adidas D.O.N. Issue #3 Performance Review

Utah Jazz star Donovan Mitchell recently dropped the adidas D.O.N Issue #3, his third signature pair with the brand.

Coincidentally, the sneaker release took place a month after the two-time All-Star sustained an ankle injury during the Game 3 loss against the Los Angeles Clippers. Nonetheless, the pair was released and received some good feedback from the community due to its appealing looks.

But the real question remains: can the performance keep up with its aesthetics?

To provide you an answer, Dribble Media comes with an in-depth performance review of the D.O.N Issue #3.

MATERIALS

The D.O.N Issue #3 is infused with cheap textile and synthetic materials on its upper, which are very thin, especially on the forefoot. At first, the materials are kind of stiff, but fret not, since these will eventually soften and conform to the feet after breaking in.

Another takeaway is that despite the thinness of the upper materials, there is not much airflow. This would affect the pair’s ventilation, as the heat gets accumulated since the pair lacks breathability.

Nonetheless, the materials are implemented nicely and this would reflect on the pair’s excellent overall aesthetics.

TRACTION

The outsole is made with translucent materials with minimal rubber compound in one portion of the forefoot and heel. But unlike the adidas D.O.N Issue #2, this pair has a soft and pliable outsole compound, which deems its durability quite questionable when used outdoors.

They might be different in terms of durability, but adidas implemented this pair with an almost identical traction pattern from the D.O.N Issue #2. The wider herringbone-like pattern, which resembles a spider web, gives a nod to Mitchell’s moniker.

While the traction pattern provides a good vibe on the aesthetic standpoint, this does not give much justice to its overall performance.

The brand experimented on the combination of solid rubber and translucent outsole. They even implemented the rubber compound on the crucial areas on the forefoot and heel that is supposed to drastically enhance the performance. But overall, the traction is not very satisfying due to its inconsistencies.

While it has a good amount of aggressiveness on a clean court, the traction’s bite is lackluster on dusty courts. Also, the outsole easily accumulates a lot of dust which lessens the traction’s performance.

These would make the D.O.N Issue #3 incomparable to the traction performance of the top-tier pairs like Curry 8 Flow and the Nike Lebron 19, which is arguably the best basketball shoe of the year.

CUSHION AND SUPPORT

Lately, the brand has been pushing the implementation of the Lightstrike cushion technology to their pairs, similar to what they did with the air jordan 1 . Now, it seems like Mitchell’s shoe line has formally transitioned from Bounce to Lightstrike with the implementation of this technology to the D.O.N. Issue 3.

Although it’s true that the Boost and Bounce technologies are more established, the Lightstrike technology is also noteworthy thanks to its lightweightness and responsiveness. But unlike the aforementioned, the Lightstrike’s impact and implementation vary to every pair.

For some reason, the Lightstrike is infused inconsistently in various pairs. It is perfectly implemented in some sneakers, but it feels lackluster in others.

In the case of the D.O.N Issue #3, the cushion technology is like a slope — thick on the heel, then it gets thinner going through the forefoot. This setup has more plush and bounce on the heel area, which is a perfect fit for players who prefer heel strike than forefoot running.

Another takeaway of the setup is that the heel-to-toe transition is definitely smooth. There is an excellent curve on the heel and additional flex on the forefoot due to its thin and soft mesh, so running is smoother compared to the very flat D.O.N Issue #1, where it feels like the user’s feet are slapping the ground when running.

Also, the pair has an excellent court feel, which is definitely preferred by a lot of shifty players since they can move freely and naturally. The pair’s court feel is then reinforced by a fully exposed midsole, which allows the low density foam to have more compression for better impact protection especially on the heel area.

If players have used the adidas Harden Vol. 4, the D.O.N Issue #3’s court feel and compression are comparable to that specific pair.

In addition, a TPU plate is visible on the shank portion of the outsole, which can be felt from under the strobel board when the insole is removed. This gives the impression of having two support systems.

However, there are some major downsides on the cushion set up of this pair. One of the few is the very thin insole that adidas constantly uses on their sneakers. The insole should provide additional impact protection and bounce to the sneakers, but for adidas, it seems like the insole is just for the division between the user’s feet and the foot bed. The strobel board beneath the insole is also very stiff.

But so much for the cushion. Let’s move forward to the pair’s lockdown and support.

