Terms of the offer
After a full day, my feet are "ready" for a break. The lack of arch support and firm midsole is noticeable. But! The style points are through the roof. They look great with jeans, shorts, you name it. Durability is a plus—these things are tanks. So, who are they for? People who prioritize style > all-day comfort. Not for you if you're on your feet 12 hours. It's a trade-off with this iconic Jordan series model. Got the classic 'Chicago' Jordan Air 1 Retro High OG. Man, unboxing this legend... the red just "pops" against the white. It's history in a box. On foot, it's the same familiar fit—secure, but don't expect cloud-like comfort. It's about the look and the legacy, "period". Comparing it to newer Jordan models with Zoom? No contest on cushion. Pro: unbeatable iconic status. Con: premium price (often over $200) for a "firm" experience. A grail for collectors, but a practical choice for daily beaters? Maybe not. Now, the potential downside? That flat, firm footbed I mentioned. If you're on your feet all day, it might not be the most comfortable option. Also, the leather can crease — some people hate that. I think it adds character, but it's worth noting. It's not a "performance" shoe by today's standards. What's good everyone? Unboxing the "Mid" version of the "Jordan 1" in this "Shadow" palette. First thing I noticed: the price is "friendlier" – around "$135" – but the materials feel a "step down" from the Highs. The shape is "slightly" different, a bit chunkier. On foot, the comfort level is "similar": firm. The "main benefit" here is accessibility; it's a more affordable way to get the iconic look. The "trade-off" is prestige and often material quality. Honestly, if you're on a budget or prefer a "slightly" less restrictive collar, the Mid is fine. Purists will always choose the High OG.
- Shown: Rookie Of The Year
- Style: 555088-180
