Do the people that design Nike Tennis shoe play tennis?

H

hugo

New User
The Nike Air Cage Court shoe has no proper side wall support. Leather or other imitation materials, used to provide support are missing. The simple webbing does not give any lateral support to the foot while your wearing this shoe. After a short time the side wall becomes stretched and your foot becomes outward prone while your wearing this shoe. This results also in extraordinary wear on the outside shoe sole surface.
edit


More importantly it aggravates the problem of poor foot posture, while your wearing the shoe.

Today I finally wore my older NW shoes which I had relegated for painting.

I'm tired of Nike's B--- S--- design. It seems Nike is only interested in designing shoes for people that would rather look good in tennis shoes, then making a functional product, for the purpose of playing tennis.

I will never buy Nike Tennis shoes again!

Notice to webmaster: add Google Drive to forum picture posting so I can post pictures.
 
I think you have to have a certain amount of posts before you can post a picture.

Lunar Ballistecs are pretty solid shoes, in my experience.
 
Well you bough a low-cost Nike shoe, you gout what you paid for. The high end models (Lunar Ballistec, Vapor 9.5 and Air Max Cage) are more solid... and more expensive.
 
I guess in this price range Nike is just not a good deal, at $70 you can buy better shoe, especially from other brands already on sale. I recently checked Air Max Advantage, and was very disappointed at that shoe, which is still higher end than what you bought. Just take it as a lesson learnt and move on to different brand if this is the price bracket you're willing to entertain.
 
Wow! What a 1st post!

Leather? Support? Are you kidding us?

Yeah, all those pros are really using Adidas/Asics painted to look like Nikes, otherwise they'd be crippled. Sure, kid.

I've used Nikes from the City Courts up to the V9.5's - they're all fine tennis shoes. Nike spends plenty in R&D on all their shoes. They know how to do FEM/FEA (stress analysis).
 
The fascinating thing about Nike is that they really don't need much innovation for anyone who isn't a professional.

Just look at this ridiculous "sneakerhead" culture where status is based on how many $200 pair of shoes one possesses. Not only are they expensive, but they're recycled designs with nothing new save for the obnoxious colorways.

They've even re-issued Agassi's Air Tech Challenge series and Huaraches.

I will admit: It would be nice if Nike would re-issue the Air Oscillate and the Breathe Free II. No wild colorways, just solid shoes in reasonable colors. Not everyone wants to be the center of attention because of their shoes.
 
The Air Cage Court is one of nike's lightest and least expensive tennis shoes.

Typically light shoes sacrifice stability, durability, etc.

If you want stability and more features, you need to pay more.

If you compare nike to other brands, they all have cheaper, intro models that lack all the features, and the more expensive models all have the better cushioning and support. Thus, your experience is not a nike-only phenomenon.
 
darklore009 said:
Never seen tinker hatfield played tennis when he was designing the vapor 9s
Click to expand...

Hatfield has a team of designers and engineers working for him.
He's a brand himself in design, just like Pininfarina was for Ferrari or a guy like Philip Stark...
And among that team, sure some of them must play tennis.
 
I've always thought Nike shoes were over-hyped but then I have to stop and be more realistic: Nike's don't tend to fit my feet well, so I'm not able to give them a fair assessment because I'm mostly focusing on foot pain.

The fact that some non-sponsored players use Nike suggests that they are doing something right with some of their shoes. However, you do see a variety of shoes on players at the moment. Nike gets the most attention because of Nadal and Federer, and the crazy collectors that other brands don't have.
 
Personally after my experience with the new nike air max cages i'm never going to wear nike tennis shoes again. Maybe running or crossfit stuff but never for my on court shoes. Sprained my ankle really bad with cages, i'm not saying they were the cause of the injury but since day 1 my feet never felt comfortable in those shoes. Yesterday i put on my GR5's for a light rehab workout and boy do those shoes feel nice.

Nike does stand by their shoes. If you order their shoes off nike.com they have a 30 day no questions return policy. You can wear the shoe on the court for 3 weeks and decide you don't like it, and return for a full refund. Keep in mind its 30 days from when nike shipps it, so if it takes a week to get the shoes that only a 23 day return policy.
 
ArliHawk said:
I think you have to have a certain amount of posts before you can post a picture.

Lunar Ballistecs are pretty solid shoes, in my experience.
Click to expand...
How are the Lunar Ballistecs?

The blue ones look gorgeous and I've been meaning to replace my 2.3s at some point, but I've read that they have really poor durability and wrinkle like crazy very quickly...
 
phnx90 said:
How are the Lunar Ballistecs?

The blue ones look gorgeous and I've been meaning to replace my 2.3s at some point, but I've read that they have really poor durability and wrinkle like crazy very quickly...
Click to expand...

