Are Nike trainers still widely seen as being “bad”?

shoes are rarely the cause of injury. its bad coaches making excuses.

they are bad, besides the pegasus

iS IT BAD? IS IT SNOWING BETWEEN SANTAS LEGS?

only if you're a hobbyjogger

just no wrote:

shoes are rarely the cause of injury. its bad coaches making excuses.

Explain why Lydiard said no one heard of plantar fasciitis until Americans started making shoes? Gordon Pirie said that before modern running shoes no one really suffered from injuries.

Modern running shoes are the problem wrote:

just no wrote:

shoes are rarely the cause of injury. its bad coaches making excuses.

Explain why Lydiard said no one heard of plantar fasciitis until Americans started making shoes? Gordon Pirie said that before modern running shoes no one really suffered from injuries.

So its not just Nikes its all modern running shoes?

If you honestly believe that no one got injured before modern running shoes and we should all be training in a pair of Converse One Star's then I don't know what to say.

My advice would be to examine your training and form for causes of injury first but you seem eager to perpetuate a myth so good luck.

I don't know but I always used to think Nike were a bit of a joke as far as serious running shoes were concerned. Thought they were all about selling hoodies and sports replica jerseys.

But got to say absolutely loved Lunarglides and loving Reacts for easy runs. Wish I'd got more into Nike's years ago.

just no wrote:

Modern running shoes are the problem wrote:

Explain why Lydiard said no one heard of plantar fasciitis until Americans started making shoes? Gordon Pirie said that before modern running shoes no one really suffered from injuries.

So its not just Nikes its all modern running shoes?

If you honestly believe that no one got injured before modern running shoes and we should all be training in a pair of Converse One Star's then I don't know what to say.

My advice would be to examine your training and form for causes of injury first but you seem eager to perpetuate a myth so good luck.

Here's the thing, running with a wedge prevents the foot and de facto rest of the leg from moving the way it is meant to. This is one reason why modern shoes cause injuries. As to why not train in converse, well they are too narrow in the forefoot and we have better synthetic materials today.

Modern running shoes are the problem wrote:

just no wrote:

shoes are rarely the cause of injury. its bad coaches making excuses.

Explain why Lydiard said no one heard of plantar fasciitis until Americans started making shoes? Gordon Pirie said that before modern running shoes no one really suffered from injuries.

No fat hobbyjoggers back then.

I meet a lot of casual runners who wear the Free's and say- I can't run in Nike, their shoes aren't any good.

from what i understand a lot of small shops hate nike running shoes...because nike won't let them sell their shoes. nike only works with companies that sell a lot of shoes. take that for what its worth as ive read it on the internet time and again.

i personally love nike running shoes. have been using them for high school. a relative used to run professionally for them and has and still does use their shoes. i think all of the companies have their advantages/disadvantages. the new vomero's look interesting. the 4% seem to be the best racing shoes out there right now for distance.

I used to think that Nike shoes were bad but after trying them a few years ago I won’t wear anything else.

Peg 35s are fantastic.

Vomeros are great too.

For racing and faster stuff the Streaks, Peg Turbos, Zoom Flys and 4% cannot be beat. Nike track spikes are by far superior to anything else on the market.

NoNike? wrote:

Most HS and College coaches I’ve talked to all seem to dislike Nike trainers. They claim shoe like the Pegasus, Structures, etc all get their kids hurt. Are they just stuck in their ways? Or is there some truth in this? Was there ever any truth in Nike making lesser quality trainers?

I know a lot of praise had been given in the past towards ASICS, but they changed their shoes a lot and people have began to think less of them. Has the opposite happened for Nike?

Doesn’t make sense to me because most pros wear Nike.

I also used to to hate Nike just for being Nike... perhaps because they sell a lot of lifestyle junk to posers (like Adidas, another brand I used to hate). My opinion changed when I bought the Streak 6, and then the Elite 9 four months later. Now I see that they make some fine running shoes. I’ve gotten injured from wearing other brands, and haven’t been significantly injured since I switched to Nike. That may be from smarting training and from doing injury-prevention exercises.

More teams run in Nike than any other shoe so of course more kids in Nikes will get injured. The coaches may blame the shoe but it is the coaching. Also, I am unaware of coaches disliking Nike.

I worked with a distance coach for several years that would constantly talk about how bad Nike's were, but yet, many of the athletes who were training in other shoes, were often going through some sort of injury. When the school switched from Nike to another shoe, the injury rate stayed about the same.

Nike makes a great product, just as many others do.

It IS about the coach and the training program.

Coaches are knuckleheads wrote:

More teams run in Nike than any other shoe so of course more kids in Nikes will get injured. The coaches may blame the shoe but it is the coaching. Also, I am unaware of coaches disliking Nike.

You’re absolutely right. As repetive an active as running is, most people are bound to get some sort of injury sooner or later, regardless of the shoe.

A few yrs ago I tried shoes from several brands and kept going back to a pair of Nikes that felt the best. They simple make the best quality products- it’s no contest. Hoka and Altra use s*** materials, heavy, and have quality control issues. I don’t get it why people like their shoes. The other brands are quirky in their own ways and Ok but not as good as Nike. Only other brand I’d wear besides Nike is Brooks. Otherwise Nike everything is the best across the board- soft, light, resilience, durable.

I can't speak for any Nike shoes besides the Pegasus. I have worn them exclusively since around 1991-1993. Only ever suffered one injury (IT Band friction syndrome), and that occurred during a marathon in 1997 while wearing racing flats. Have run as high as 105 miles in a week and held 90+ for about two months during a marathon prep. Maybe they are the perfect shoe for me, maybe not. I've never tried anything else. But they seem to be fine for both miles on the road and light enough to hammer repeats on the track.

you pretty rarely see the pro's -- the people who put in the most miles -- training in nike or racing well in them.

To your point, most of the best runners I can think of are Asics athletes.