elite-hyrox-marking-a-new-era-in-hybrid-race-footwear

https://mediahub.puma.com/articles/puma-unveils-first-of-its-kind-deviate-nitro-elite-hyrox-marking-a-new-era-in-hybrid-race-footwear

[43] https://www.imse.iastate.edu/files/2014/03/Van-Groningen-Daniel-Effects-of-outsole-shoe-patterns-on-athletic-performance.pdf

https://www.imse.iastate.edu/files/2014/03/Van-Groningen-Daniel-Effects-of-outsole-shoe-patterns-on-athletic-performance.pdf

[49] https://www.menshealth.com/fitness/a70717859/puma-hyrox-deviate-nitro-elite-4-shoe-review/

https://www.menshealth.com/fitness/a70717859/puma-hyrox-deviate-nitro-elite-4-shoe-review/

[52] https://www.runnersworld.com/gear/a69264594/rad-1-review-gear/

https://www.runnersworld.com/gear/a69264594/rad-1-review-gear/

[54] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844025012514

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844025012514

[55] [60] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2095254625000481

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2095254625000481

[56] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352573819300101

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352573819300101

[58] https://plantscience.psu.edu/research/centers/ssrc/documents/ats.pdf/%40%40download/file/ats.pdf

https://plantscience.psu.edu/research/centers/ssrc/documents/ats.pdf/%40%40download/file/ats.pdf