If you don't run in Nike your a chump

[quote]always go with nike. wrote:

Hokas (who can wear those thick clown shoes on trails without rolling their ankles?), /quote]

Since they are the best selling trail shoe, I would guess anybody that isn't severely uncoordinated or running blindfolded.

Just because something is a best seller doesn't automatically mean it's good. The shoe market and fads go together really well.

db indicator #1 wrote:

I look down on (amateur) runners in those cheater 4% shoes.

And they don't give a rats tail if you do.

3,028 miles on my bondi without rolling an ankle wrote:

[quote]always go with nike. wrote:

Hokas (who can wear those thick clown shoes on trails without rolling their ankles?), /quote]

Since they are the best selling trail shoe, I would guess anybody that isn't severely uncoordinated or running blindfolded.

That doesn't make them the best option. It's physics that thicker cushioning raises your center of gravity, like an SUV and more likely to tip over. You lose the tactile feel and proprioception in your feet to control foot and ankle movement.

db indicator #1 wrote:

I look down on (amateur) runners in those cheater 4% shoes.

No one cares what you think.

always go with nike. wrote:

[quote]3,028 miles on my bondi without rolling an ankle wrote:

It's physics that thicker cushioning raises your center of gravity, like an SUV and more likely to tip over.

The bottoms of the shoe are wider so you don't tip over like a sleeping cow. That's physics too.

db indicator #1 wrote:

I look down on (amateur) runners in those cheater 4% shoes.

+1

If Usain Bolt ran in 4%s, he would have ran 9.19! Cannot believe people would run in anything else. Technology 5-10 years ago is so far behind.

Lazy students wrote:

dbsquirtNXC21 wrote:

With all the insane product improvements in the past few years I really don't get how anyone actually competitive (who isn't sponsored by another company) chooses to run in anything besides Nike. From the Vomero as the high end plush trainer down to the LTStreak 4 they have a full line of awesome shoes fit for any type of run. I can guarantee you with near certainty that most actual fast people run in the swoosh. If you disagree post with your PRs.

*you're

It's not that effing hard. You did the same thing on the 'VF vs Spikes' thread. I won't even bother with your punctuation.

Please note: You + Are= you're

I already corrected myself you gohtdammed mongolid

Its prob because you've been to a dogs!t store that can't get an elusive nike deal. Yeah the run roshes you find at kohl are trash, but any performance model (peg, vomero, zoom elite) are better than any of the shoes on the market. If you claim they wear down to fast your probably a heel striking fata$$ who needs to run better.

Pretzel Man wrote:

db indicator #1 wrote:

I look down on (amateur) runners in those cheater 4% shoes.

No one cares what you think.

He's say that he looks down on people running in 4%s.

Why do you think he'd give a rat's ass what other people think about that? Do you form your opinions in life based upon how you perceive others will view them? If so, please do tell someone about that!

consider this wrote:

The stark fact about Nike wrote:

Almost without exception, Nike shoes are for biomechanically perfect young people at or below LR accepted body weight.

If you have a shred of stability issues, or are above the age of 32, or could drop a size or two before feeling good going shirtless, you can't wear Nike shoes. Every other running shoe manufacturer makes a shoe that is more stable than anything Nike makes. And you're not fast anyway, so why are you tempting fate?

Just one problem with your diatribe: the myth of stability shoes has been debunked long ago.

I wear Nike. I have custom orthotics. Without the orthotics I would not be running. I tried a few years ago- weaned myself off- it didn't work.

I love the Pegasus, my favorite shoe ever was the Lunar Glide (1,2,3,4,5,7).

I am 60 and have been running since 1971.

Lazy students wrote:

dbsquirtNXC21 wrote:

With all the insane product improvements in the past few years I really don't get how anyone actually competitive (who isn't sponsored by another company) chooses to run in anything besides Nike. From the Vomero as the high end plush trainer down to the LTStreak 4 they have a full line of awesome shoes fit for any type of run. I can guarantee you with near certainty that most actual fast people run in the swoosh. If you disagree post with your PRs.

*you're

It's not that effing hard. You did the same thing on the 'VF vs Spikes' thread. I won't even bother with your punctuation.

Please note: You + Are= you're

He likely had trouble at CU Boulder, where the university has an over 80% acceptance rate in undergrad.

Also thought Boulder was way too cold.

Let us know when FSU let's you walk-on, ya slow bitch.

Because it really comes down to fit.

It doesn’t matter if there are rockets built into them. If they don’t fit your feet they are bad shoes.

No amount of cushioning technology is going to allow your feet to work properly if they are too tight or too loose in the wrong places.

The elites have their shoes custom lasted for their feet. This is what the consumer should be demanding for the money, not special foam and springs.

Can you imagine thinking everyone's feet are like yours? Nike is fine and all but my feet don't work in them so I don't wear them. Simple as that.

If you find a Nike shoe that you do like, chances are in six months they are going to redesign it and you'll be looking for a new model or brand anyway. So why bother.

If you make decent products, you don't need to use message boards for free advertising!

It's not the shoes. Abebe Bikila won the 1960 Olympic marathon barefoot. But you're (not your) welcome to pay $250 for a pair of shoes if it makes you feel special.