The upper feels sturdy. On feet, they're true to size with a secure wrap. Visually, the silhouette is just unbeatable; it works with almost any outfit. At $180, it's an investment in a classic. The upside? Timeless appeal and durability. The potential downside? They can feel a bit "clunky" compared to low-profile sneakers. Great for your rotation if you love classics, but maybe pass if you prefer minimal, flexible shoes. Who should "avoid" it? Performance basketball players—this is not a modern hoop shoe. People with wide feet might find the fit snug. If all-day, cloud-like comfort is your #1 priority, there are better (but often less cool) options. The "Air Jordan 1" demands a slight comfort sacrifice for style. That's the trade-off. Check out this "University Blue" "Jordan Air 1"! "Straight out" of the box, the colors pop "so" well. This is one of those pairs that just looks "better" in person, you know? On feet, the fit is perfect for me – a true sneakerhead staple. The "advantage" of the "Air Jordan 1" is its timeless design; it's a piece of history. However, the "arch support" is basically non-existent, which might bother some. If you're new to Jordans, this is a "fantastic" first pair. If you have "multiple" 1s already, it's just another (awesome) color. At "$170", it's a solid pickup. Unboxing these Jordan 1 Retro High OG 'Bred Patent' was… interesting. The patent leather shines "so" much under the lights—it's a statement. Fit-wise, they feel a bit stiffer than the standard leather versions. Honestly? I love the bold look, but it's not an everyday shoe for most. The pro is that iconic colorway with a twist. The con? The patent can show scuffs easily. At $200 USD, it's a collector's piece. Suited for bold dressers & completists, less so for a subtle, beaten-up sneaker look.

  • Shown: Obsidian
  • Style: DC9533-800

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