I normally don't like Nike shoes because they're so stiff. I have close to 50 pairs of shoes, and only 2-3 of these are Nike. (Well... Nike now owns Converse, and I have about a dozen pair of Chuck Taylor hightops in different patterns and colors -- which I can only wear by inserting a quality running shoe insole -- so I guess technically these are Nike.) But the Nike Free has a "sectioned" sole, making it very flexible. On top of that, they are lightweight with a soft, sock-like inside (no tongue). Basically, these are like a sock racer, but with a little more structure.
Essential points of clarification (with parenthetics):
5.0 is the model number -- not the size. (I wear a 10.5 in Nike, which run small.)
"Free" is the model name -- not the price. (These are about $85 USD.)
I wear these just as comfortable, walk-around shoes. (I run in New Balance or Asics.)
[ August 04, 2006: Message edited by: marc weber ]
"We're kind of on the level of crossword puzzle writers... And no one ever goes to them and gives them an award." ~Joe Strummer sscce.org
Today was a pair of Rocky Branson Ropers. A great cross-over work boot with western styling. Perfect for the motorcycle, and super-comfortable right out of the box. [ August 06, 2006: Message edited by: Bear Bibeault ]
Originally posted by marc weber: Okay, Bear... They're not my style, but I have to admit those are cool. Actually, the soles caught my eye -- I might even believe they're "comfortable" (within certain parameters).
Believe it or not they're extraordinarily comfortable. More so than my sneakers, in fact.
Even though I'm in the heart of Texas, I've never been a big fan of western boots -- in general, they're impractical, uncomfortable and just too ornate for my tastes.
But when I saw these, I thought they struck a nice balance and would be a nice change from the more prototypical motorcycle boots that I usually wear, especially if I wanted to "dress up" a bit.
I think it was the sole that initially caught my eye too. That and the rounded (sensible) toes, and flat (sensible) heel. [ August 05, 2006: Message edited by: Bear Bibeault ]
I'm wearing cheapo trainers. When my last pair were finally banished to the bin (more at my girlfriend's insistence then at mine, after all what's the problem with a few extra holes?), I initially decided to go for some kind of ethically correct footwear. You know the kind of thing, a shoe that hasn't been made by three year olds with one arm stuffed into a factory in a jungle somewhere. Then I realised that all the shoe companies probably do that so I may as well do what I always do and go with the best deal.
So now I have a pair of trainers which cost just twelve quid. I'm not sure how much of that princely sum went to the children, but I'm guessing about 3p. I guess you could say I sold my soul for a sole
Just out of interest, while on the subject of shoes, is there anyone here in a male-female relationship where the male owns more shoes then the female? Has this ever happened? I consider my three pairs of shoes to be a bit of overkill, but my girlfriend has a shoe collection which would put Imelda Marcos to shame.
There will be glitches in my transition from being a saloon bar sage to a world statesman. - Tony Banks
Joined: Jan 29, 2003
Marc - sorry about the "k". Gotta learn to engage brain & type slower.
Originally posted by Dave Lenton: ...is there anyone here in a male-female relationship where the male owns more shoes then the female? Has this ever happened? ...
I think my girlfriend and I are running neck and neck at about 50 pairs each.
Part of my compulsion is an eternal quest for a really comfortable shoe. (No, I mean really.) I usually put running insoles inside most of my shoes (which seems kind of funny with Chuck Taylor hightops, because the insoles cost almost as much as the shoes).
I normally run in New Balance or Asics. I gave up on Nike back in the 80's, when I developed a stress fracture training in Nike Vectors. But these new Nike Frees are so light and flexible that I gave them a try on Saturday. They felt great! I guess now that I'm only running about 20 miles per week, I probably don't need the high-mileage trainers that I've always used, and can get by with a less structured, more comfortable shoe.
On the other hand, my girlfriend is obsessed with "cuteness" (which she interprets as heels) and only has 3-4 pair of flats. I don't think she has any concept of a comfortable shoe.
I used to have quite a lot of shoes, also being constantly on the lookout for shoes that were comfortable (and in fact for the last several years shoes that I could wear without getting sore feet after a few hours).
I've now pretty much given up on shoes except when the need strikes, and thrown away all but some pairs of sandals and 2 pairs of the most comfortable dress shoes for when the need arises.
My feet over the last several years have gotten wider and wider to the point where I now need shoes that are 2-3 sizes wider than they are long, something that's impossible to get.
Unfortunately, I've never found dress shoes that are even remotely comfortable. Fortunately, I don't have a job that requires them. But here are some non-athletic options that fall within my "acceptable" comfort range (with new insoles)...
I have never spent more than 100 euros on a new pair of shoes, and last month I replaced my trusty old Adidas, with a new Asics Gel Nimbus (Speva, IGS etc etc) - which I find excellent - good support and balance.
To work, its always a cheap Clarks (often bought in a sale somewhere), and each pair usually lasts about six months! I also have a few other pairs (Hush Puppies) for the weekends, shopping, socialising etc. Oh, have two pairs of boots, which I never get to wear!
Old trainers serves me well to muck about in the garden!
I don't find that unusual; I've probably got about that many or perhaps a few more. I haven't counted.
Joined: Jan 20, 2005
Originally posted by marc weber: I think my girlfriend and I are running neck and neck at about 50 pairs each.
50 That must take up some serious storage space. I'm not sure I would be able to have that much even if I could think of a reason for having that many!
I normally run in...