The first impression when wearing the D.O.N Issue #3 is that the foot bed, especially on the heel, is unstable. It is actually the same dilemma that users had with the Nike PG 4, which was later on fixed when the Nike Kyrie 8 came out.

The downside of the pair is that the user can actually feel instabilities from the inside. There is an impression that the only lockdown-providers are the laces, the newly implemented elastic band on the lace lock, and the TPU-like flaps on the eyelets.

However, if users prefer roomier sneakers or if they have naturally thick and wide feet, then this would not be much of an issue.

When it comes to the support, the ankle and tongue have a good amount of padding, although they are quite thin. But players can be assured that the lateral containment of the pair is superb despite the instability on the heel and lackluster lockdown.

Do you remember the TPU plate on the pair’s shank? It actually goes through the lateral containment of the pair. With the additional internal TPU setup and the pair’s wide base, players can be confident that the lateral support is very functional.

SIZE AND FITTING

The D.O.N Issue #3 runs true-to-size, but it is very recommended to try on a pair first before purchasing since there are issues with the footbed. Users might opt to adjust to a smaller size, especially if they prefer snug-fit sneakers.

OVERALL RATING

The first two releases were not really mouth-watering from an aesthetic point of view: the D.O.N. Issue #1 looked like a sneaker for grade schoolers, while the second was bulky and hard to rock. But adidas came through with this facet of their new shoe, as the best aspect the D.O.N Issue #3 can offer are the aesthetics. The colorways are promising, and the style is easier to rock both on and off the court.

When it comes to the technology, the implementation of the Lightstrike cushion technology in this shoe line could receive mixed responses. But if it messes up this pair, adidas must consider returning to the Bounce tech.

Overall, the pair looks promising despite the downsides when it comes to the lockdown. However, the brand must not overlook that factor since instability could cause foot injuries, especially if you look at the fact that Mitchell himself just recently had an ankle injury.

But if Nike was able to fix that issue when the Dunk came out, hopefully adidas would do the same.

The adidas D.O.N. Issue #3 nets an overall rating of 4.5 out of 5. 

Too low, maybe. It’s because the major flaws of the sneaker, the instability on the foot bed and the inconsistent traction, are very crucial and might cause severe foot injuries to the user. Both are very important for basketball players and must not be overlooked.

Nike Zoom Freak 3 Reviews

Before Giannis Antetokounmpo captured his very first NBA title with Milwaukee, the two-time Most Valuable Player achieved another career milestone elsewhere: the release of his third signature shoe, the Nike Zoom Freak 3, last July 1 — 20 days before the Bucks finished off the Phoenix Suns in Game 6 of this year’s Finals.

The Zoom Freak 3 also dropped four years after Antetokounmpo signed his very first sneaker deal with Nike back in 2017. During the contract’s first year, Giannis earned roughly $35 million before his earnings skyrocketed to $43 million by June 2019.

This massive increase in endorsement revenue continued to solidify the growing relationship between the Greek Freak and the Swoosh Team, which has now produced three signature sneakers under the Zoom Freak line, along with a recently-introduced budget sneaker line known as the ‘Giannis Immortality’.

Unfortunately, the main signature line has yet to release a top-tier sneaker.

For context, both the Zoom Freak 1 and the Zoom Freak 2 were only considered as midrange performers. While there were noteworthy bright spots, both pairs are still not worthy of any comparison with the other more established signature pairs.

But with the release of the Zoom Freak 3, could Giannis’ main shoe line finally cause an uproar in the hoops world? To provide you an answer, Dribble Media is here to present an in-depth performance review of the 2021 Finals MVP’s third signature pair.

MATERIALS

This is already the third iteration, but the main shoe line has yet to receive a premium material from Nike.

Just like its predecessors, the Zoom Freak 3 is infused with textile materials for its uppers, which is very common among basketball pairs.  The upper is also reinforced with mesh materials on the heel portion for additional durability and lockdown.

But despite utilizing only cheap textile uppers, the Zoom Freak 3 conforms to the feet very well. Its flimsy mesh on the toe part nicely compliments the Greek Freak’s playing style, which is predicated on bulldozing and overpowering defenders on his way to the hoop, and euro-stepping to evade collapsing defenses.

The pair’s mesh forefoot is designed to be flexible enough to support Giannis’ signature moves. This allows the wearer to freely execute side steps without much strain. The sneaker’s forefoot is also reinforced with fuse materials so it won’t break easily.

