There is also a widely held view that it is impossible to equate the recent spate of world records on track and road with previous performances, such has been the great step forward in terms of shoe design.

It is not hard to sympathise with this view. But things, it seems, ain’t quite that simple.

Ends.

Only joking. There is, as you might expect, a huge amount to be said on this subject - but even the experts are admitting that the picture isn't clear.

To try and express this in terms of Formula 1 - you might think you have the best car, but it may work better for some drivers than others.

That seems to be one of the key messages coming from sports scientists.

The new Adizero Adios Pro Evo 1 shoe worn by Tigist Assefa as she took more than two minutes off the women’s world marathon record in Berlin last Sunday were, as Adidas claimed, "enhanced with unique technology that challenges the boundaries of racing".

In the wake of Assefa’s clocking of 2hr 11min 53sec in Berlin - which improved the world record of 2:14:04 set in Chicago four years ago by Brigid Kosgei of Kenya, who was wearing some of the first Nike VaporFly super shoes - LetsRun invited two experts to offer their comments.

Ross Tucker, PhD in exercise physiology, co-host of The Real Science of Sport podcast and science and research consultant for World Rugby and scientific advisor to Virgin Active and Adidas, said: "The shoes have distorted everything."

He went on to explain: "I hate these shoes, and I truly wish the authorities had acted to prevent this entirely foreseeable situation, for a few reasons.

"The main one is that the range of responses to them is so large that we cannot sit with any confidence and evaluate performances between different athletes independent of this nagging doubt over what the shoes do.

"That is, the shoe is there, all the time, because the differences between athletes is smaller than the differences made by the shoe, to the same athlete, and between different athletes."

He added: "Some people in this debate have said that we can’t explain Assefa’s performance using the shoes, because Kosgei also had the shoes. And what I’m saying is 'So what?'

"The difference between shoes is so enormous that it could easily still be the SOLE EXPLANATION for that performance, if Assefa happens to be the athlete on one extreme end of the response curve and Kosgei somewhere near the average (and of course Radcliffe didn’t have them)."

Assessing the three most recent women's world records, including the 2:25:15 set by Britain’s Paula Radcliffe at the 2003 London Marathon, Tucker concluded:

"So you could well be looking at three quite similar performances, down to similar physiology, but with very different time outcomes because the three athletes lie at different points on this 'non-user' - 'medium responder' - 'super responder' continuum.

"The point is we just don’t know, and the evidence that does exist, albeit in non-elite athletes…shows us that there is a large range of responses that is comfortably six per cent and may even be as large as 11 per cent. I don’t need to tell you the implications of one athlete getting two per cent and the other four per cent benefit."

Geoff Burns, PhD in sports science and physiologist for the United States Olympic and Paralympic Committee, offered a different perspective.

After considering the potential benefits of the latest Adidas shoe in terms of weight - it’s said to be around 46 grams lighter than its Nike VaporFly equivalent - energy return and "rocker" geometry, Burns concluded it might add up to less than 1 per cent running economy enhancement.

That, he believes, could equate to a performance improvement of 0.5 per cent - which would be equivalent to around 40 seconds at that level of running.

The genie cannot be put back into the bottle. 

Super shoes are out and here to stay. But you may still - as before - need to shop around to find the shoe that works for you. If and when you do, however, it can improve your performance as never before.

How satisfied should any runner be if they hit the shoe jackpot? Discuss.

Meanwhile, let's consider the shopping around.

The Adizero Adios Pro Evo 1 shoes are now on sale for £400 ($500/€460).

To paraphrase Anatole France, runners rich and poor alike are free to purchase the latest high tech running shoes.

Oh and by the way, the Adios Pro Evo 1 shoes are, according to Adidas, single-use.

Which opens up another debate over how much or how little manufacturers should be acknowledging environmental factors in their operations.

This question, surely, has a far clearer and arguably more important answer.