I like them a lot, but opinions differ. I think they offer good cushioning in a light shoe, and I am not a shoe killer so can't answer that question.

They do wrinkle quite a bit, but that's no big deal to me. And, most importantly, size down 1/2 a size in them.

I have the orange color, which is on sale here for a great price. Guess nobody liked that color. I'm like you, the blue is a nice looking shoe and I may have to pick those up when they go on sale.
 
TennisLovaLova said:
Hatfield has a team of designers and engineers working for him.

He's a brand himself in design, just like Pininfarina was for Ferrari or a guy like Philip Stark...

And among that team, sure some of them must play tennis.
Click to expand...


Along with Roger Federer who claimed he contributed in development of the shoe.
 
The top-of-the-line Nike tennis shoes are very good for tennis. Anything under $100 is probably not nearly as good. You get what you pay for.
 
The Lunar Ballistecs and Vapor 9.5s are both fantastic shoes. You can't really go wrong with either of them in my opinion. If you're buying a crap pair of shoes for less than 70 bucks, what are you expecting?
 
PhotoBlue said:
The Lunar Ballistecs and Vapor 9.5s are both fantastic shoes. You can't really go wrong with either of them in my opinion. If you're buying a crap pair of shoes for less than 70 bucks, what are you expecting?
Click to expand...

70 euros is the price of the V9 in any nike factory outlet store in Europe. All we pay above is this price actually is marketing.
 
Bartelby said:
You get what you over-pay for when it comes to marketing-based companies like Nike.
Click to expand...
That's true, but the new Lunar Ballistecs have me wondering what the price jump is going towards. It's not new tech, and it's certainly not more durable.

Gorgeous shoes though, but I digress.
 
phnx90 said:
That's true, but the new Lunar Ballistecs have me wondering what the price jump is going towards. It's not new tech, and it's certainly not more durable.
Click to expand...
Nike just took a chance; they probably thought they could get his special cushioning in the LB so Nadal could play in it. He apparently didn't feel good in them and didn't wear them and thus sales have tanked. The price bump might have been too big anyhow. We'll see what they do in 2015.
 
Bartelby said:
You get what you over-pay for when it comes to marketing-based companies like Nike.
Click to expand...
Exactly! You don't get top-of-the-line performance by paying only bottom-of-the-line price. You can't pay for hamburger and expect to get filet mignon.
 
Big_Dangerous said:
That's the problem though, I'm not sure they will.
Click to expand...
They get sold out before they get that cheap in my experience.

Either that or the ugliest colours are still available, and I'm not sure I'm willing to spend money on something I consider hideous.

These colors are by far the best I've seen in the Ballistec line IMO:
nike-lunar-ballistec-mens

Nike-Lunar-Ballistec-polarized-blue-2.jpg

rs-2-copy.jpg

Still wondering if I should get the blue or the zinc...
 
Last edited:
phnx90,

the zinc looks terrible in person. On court it looks like you are wearing an extremely dirty shoe. Go for a different color.
 
QuadCam said:
phnx90,

the zinc looks terrible in person. On court it looks like you are wearing an extremely dirty shoe. Go for a different color.
Click to expand...

Ah, well that's unfortunate. Thanks for the heads up!

Blue it is then? I do have the Rafa WTF 2013 kit but no shoes or bands, and the blue LBs would go pretty well with that kit...
 
I'm sorry for the delay in getting a picture posted, but a picture is worth a thousand words, lets see if I can post the picture, so my comments can make more sense :)

if not: the HTML code link will take you there, if you copy and paste the code into your browser
HTML: 
http://postimg.org/image/6wsw7hvl7/

6wsw7hvl7
 
I'm past the age where I have need to look good on the court. So I don't give a ____ about color.
I'm more concerned that my knees with still hold out, and good functional tennis shoe. Don't ever think buying a $200.00 tennis shoe is going to give you better arch support. Your better off spend $25.00 for proper cushioned arch support, you feet will love you for it.
 
West Coast Ace said:
Nike spends plenty in R&D on all their shoes. They know how to do FEM/FEA (stress analysis).
Click to expand...

OK! ..... Sounds like you work for NIKE. Please tell me the address where I can mail them back to NIKE for further testing.

HTML: 
http://postimg.org/image/6wsw7hvl7/
 
hugo said:
I'm past the age where I have need to look good on the court. So I don't give a ____ about color.
I'm more concerned that my knees with still hold out, and good functional tennis shoe. Don't ever think buying a $200.00 tennis shoe is going to give you better arch support. Your better off spend $25.00 for proper cushioned arch support, you feet will love you for it.
Click to expand...
Don't think anyone mentioned $200 shoes. What you've bough isn't a high-end Nike shoe, period. The high end Nike shoes are the Air Max Cage, the Zoom Vapor 9.5 Tour and the Lunar Ballistec. The "Air Cage Court" aren't. If you've bough something else than that as it was mentioned several times in this thread and try to compare it to other high end shoes models, then you're on your own.
 