While the forefoot provides maximum comfort with added durability, the mesh material infused on the heel is designed to strengthen the uppers and provide more breathability. Considering that the forefoot will be exposed to excessive breaks, the durable mesh heel should be able to absorb any impact.

TRACTION

At first glance, Nike Lebron 19 traction pattern — which is identical to the top-tier Kobe 9’s outsole — looks almost the same case with the Zoom Freak 3. Unfortunately, the similarity stops there.

If you are hoping that the Zoom Freak 3’s traction can at least perform on par with the PG 5, you better look elsewhere. The shoe’s aggressiveness is far from the excellent grip of the PG 5, let alone the Kobe 9.

In comparison to its predecessor, the rubber outsole’s aggressiveness of the Zoom Freak 3 could not even outdo the traction of the Zoom Freak 2 despite its omnidirectional attribute. In addition, the outsole’s rubber compound is soft and pliable, so there might be issues with its durability, especially when played outdoors.

But fret not, as it still provides an ample bite when played indoors despite the slides and delays during stops.

Each time a new sneaker is released, the bars are often set higher. It’s a shame that the Zoom Freak 3’s traction did not achieve that feat. But hopefully, breaking in the shoes can somehow give it justice.

CUSHION AND SUPPORT

On paper, the Nike Zoom Freak 3’s cushion system has the potential to be one of the best from the list of 2021 releases. This is because the pair is infused with cutting-edge technology such as the Zoom Pod, Zoom Air, the ortholite insole and the ever-responsive phylon midsole.

However, it seemed as if air jordan 1 used the right technology in the wrong places.

First, the Zoom Freak 3 is infused with two giant Zoom Pods on the forefoot. The idea was good considering Antetokounmpo’s playing style, but it would have been more effective if there was just one giant Zoom pod for maximum cushion experience.

Also, despite adding a bigger Zoom unit, there is a padding between the feet and the unit itself. This is also known as “bottom-loaded”. If the cushion is bottom-loaded, the wearer can’t really feel that there is a responsive Zoom unit on the footbed.

Another downside of the cushion is the Strobel board inside that reinforces the insoles. Due to this board, instead of experiencing the softness of the insole and Zoom unit, it just causes an unstable footbed.

Fortunately, the pair has a good amount of padding on the ankle area and tongue, which is reinforced with a TPU on the heel counter that provides good lockdown and support.

Talking about lockdown and support, the pair’s base is low and wide, so the lateral containment is almost not an issue. But what bothers is the plastic-like caging on the lateral portion of the pair. Given that the pair is infused with a phylon midsole, the caging is almost a non-factor. The pair’s lateral containment is already secure even without it.

Lastly, let’s look at the most noticeable attribute of the pair — the midfoot strap. The strap adds flavor and aesthetics to the pair, making the Zoom Freak 3 more appealing. But honestly, the strap does not really have an actual use and is nothing but a design to the pair. Supposedly, it provides better lockdown. Unfortunately, it does not serve its purpose.

SIZE AND FITTING

The Zoom Freak 3 runs true to size. However, ballers might experience some instabilities and inconsistencies on the forefoot caused by the Zoom pods. So for the best option, it would be the safest choice to fit a pair first before copping.

OVERALL RATING

This should be one pair that a lot of people may be looking forward to. Unlike other signature pairs that can still complement the style of other players, Nike made the Zoom Freak 3 personal for Antetokounmpo.

The aesthetics are good and it is arguably the best-looking sneaker from the Zoom Freak line. However, the feeling of misplaced technologies somehow ruined the potential of the pair.

The strong points were there: the uppers and the padding. But a good upper must come with a competitive traction. The adequate amount of padding is supposedly just to support the cushion.

Overall, the Zoom Freak 3 is not as amazing as it should be. Arguably, the Zoom Freak 2 is still the better choice. This might be a strong case for argument, but in a nutshell, the budget sneaker Giannis Immortality might be better both in terms of appearance and performance.

THE NIKE ZOOM FREAK 3 NETS AN OVERALL RATING OF 4 OUT OF 5.

Nike could have done better with the implementation of each technology, and they could have strengthened the traction. The upper materials are cheap, and yet it turned out to be the best feature of the sneaker. Just from that standpoint alone, there is a serious dilemma.