Ah, I see. If you have a hobby which involves using a particular item of clothing, I guess it is understandable that you would have more. Even still... 50. I'm making a large assumption here, but are you in the US? I've heard that trainers are a lot cheaper there. I certainly couldn't afford to buy that many here in the UK. OK, so mine were quite cheap (�12/$22), but many decent running trainers would cost about �40-80 ($76-$152). 50 of those would be quite an investment, unless done over a long time period.
I don't think she has any concept of a comfortable shoe.
I wonder if the Spanish Inquisition originally designed heeled shoes. Its beyond me why so many people actually enjoy wearing something which causes them physical pain!
Joined: Oct 13, 2000
Exactly same thoughts as Dave posted there - a decent pair of shoes (any type) costs between 50 to 100 euros, and my shoe rack holds about 24 pairs (between myself and my girlfriend). Well, there are few more here and there (attic etc), but I don't think I would ever wear them again!
Joined: Oct 23, 2002
Regarding women and shoes:
I have a hard time understanding why anyone - in a public forum - would say things like:
Marc: my girlfriend is obsessed with "cuteness" (which she interprets as heels) and only has 3-4 pair of flats. I don't think she has any concept of a comfortable shoe.
Dave: I wonder if the Spanish Inquisition originally designed heeled shoes. Its beyond me why so many people actually enjoy wearing something which causes them physical pain!
Shhhh... dont give them any good ideas
Jeroen T Wenting
Joined: Apr 21, 2006
The first recorded high heeled shoes were worn in Venice by a rather short member of the important families in order to appear taller than she really was. It soon became a fashion statement among the noble houses to wear ever higher heels, and as the general population has always mimmicked their leaders and icons they soon started the practice as well (though it would be several centuries more until the general population started to wear shoes at all for more than formal occasions, shoes being at the time far too expensive to wear them except to church, funerals, and weddings for all but the richest).
Me? I live in Annapolis too, and I love the aqua as much as the next person, but today I wore my good ol' trusty pair of Johnston-N-Murphy Signatures (Cost? $300.00, yeah beatches, you read rite, $300.00). Now, why would any self-respecting engineer buy an expensive pair of shoes like that? three words: built-in odor-eaters. Yeah, I got some stanky feet, and the built-in odor eaters, supple lamb-skin leather, rubber soles, shock-absorber heal, and built-in fellator do all I need and much, much more!
If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Unless you really suck at it. Then, you might just want to try something else, if you dont' want to be a loser I mean.
Great shoes - I've worn them to work every day since I got them in '98 and apart from several pairs of laces they are just fine...
Wearing trainers/sneakers/runners/whatever-you-want-to-call-them shoes to work is generally not accpetable - but my shoes manage to balance the line between 'casual' and 'formal' well enough to handle me wearing anything other than dinner suit - (and obviously not with shorts in summer)...
How many pairs of shoes do I own:
1 - dress shoes for dinner suit, (worn at *most* once a year) 1 - work shoes/casual attire shoes (as seen above) 1 - trainers (worn for 5-a-side soccer) 1 - tivas (all-round summer sandal) 1 - walking boots (worn for heavy duty-hiking, mainly when on holiday) =========================== 5 pairs... thats it....
Why would anyone need 50 pairs of shoes?
Joined: Jan 20, 2005
Originally posted by Adrian Wallace: Wearing trainers/sneakers/runners/whatever-you-want-to-call-them shoes to work is generally not accpetable
This could by why I have less shoes then many - I can wear trainers to work, so I don't need an extra pair. In fact trainers are smart compared to what some people in the office wear on their feet!
Now I just have trainers, some smart shoes for the rare times I wear a suit and some casual shoes to wear when on holiday. I also have a pair of flip-flops for the beach, but I don't think they really count as shoes.
I don't believe anyone used the word "need". No one needs 50 pairs of shoes/boots. No one needs 50 shirts. No one needs a plasma TV. No one needs a wifty sports car. No one needs gourmet coffee (OK, I'm addicted and do need it).
But these are all things that people like and make them happy. I enjoy having the same degree of choice in footgear for the day that I do in shirts or pants. So if I see a pair of shoes or boots that I like, and I can afford them, I buy them, societal norms about how men are "supposed" to view wardrobe non-withstanding. (Goodwill and other charities benefit greatly when I get "tired" of a pair.)
I've got the closet space, so why not? [ August 09, 2006: Message edited by: Bear Bibeault ]
The only difference is that I don't have the closet space, so it's time to gather stuff for a charity donation.
LOL. Closet space is sometimes the trigger for when I donate a pair to charity. When a new pair comes in, an arithmetic shift occurs and a pair gets pushed out onto the donation stack.
Joined: Jan 20, 2005
In the paper this morning I read about a recent survey (of women in the UK) claiming that on average three quarters of shoes which a woman owns will not fit correctly, and half of all women will have had to have been carried by their partner at some point because their feet hurt!
Originally posted by Chetan Parekh: I want to purchase following one...
Looks cool (and comfortable)! You need these. [ August 10, 2006: Message edited by: marc weber ]
Jeroen T Wenting
Joined: Apr 21, 2006
Originally posted by Dave Lenton: In the paper this morning I read about a recent survey (of women in the UK) claiming that on average three quarters of shoes which a woman owns will not fit correctly, and half of all women will have had to have been carried by their partner at some point because their feet hurt!
That's optimistic. I've read papers by foot doctors who claim that over 90% of shoes manufactured today don't fit anyone properly, the only exceptions being custom fitted shoes made to size by expert professionals (which are exceedingly rare and expensive of course, as each shoe is made by hand to exact specifications).