New ON performance tennis shoe line coming later this year - Tim Newcomb

aus89

Hall of Fame
ON has revealed there is a new top of the range ON performance shoe joining the lineup alongside the Roger Pro 2 later this year in an interview with Tim Newcombe on Forbes.

"Both on the tennis court and off, On’s The Roger footwear line has a fresh sense of purpose. That purpose will expand throughout 2025.

The newest update is a fresh take on the lifestyle-centric The Roger Clubhouse model and a completely new The Roger Advantage Pro for the court. Later in 2025 expect a second pinnacle performance model to join The Roger Pro 2, along with a host of updates throughout the year.

It’s all part of a brand embracing tennis, both on and off the court."

Katariina Tuohimaa-Mendel, On’s head of product for tennis says: “In the second half of 2025, we’ll extend the lineup on the performance side with a shoe built for aggressive movers that will offer a great alternative for our athletes who can choose from two pinnacle performance shoes,” Tuohimaa-Mendel says, “one tailored more for speed and agility, and the other more for durability and stability.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/timnew...-roger-footwear-line-modernizing-and-growing/
 
ON has revealed there is a new top of the range ON performance shoe joining the lineup alongside the Roger Pro 2 later this year in an interview with Tim Newcombe on Forbes.

"Both on the tennis court and off, On’s The Roger footwear line has a fresh sense of purpose. That purpose will expand throughout 2025.

The newest update is a fresh take on the lifestyle-centric The Roger Clubhouse model and a completely new The Roger Advantage Pro for the court. Later in 2025 expect a second pinnacle performance model to join The Roger Pro 2, along with a host of updates throughout the year.

It’s all part of a brand embracing tennis, both on and off the court."

Katariina Tuohimaa-Mendel, On’s head of product for tennis says: “In the second half of 2025, we’ll extend the lineup on the performance side with a shoe built for aggressive movers that will offer a great alternative for our athletes who can choose from two pinnacle performance shoes,” Tuohimaa-Mendel says, “one tailored more for speed and agility, and the other more for durability and stability.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/timnew...-roger-footwear-line-modernizing-and-growing/
A speed shoe and a durability shoe - how do they just come up with this stuff?:sneaky:
 
The outsole of RP1 has not support, it's like a flat pad under the forefoot of your foot. Otherwise I think it's alright. Apparently RP2 is the same outsole?

And this new model would be the durability one?
 
Finally, been saying this for months for ON to create a more durability/stability model for their line up. If they are going to create a speed/agility model, what’s the RP1/RP2 model? Isn’t that already a speed/agility shoe ala Zoom Vapor

The only downside I’d have is the stupid price point for these models. I don’t mind spending retail for their running models but the prices for their tennis shoes are much more than Nikes but also never go on discount/sale too
 
I don't understand the On hate in this forum. I like the brand — excited to see them continue to iterate, improve and figure out how they fit into the market.

That's ON in general, even in the running sector. They're nice, but overpriced and there are typically a lot better options for the price. If you want to look boujie though, you buy ON lol.
 
I wish they were good. Roger Pro 1 just plain sucks. It's terrible.

Terrible in what sense? I have a pair from when they first released and the only "negative" I can take away is that it's very minimal/low cushioning shoe which makes you play on your toes. Makes sense since it's modeled for Roger's playstyle which is soft, fluid, constant movement. My feet were hurting after a couple matches but it felt great on the court.

I know it doesn't get the greatest praise, especially for its durability.
 
Terrible in what sense? I have a pair from when they first released and the only "negative" I can take away is that it's very minimal/low cushioning shoe which makes you play on your toes. Makes sense since it's modeled for Roger's playstyle which is soft, fluid, constant movement. My feet were hurting after a couple matches but it felt great on the court.

I know it doesn't get the greatest praise, especially for its durability.
There is no forefoot support whatsoever. It's like a flat board with no cushioning nor extra spring to help you out.

The most important part of a tennis shoe, in my opinion, is the forefoot support. If you have none it's useless.
 
There is no forefoot support whatsoever. It's like a flat board with no cushioning nor extra spring to help you out.

The most important part of a tennis shoe, in my opinion, is the forefoot support. If you have none it's useless.

What do you mean by "support"?

If you mean by "cushioning" something that absorbs impact, then this is the opposite of giving you return, or "spring."

But both "return/spring" AND "absorption" - which can be combined to some degree, but I am not a materials engineer - are best performed by your body and proper footwork/movement mechanics.

Too little ground feel/feedback offered by "cushioned" court shoes merely compensate for poor mechanics; and they can also encourage the same, and ultimately injury.

If you mean by "support" that your feet are well wrapped and laterally secure, then I agree; but the RP1 and RP2 offer this in spades.
 
The core issue with ON shoes is their pricing is just too high. I have had many pairs of their running shoes and while I do like them pricing wise it gets hard to justify.
At the junior levels where my kids are playing it makes no sense since they go through shoes and honestly, tennis shoes are like the balls & strings. Disposable aspects of the sport so heavy investment on such a depreciating piece of equipment is tough.
 
What do you mean by "support"?

If you mean by "cushioning" something that absorbs impact, then this is the opposite of giving you return, or "spring."

But both "return/spring" AND "absorption" - which can be combined to some degree, but I am not a materials engineer - are best performed by your body and proper footwork/movement mechanics.

Too little ground feel/feedback offered by "cushioned" court shoes merely compensate for poor mechanics; and they can also encourage the same, and ultimately injury.

If you mean by "support" that your feet are well wrapped and laterally secure, then I agree; but the RP1 and RP2 offer this in spades.

This is a good question. I'm trying to think what is more important in general for a shoe - the support from returning onto the ground or the ability to help spring / energy return as cuts are made.

The spring / energy return is an added nice feature but not important. Just a personal preference.

Otherwise I agree with you, the cushion is super important in my eyes and it has no cushion whatsoever. I would assume the pros that used RP1 (maybe RP2 also) have an insole that helps a little on the cushion aspect, no? I just can't imagine players are grinding their bodies with a shoe that gives nothing.

Have you played with them as well vs other popular high end models?
 
It’s a solid shoe, I think the Roger pro 2s are better, but when I tried the Roger Pro Fire, they were definitely good shoes
No I bet and I never tried the RP2 but the RP1 I thought was more comfortable, love that uppers on those compared to the RP2s
 
They love their pink! The outfits posted btw are the US Open outfits.
Haha I don’t mind it but it gets boring after awhile. It’s like Nike using volt.

Yeah I saw them, looks basic but simple and nothing new imo. If you look at some of their running shirts/tanks, those designs are good
 
For sure! Some of their running designs are really nice, just the material doesn’t hold up for tennis as much just because it’s so much thinner. They’ve got a bunch of nice stuff coming out for their “Pace” running line.
How much different is it compared to their tennis line? Cause from what I see from the players who endorse them, it doesn’t look as breathable and very thin
 
Back
Top