Why have so many pros started using ultra low profile shoes?

Djokovicfan

Professional
By low profile i mean thin sole. I found out a long time ago that professional badminton players prefer shoes like adidas sambas; they prefer thin soled shoes like sambas because the closer their feet are to the ground the more quickly they can react to shots and the more stable they will be. Tennis shoes from what i have seen over the years seem to have had fairly thick soles, putting more distance between the court and the bottom of the players feet. I assume this was to add height to the player so they could serve better, but i guess comfort could have been another reason.

But recently i have seen many pros using shoes that have much thinner soles than i am used to seeing. Is this paradigm shift forthe same reason as badminton? If so i guess the added response and stability of a low profile thin soled shoe outweigh the lost height afforded by a thick soled shoe.

Is there any reason besides adding serve height and adding cushioning that the older gen of shoes had thicker soles?

does modern shoe technology allow shoes to be just as cushioned with a thinner sole than before?
 
The Nike air oscillate should never have been retired - low profile low drop shoes are like a low, good handle sports car - you feel the ground beneath your feet and just feel more stable moving around (provided they fit well).
 

Djokovicfan

Professional
The Nike air oscillate should never have been retired - low profile low drop shoes are like a low, good handle sports car - you feel the ground beneath your feet and just feel more stable moving around (provided they fit well).
Yeah. I think in general tennis shoes were obtusely designed in the 90s. I remember having tennis shoes that almost felt like snow boots they were so clunky.
 

Seth

Legend
The Nike air oscillate should never have been retired - low profile low drop shoes are like a low, good handle sports car - you feel the ground beneath your feet and just feel more stable moving around (provided they fit well).

Might have to start a thread dedicated to the Oscillate. So many pros wore them.
 

Flair328

New User
I had a pair of Oscillate, gave me pain in the knees after long matches, the cushioning was non existent, it was the 1st shoe Nike used Zoom Air
 

brewcrew

Rookie
I think the thickness was/is more for durability than height. As it is I blow through a pair of the thick-soled shoes every six months. I tried some Adidas low profile light weight tennis shoes several years ago and they were fast and comfortable, but they lasted like six weeks. Hard cuts and sliding on asphalt is really tough on shoes.
 

brinkeguthrie

Hall of Fame
I had a pair of Oscillate, gave me pain in the knees after long matches, the cushioning was non existent, it was the 1st shoe Nike used Zoom Air
The Air Zoom pounce, while tres' ugly, fit very comparably. That, the Oscillate, and the Mac trainer thing were my faves for them.
 

bluetrain4

G.O.A.T.
I think the thickness was/is more for durability than height. As it is I blow through a pair of the thick-soled shoes every six months. I tried some Adidas low profile light weight tennis shoes several years ago and they were fast and comfortable, but they lasted like six weeks. Hard cuts and sliding on asphalt is really tough on shoes.

This. I never heard of thick soled shoes for height. It was about cushioning and durability. But durability isn't the same issue for pros who are receiving free shoes. It's actually sort of a return to the shoes of eras past which were generally more thin soled. Obviously some players will stick with more cushioning, but others seem to like the benefits of a less substantive shoe.
 

travlerajm

Talk Tennis Guru
I wear worn-down beat-up Adidas Rockadia cross trainers that are an inch lower to the ground than when new. I’m glad to see my unique shoe taste is coming into style.
 
Top