It's versatile. On feet, the fit is true to size for me – good lockdown around the ankle. The "feel"? It's a firm, classic basketball shoe feel, not super plush. But that's the authentic AJ1 experience, you know? The "Air Jordan 1 Mid" is more accessible price-wise than the Highs, which is a major plus. Let's talk about the "Air Jordan 1 Mid" 'University Blue' – a colorway that always looks good. Unboxing it, the white and blue combo is just crisp and classic. The materials are what you expect: durable, easy-to-clean leather. On foot, it's the same reliable experience: good arch support, break-in required for perfect flex. Styling-wise, this might be one of the most wearable Mids out there – pairs with jeans, shorts, you name it. Pro: Fantastic, crowd-pleasing colorway that's always in style. Con: Like all AJ1s, the toe creases pretty noticeably – that's part of the charm for some, a deal-breaker for others. I'd say this is ideal for someone wanting a fresh, clean sneaker that won't go out of fashion. If you're terrified of creases, maybe look at a different model. Who should "avoid" it? If you prioritize extreme comfort above all else, you might be disappointed. It's a flat, firm shoe. Also, purists who "only" mess with the OG High-top silhouette might skip it. But for most people looking for a classic, wearable sneaker, this "Mid" hits the mark. Wearing the air jordan 1 mid — this "Mid 'Chicago'" style ($130 USD) — feels like stepping into history! The fit is true to size, with good lockdown, but the ankle collar is lower than on Highs, so support is moderate. On camera, the red and white combo is a showstopper. Pros: iconic design and easy to clean. Cons: the sole might feel hard after hours. Ideal for street style, not for intense sports. A must-have for Jordan fans!

  • Shown: Purple Metallic
  • Style: 555088-311

Available

Product reviews

Rating 4.5 out of 5. 8,008 reviews.

Characteristics assessment

Cost-benefit

Rating 4.5 out of 10 5

Comfortable

Rating 4.3 out of 5

It's light

Rating 4.3 out of 5

Quality of materials

Rating 4.1 of 5

popular

Assessment 4 of 5