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. Okay, here's my real take on the "Air Jordan 1 Mid". You're not getting groundbreaking tech here – it's a 1985 design, updated. The ankle padding is thinner than the Highs, which I actually prefer for casual wear. It's a style-first shoe, part of the core "Jordan series". At around $120 USD, it's an accessible entry point. Fantastic for beginners in the sneaker game. Not so fantastic for performance basketball – that's not what it's for anymore. Slipping these on for the first time... The fit is true to size, offering a secure, snug wrap around the midfoot, thanks to that classic lace system. The ankle collar, being a Mid, is definitely less restrictive than a High-top. It’s a comfortable, broken-in feel from the jump, which is a huge plus for daily wear. Alright, let's get into these "Air Jordan 1 Mid" ‘Black Toe’ right here. First impression? Super clean. The color blocking is just iconic. The leather on these feels decent out of the box, not super premium but it’s good for the price point of around $115. Honestly, the silhouette of the "Jordan 1 Mid" just works so well—it’s a classic for a reason.

  • Shown: Electric Green
  • Style: 528895-106

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