This "air jordan 1 mid" offers that iconic look without draining your wallet. The version I have is the 'Chicago Black Toe' inspired one. Construction is standard - nothing luxury, but it gets the job done. On feet, they feel... familiar. It's the same tooling as always. Compared to retro releases, you're sacrificing some material quality for accessibility. Pro: Iconic design. Con: You feel the cost-cutting. It's a gateway into the "Jordan series", ideal for new fans. Opening the box, the air jordan 1 mid's profile is just iconic – that never gets old! For this Black/White pair at $125, the value is there if you want a classic. When I walk in them, the support is good, but the break-in period is real. Cameras love this shoe; it always looks sharp. Main advantage? Timeless aesthetics. Downside? The midsole is pretty stiff. Great for style-focused folks, but probably not the best pick for people with wide feet or those needing plush cushioning. What's up, everyone! Got the "Air Jordan 1 Mid" on feet today. Look, for the money — we're talking $120-$130 — you're getting a ton of style. The "Gym Red" pops "so" well on camera. Compared to a high-top AJ1, the Mid offers a bit more ankle mobility, which I actually prefer for casual wear. The "big" pro? Versatility. The con? That flat, unforgiving insole. I'd grab a pair of your own comfort inserts, seriously. If you value looks over cloud-like comfort, go for it. Open box, and that new sneaker smell hits! The shape on these Mids is slightly bulkier than the OG Highs – you can see it in the toe box and collar. It's not bad, just different. Some colorways use softer leather than others, so check reviews! Overall, for a "Jordan series" entry-point, it delivers. It feels substantial in hand, not cheap. A solid first impression every time.

  • Shown: Court Purple
  • Style: CT8529-141

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