First off, the box is classic Jordan, and the shoe inside... the build quality is solid. This Mid-top silhouette is instantly recognizable. For around $135 USD, you're getting a piece of that Jordan 1 legacy. The leather feels decent for this price point - not super premium, but definitely not cheap. Alright, let's get these on foot. So, slipping into this "Air Jordan Mid 1", the fit is true to size for me. The ankle collar is less restrictive than a High, which is a plus for all-day wear. Comfort? It's a classic court shoe—don't expect Boost or React. It's firm, but in a good, supportive way for casual use. The "Jordan series" mid cut is seriously underrated for daily comfort. Comparing it to other Jordans... If you have a High, you don't "need" a Mid, but it's a different vibe. The "Air Jordan Mid 1" is easier to put on and off, for sure. It’s less of a statement, more of an everyday shoe. I find myself grabbing these for quick errands more often than my Highs. The price difference in the "Jordan series" makes the Mid a fantastic entry point. Just know the materials might be slightly different—sometimes less leather, more synthetic. Still a great shoe for the money. On-camera review of this "Air Jordan Mid 1" ‘Black Toe’. Man, this colorway is legendary. In-hand, the leather has a nice grain. Upon wearing, the support is great – true to the shoe's heritage. It looks sharp and timeless on foot. Compared to other Jordan models, this is pure, unfiltered history. The pro is its iconic status and versatile color-blocking. The con is the lack of modern cushioning tech; it's a firm ride. For around $125, you're buying into a piece of sneaker culture. I'd say it's a must for collectors of classic silhouettes. Not for those seeking a cloud-like, modern sneaker experience – and that's okay!

  • Shown: Rookie Of The Year
  • Style: CZ0774-300

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