Nike Lebron 18 Low Performance Review

The original version of King James’ Nike LeBron 19 made a huge uproar with its superior overall performance, bombarded cushion system, and excellent aesthetics. There’s no doubt that it is among the best basketball sneakers in recent memory. Its durable Battleknit uppers, a combination of Nike Zoom and Nike Zoom cushion set-up, and a very effective traction pattern really gave the upper hand to the pair that is indeed fit for a king.

However, it’s not that much of a high top compared to its predecessors. Honestly, it is more like a low top version compared to the actual Nike LeBron 18 Low. Still, Nike did not cut corners in the support system of the LeBron 18, making the pair more superior than the others. If you are intrigued about the four-time NBA MVP’s original version of his 18th signature shoe with Nike, you can find a full review of the LeBron 18 on the link below this article.

For now, let’s focus on the overall performance of the recently-released Nike LeBron 18 Low. Spoiler Alert! The pair obviously cannot replicate each and every aspect of the original Nike LeBron 18. However, you can still keep your hopes high with this low top sneaker’s potential. That being said, let’s dig deeper into the performance of the Nike LeBron 18 Low.

HOW DOES THE NIKE LEBRON 18 LOW PERFORM ON THE COURT?

The Nike LeBron 18 Low features mesh-like uppers. (Photo courtesy of Sneaker Bar Detroit)

MATERIALS

Nike decided to forego the thick and firm Battleknit 2.0 of the Nike LeBron 18 and settled with a thin and flossy mesh-like upper material infused in the LeBron 18 Low. Evidently, the analogy is that the cheaper the price, the lesser the quality of the material. Well, the price difference between the Nike LeBron 18 and Nike LeBron 18 Low is US$40, so it clearly justifies Nike’s decision.

The material might be different, and it obviously equates to the difference in performance, but it doesn’t mean that it won’t work so don’t just throw random prejudices. Despite the visible downgrade, the Nike LeBron 18 Low’s mesh-like material offers a wide range of ventilation. Due to its thin nature, the uppers can provide enough airflow, thus, the pair consistently avoids the heat from affecting the user’s feet.

In addition, the soft mesh textile uppers conform to the feet very well wherein the pair needs less or no break-in at all to reach the uppers’ potential. Also, despite of its thinness, the upper material is durable enough to maintain its conformity and lockdown even when already a bit worn out.

Another notable feature of the upper is the fuse material in the toe cap that adds durability and protection from drags while the fuse on the medial parts provides better lateral containment. Along with this, the toe box provides good flex and curve, giving the user a smooth and comfortable experience when running.

Nike LeBron 18 Low’s traction pattern is almost similar with the Nike LeBron 18. (Photo courtesy of Sneaker Bar Detroit)

TRACTION

Although it received a little tweak with the design on the outsole, the traction pattern of the Nike LeBron 18 Low is almost similar with the original version appearance-wise. The pair has an additional abstract design, along with the square patterns on the forefoot and the nubs on the heel portion.

The outsole is very competitive and it grips well whether being used indoors or outdoors. The pair’s lateral stop is good and does not have any delays or slides while being supported and contained by the fuse-like material. Surprisingly, the traction of the Nike LeBron 18 Low is a notch higher than the Nike LeBron 18 only because in the original version, you can actually experience some slides during stops. It’s noteworthy that the LeBron 18 Low’s traction performance is very much consistent.

The only downside of the outsole is that the rubber compound is too soft. The outsole gets easily worn out overtime when used outdoors, especially if the player loves to drag or slide. Well, it is normal for outsoles to get worn out when used outdoors but the main concern will always be the durability. For a US$160 pair, it’s not very smart and practical to burn out the rubber compound in just a few games.

While there are no major concerns with the outsoles except for its durability, it’s still very advisable to give more time using this pair indoors rather than playing on blacktops. To preserve the lifespan of the pair, we strongly suggest a wider sneaker rotation, especially when you have more access playing outdoors.

But if you’re just after a competitive and consistent traction without actually minding if the outsoles will get scoffs and drags in a short period of time, and if the price of the pair will never be an issue, then the ball is on your court.

Nike LeBron 18 Low is infused with Nike React technology. (Photo courtesy of Sneaker Bar Detroit)

CUSHION AND SUPPORT

When it comes to LeBron shoes, particularly its main signature line, Nike never cuts corners when it comes to the cushioning technology. In addition, it’s no secret that LeBron is a huge fan of the Zoom Air technology, so it is and will always be the main inclusion when it comes to the Lakers superstar’s signature pairs.

