The "Patent Bred" 'Nike Air Jordan 1 Retro High' is… shiny. First off, the patent leather looks "rad" in light – super glossy. However, it’s stiff! Breaking these in will be a journey. They feel tighter than regular leather AJ1s. On foot, they’re a statement piece. Compared to my standard "Bred" pair, these are for bold outfits. Pro: unique look that stands out. Con: questionable comfort & durability (creasing). Recommend for hardcore Jordan fans who want something different, but maybe not for your first pair. Now, a potential "con": that stiff leather and flat footbed. If you have "really" wide feet or need arch support, these might feel restrictive after a few hours. They do break in, but the initial wear can be a bit "harsh". It's a trade-off for that crisp look. Final verdict on this pair. The Air Jordan 1 Retro High remains a style icon for a reason. This 'Bordeaux' pair has rich colors that look even better in sunlight. On foot, they provide great ankle support and a timeless profile. The main benefit is its ability to elevate almost any casual outfit. The drawback is the dated tech - your feet aren't getting spoiled here. I'd say these are perfect for someone who values heritage, style, and that classic basketball sneaker vibe above cutting-edge comfort. If your priority is all-day cushioning, I'd point you towards the Jordan 1 Zoom CMFT or a different line entirely. Unboxing this 'Black Toe' version felt like holding a piece of history. The nike air jordan 1 retro high's construction is top-notch, no glue stains or messy stitching on my pair. The ankle support is great for casual wear. Downside? They're a bit heavy compared to modern trainers. For styling & that classic sneakerhead flex, these are 10/10. But for performance or long walks? Not the best tool for the job, in my honest opinion.

  • Shown: Bred Toe
  • Style: 555088-711

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