Shoe reviews, useful or not? If you are looking for an extra pair of shoes it is is easy to get confused. A year ago I bought my first pair of serious running shoes: Asics Nimbus 19. Being a big guy (read: to heavy) they were recommended plus they felt good after trying some others in the shop.
But then you get tangled in the web of articles on blogs, in magazines and talks with others:
- you need at least 2 pair of shoes
- heel landing is fine
- heel landing is the devil and will get Trump reelected
- 180 cadans
- these are to heavy
- cushioning is horrible for your senses
- cushioning is great for preventing injuries
- our shoes are so great you will run a marathon untrained (I am in advertising but really: ‘ bleehh’)
- etc etc
Combining with the fact I am not a great runner-big understatement- I thought sticking to what I have is the best. With my injury now almost gone my physiotherapist said I should look at chi running. Not completely adapt it but a least take some of it. Which led to looking at advice for shoes that would make it ‘easier’ to adapt. 2 things were obvious: weight and heel drop. So being a really bad runner and completely not understanding reviews people give about shoes I bought a second pair and felt really pro about it!
Here is my review:
- They are much lighter then the Nimbus 19.
- they are black
- I felt that midfoot landing was sort of easier with the lower heel drop. (but this could also be in my head)
- they were really cheap: EUR60,=
Hopefully my triathlon ‘career’ will be long enough to be able to write better reviews… 😉
Sinds 3 jaar een triatleet. Startte met een kwart op de Alpe D’huez in 2016 en moet daar nog steeds van herstellen.