The Nike LeBron 18 Low is not an exemption to that rule.

The LeBron 18 Low is infused, as expected, with the Nike Zoom Air Max technology on the heel portion, along with a full-length Nike React cushion. Without any exaggeration, both the Nike Zoom Air Max tech and the Nike React cushion are among the best cushion technologies ever created by Nike due to their superb impact protection and jelly-like bounciness.

Not to rain on anybody else’s parade, but not all combinations of the best technologies can totally equate to a perfect performance. See the Under Armour Curry 7 as an example, with the lowly integration of the brand’s best performing cushion techs, the Micro G and the HOVR.

Under Armour’s Micro G and HOVR, just like the Zoom Air and React, are known as soft and responsive cushion technologies. But when they were infused in the kyrie 8 they turned out to be a bit of a flop due to the stiffness and unresponsiveness. While it is Stephen Curry’s preference to use stiff cushion, it was still both lackluster and disappointing performance-wise, knowing the good reputation that the Micro G and the HOVR have.

On the contrary, the Nike LeBron 18 turned out to be very responsive and a bit too bouncy that the pair’s cushion was forced to have some minor flaws which yet could result into something fatal on the user’s end. This might sound exaggerated for some but don’t forget that in sneakers, too much of something could downgrade the overall performance of the pair.

Still, the LeBron 18 Low’s cushion performance is not as bad as it seems. To be honest, it performs very well. The integration of the Zoom Air Max unit and React tech is undoubtedly very comfortable. It feels like you are jumping on a mattress with how soft and responsive the cushion tech is.

However, there are some negative takeaways that are worth jotting down before you consider buying a pair.

There was a tiny flaw with how these cushion techs were infused. If you are paying close attention, we mentioned that the pair is infused with a full-length Nike React cushion. Yes, full-length. Unlike in the Under Armour Curry 7 wherein the Micro G and HOVR were infused in two opposite sides without overlapping. In the LeBron 18 Low, the Nike React was fully-infused on the forefoot area then became very thin to fit at the top of the Zoom Air Max unit on the heel portion.

This set-up allows the user to experience maximum compression and comfort. However, this same exact set-up is the reason why the Nike LeBron 18 might be unstable. The heel-to-toe transition is too high and due to the insole and the Nike React at the top of it, you can’t feel the Zoom Air Max unit. And considering that court feel is an important preference for some, this might be a red flag for them.

This is unlike the low-to-the-ground Kyries or even the responsive Nike PGs where you can feel the Zoom Air unit and the Zoom Air Strobel, respectively.

Since the court feel is messed-up because the heel-to-ground difference is too great, the cushion techs infused in the pair are basically unstable for some, especially when landing off-a-jump, which might even cause ankle tweaks resulting into an injury. While foot injuries are somewhat common regardless of the pair you use, this is one of those circumstances wherein you can actually avoid getting one.

Due to too much compression of the Zoom Air Max unit, it created a crucial drawback to the users. The cushion technology of the air jordan 1 is like a double-edged sword. While it has a pretty solid impact protection and compression, it might also inflict you an injury due to its instability, comically, with the same exact explanation.

But then again, those are just some possibilities that might occur, particularly if the user is new to high heel-to-ground and bombarded cushion pairs. Also, we cannot take away the good sides just because of some incompatibilities between the user and the sneaker.

On the other hand, the heel-to-toe transition is smooth comparable to a rocking chair motion. The forefoot flex is so good that the user can barely feel the force when running. And again, the Nike React in the forefoot area does a good job responding and lessening the tension on the feet.

The impact protection being a given, due to the bombarded cushion technology, the pair also boasts its excellent lateral containment and overall protection due to the fuse-like material and plastic piece that serve as lateral caging along with an infused TPU heel counter.

Some added features are the thick padding on the Achilles, for added stability along with the oversized tongue which makes the pair easier to wear. The inner side of the pair, specifically the foot bed is flat yet soft and responsive, making the foot stable, firm, and protected.

The pair also has a second set of eyelets just in case users prefer a tighter lacing system. For starters, the lacing system does not only prevent the shoe from wearing off the foot when moving, but it also drastically improves the pair’s lockdown to the foot to make the shoe more stable and keep the feet protected by the uppers.