BreakPoint said:
If you only paid for hamburger, you won't get filet mignon to grind.
Click to expand...

I was trying to humor you. .....Seriously stop with your silly analogy's.
The NB's are just as cheap as the Nike's I posted, and have held up better.

Suggestion: It might be better sometimes to make no comment, and leave your non-critical thinking comments for Facebook and Twitter.
 
I beg to differ: after running into problems/injuries while experimenting with other brands (such as Asiscs GR5- balls of my feet, metatarsalgia and Addidas Barricades 8- heel, plantar fasciitis), I'm returning to Nike each time for support, comfort and overall performace (my regular shoe being Nike CourtBallistec 4.3 - Rafa's).
 
I beg to differ: after running into problems/injuries while experimenting with other brands (such as Asiscs GR5- balls of my feet, metatarsalgia and Addidas Barricades 8- heel, plantar fasciitis), I'm returning to Nike each time for support, comfort and overall performace (my regular shoe being Nike CourtBallistec 4.3 - Rafa's).

And you can get them on sale for $80 (from $130), even today.
 
hugo said:
I was trying to humor you. .....Seriously stop with your silly analogy's.
The NB's are just as cheap as the Nike's I posted, and have held up better.

Suggestion: It might be better sometimes to make no comment, and leave your non-critical thinking comments for Facebook and Twitter.
Click to expand...
So why not just buy NB shoes from now on?

You bought a pair of cheap bottom-of-the line Nike tennis shoes and expected it to perform as well as the top-of-the-line Nike tennis shoes? Are you serious?

Yeah, I would like to pay for a Nissan Sentra and have it perform as well as a Nissan GT-R, too.

BTW, you may waste your time on Facebook and Twitter, but I don't and never have.
 
Last edited:
hugo said:
The Nike Air Cage Court shoe has no proper side wall support. Leather or other imitation materials, used to provide support are missing. The simple webbing does not give any lateral support to the foot while your wearing this shoe. After a short time the side wall becomes stretched and your foot becomes outward prone while your wearing this shoe. This results also in extraordinary wear on the outside shoe sole surface.
edit


More importantly it aggravates the problem of poor foot posture, while your wearing the shoe.

Today I finally wore my older NW shoes which I had relegated for painting.

I'm tired of Nike's B--- S--- design. It seems Nike is only interested in designing shoes for people that would rather look good in tennis shoes, then making a functional product, for the purpose of playing tennis.

I will never buy Nike Tennis shoes again!

Notice to webmaster: add Google Drive to forum picture posting so I can post pictures.
Click to expand...

In shoes you get what you pay for. I sell tennis shoes for a living, and the air cage court is a great shoe depending upon two things:
1. If it fits your foot type properly. This is not something you will be able to figure out on your own. I highly recommend you find a local tennis shop and find someone to fit you properly.
2. If you play more than once a week, this shoe is not going to provide the level of support or durability you need. Nike's less durable shoes are easily spotted by the green "GDR" diamond on the sole. If you're a frequent player (defined by the USTA as 21x per year or more) then you'll want to select from shoes that have the orange "XDR" diamond.
 
hugo said:
I'm past the age where I have need to look good on the court. So I don't give a ____ about color.
I'm more concerned that my knees with still hold out, and good functional tennis shoe. Don't ever think buying a $200.00 tennis shoe is going to give you better arch support. Your better off spend $25.00 for proper cushioned arch support, you feet will love you for it.
Click to expand...

You paid $200 for the "Cage Court" shoe?!?!?! it is probably their cheapest, lightest shoe. Typically the lightest shoes have the least cushion.
 
Lukhas said:
Well you bough a low-cost Nike shoe, you gout what you paid for. The high end models (Lunar Ballistec, Vapor 9.5 and Air Max Cage) are more solid... and more expensive.
Click to expand...

Yes, I think the vapor and max cage are in line with other "premium" shoes from other vendors. I have not tried the Lunar Ballistec as they didn't fit my foot shape very well but that's a personal problem. In general, I like the vapor and max cage a lot but only buy them on clearance as I am too cheap to pay full price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Help Picking Nike tennis shoes
Replies
1
Views
654
snoflewis
S
gino
The Nike Sabrina Two is the GOAT Tennis Shoe
2
Replies
62
Views
3K
gino
gino
thejuice
Bigfoot needs tennis shoes
Replies
11
Views
4K
BLX_Andy
BLX_Andy
T
Tennis shoe life
Replies
4
Views
694
tennislover2
T
D
This is the Best Shoe I’ve Ever Worn for Tennis on Hard Courts…
Replies
24
Views
2K
Kenny022593
Kenny022593
Back
Top