Tennis shoes good for running

[eLterrible]

Are there any <$80 tennis shoes out right now that are durable and good for hardcourts, but also are comfortable as running shoes?

I've tried running in nike air resolves but my shins started to hurt, so i need tennis shoes with a lot of cushion.

 

[goober]

I don't think any tennis shoes are really good for running if you plan on running on a regular basis. I would just get some real running shoes. The other thing that will help a lot is try not to run on concrete and run as much as possible on soft surfaces.

 

[jonolau]

My advice to you: the reason why there are so many different types of shoes on the market now is because each on is SPECIFICALLY designed for the type of activity it was intended for.

For example, when it comes to designing tennis shoes, pressure sensors are located in the test shoes to determine where the most stress is located, and hence the right cushioning and support would be built into those areas. Likewise for running shoes.

Both activities will have different sets of stress loads on different parts of the body.

In the long run (no pun intended), it is advisable to get specific sets of shoes to save yourself money (for medical fees) and physical discomfort.

 

[OrangeOne]

My advice to you: the reason why there are so many different types of shoes on the market now is because each on is SPECIFICALLY designed for the type of activity it was intended for.

Hmmm, i'd think specific design would account for about half of the different shoes / shoe types on the market, and marketing and advertising would account for the other half of the differences. Maybe I'm being cynical, but there's so much marketing BS when it comes to sports shoes it's not funny.

Point in question (which is brand oriented, but still holds relevance): Nike makes maybe a couple of dozen running-oriented shoes a year, maybe more. Go to a marathon or triathlon and look at the front 80% of the field and do a count.... A million Asics, Brooks and New Balances, and the very odd Nike here and there. Why? Because most of the "specific design" nike put into their "running shoes" is designed to make it feel cool & squishy in the shop, and look good. When someone has 40 kilometres to run, they care more about support & strength in a shoe, than squishy energy-wasting crap that is often really bad for their feet & joints!

[Note: I haven't been to a marathon / tri in the US. I hope that the US population aren't swallowing the Nike BS just because Nike are Nike! ]

 

[jonolau]

Hmmm, i'd think specific design would account for about half of the different shoes / shoe types on the market, and marketing and advertising would account for the other half of the differences. Maybe I'm being cynical, but there's so much marketing BS when it comes to sports shoes it's not funny.

Point in question (which is brand oriented, but still holds relevance): Nike makes maybe a couple of dozen running-oriented shoes a year, maybe more. Go to a marathon or triathlon and look at the front 80% of the field and do a count.... A million Asics, Brooks and New Balances, and the very odd Nike here and there. Why? Because most of the "specific design" nike put into their "running shoes" is designed to make it feel cool & squishy in the shop, and look good. When someone has 40 kilometres to run, they care more about support & strength in a shoe, than squishy energy-wasting crap that is often really bad for their feet & joints!

[Note: I haven't been to a marathon / tri in the US. I hope that the US population aren't swallowing the Nike BS just because Nike are Nike! ]

Hi OrangeOne,

You are not wrong and I used to share your cynicism too when it comes to claims on design. However, I had the great fortune of having my wife work as a manager in Nike. The so-called marketing BS part comes in with the colour schemes and names. But the technology and design for modern-day shoes is all real.

A lot of work and research goes into design and advancement. It may not hold so true for the entry level shoes, but the mid to top-end shoes have a lot of work put into it.

Whether all that research justifies high prices is another contentious topic that can be debated forever.

 

[muggy]

I happen to agree, if you follow shoes closely you see that Nike does a lot of the innovation in the shoe industry, and often makes some of the best shoes out there.

Nike is one of the companies that gets the best shoe designers, and works like a small company with the goal of making the best shoe. Nike also has an incredibly talented marketing department, which leads to the higher prices and flashy looks.

Nike tends to flood the shelves with shoes of all kinds, style to functional, at various pricepoints to reach as many people as possible. They still have great shoes at the top of every market. Basketball shoes are one area that Nike seems to dominate, with only Adidas making any other real quality kicks for b-ball. I think running shoes is the one area where the rest of the competition catches up, a lot of companies are making their living in this very market. Nike knows feet and shoes, though, don't be mistaken. I think they've been improving their tennis shoes each year, as they're lighter than most other brands, have good cushioning, and are moving up in durability.

 

[TheRed]

like everyone else has said, running shoes are for running and tennis shoes are for tennis. No matter what brand of shoes you're talking about, the basic running shoe is designed far differently than a tennis shoe. For short runs you could get away with tennis shoes but not any type of serious running (I used to run cross country while being captain of the tennis team). By the way, the resolves have just about the worst cushioning of any tennis shoe I've worn.

 

[BreakPoint]

Go to a marathon or triathlon and look at the front 80% of the field and do a count.... A million Asics, Brooks and New Balances, and the very odd Nike here and there.

That's just because Asics happens to make the best running specific shoes on the market IMHO. Someone has to make the best running shoes, and Asics happens to be the one. Not really Nike's fault as they do try. And you really can't fault Nike for not advertising that they make poor running shoes. I mean every running shoe manufacture advertises that they make great running shoes using their own unique technologies, right? Not just Nike. So is everyone except Asics just lying? What the manufactures may believe is "great technology" may or may not work for you.

It's up to us as consumers to use our own brains and choose the best running shoes for us, and not up to the manufacture to choose for us. That's why freedom of choice is so cherished in a free society.