The Nike LeBron 18 Low runs true to size. (Photo courtesy of Sneaker Bar Detroit)

SIZE AND FITTING

The Nike LeBron 18 runs true to size, although the toe box is a bit snug and the shoe is a bit narrow width-wise. It is still smart to assume that if you are a wide-footer, go up half a size or if in doubt, try a pair first before buying.

But then again, as a reminder, make sure that the pair’s design and technology suit your preference and physical build to prevent what could have been avoidable injuries. So don’t just barge in buying pairs just because they look good, or just because the pair is a signature shoe of your favorite player. Again, we do not want to burst your bubble and prevent you from copping a pair that is definitely worth every penny but it is very necessary to consider all these warnings, as well as the pair’s compatibility.

OVERALL RATING

As we’ve said, the Nike LeBron 18 Low is not a mediocre pair and it is definitely worth a cop considering its price. It performs very well from different point-of-views: from the traction, to the ventilation and impact protection, and to basically everything. However, just like any other excellent-performing pairs, there are drawbacks that users need to re-consider.

The Nike LeBron 18 Low has a very minor setback, but its effects could be fatal to some. A double-edged sword, you might say. A friendly reminder is to always buy a pair that is appropriate to your physical build. Compatibility is essential.

With a weight of 13 oz, it’s also noteworthy that the Nike LeBron 18 Low is heavy as expected, but lighter compared to other LeBron pairs. Evidently, the added plastic materials heavily contributed on the weight of the shoes. Nonetheless, the Nike LeBron series is designed for big and bulky players like the King himself, so the pair’s weight and the bombardment of cushion tech don’t cause any surprises.

THE NIKE LEBRON 18 LOW NETS AN OVERALL RATING OF 4.7 OUT OF 5.

Definitely the pair is a monster performer on the court. However, if it will be used by a player whose physical attributes are not designed for a heavy sneaker, or their feet could not bear the instability of the overpowered cushion tech, injuries might occur.

Air Jordan 11 Cmft Low Review

Dribble Media is here to provide sneakerheads with the Air Jordan 11 CMFT Low Review.

Responding to the plea of the public, Jordan Brand released the CMFT version of the Air Jordan 11 earlier this year. The question now is whether this sneaker can satisfy everyone’s expectations.

Months after Jordan Brand reintroduced the CMFT line, the Jumpan team has made another release of the CMFT line. This time, the iteration was made through the iconic Air Jordan 11.

You may start to wonder why the term “re-introduced” was used considering that the Air Jordan 1 Zoom CMFT was just released. Well, a lot may be unaware of this, but Jordan Brand initially released a CMFT line way back in 2011. That CMFT pair is more known as the Jordan CMFT Max Air 12.

The Jordan CMFT Max Air 12 was a nod to the Jumpman team’s very own Air Jordan 12. While the CMFT line could be a potential talk of the town in 2011 given its reputation of comfortability, the line did not age well since enthusiasts looked for something similar from the source of inspiration.

Almost a decade has passed when Jordan Brand pumped up sneakerheads with the introduction of the Air Jordan 1 Zoom CMFT. Not only that this version of the Air Jordan 1 is very comfortable, but it also almost looks the same as the OG.

With every collector’s hopes at the ceiling with the massive release of a variety of colorways of the Air Jordan 1 Zoom CMFT, everyone turned their attention to the recently-released CMFT version of the Air Jordan 11.
TO KNOW WHETHER THIS CMFT ITERATION IS WORTH A THUMBS-UP, READ DRIBBLE MEDIA’S REVIEW ON THE AIR JORDAN 11 CMFT LOW.

AESTHETICS

Let’s be honest. We all hoped that the Jordan Brand did the same to the Air Jordan 11 CMFT as what they did with the Air Jordan 1 Zoom CMFT. However, everybody’s excitement was suddenly extinguished like when you pour water on fire.

From an aesthetics standpoint, it’s very evident that the pair is miles away from the original style of the Air Jordan 11. The only angle that it somehow looks the same is on the top view.

On the other hand, the toe box gives off shadows of the Air Jordan 11. But aside from these, the pair may seem like a regular lifestyle sneaker built with the touch of Air Jordan 11.

Its appearance alone is enough to make a lot of collectors disappointed since there are almost no similarities at all from the OG. But at the end of the day, it will still boil down to one’s preference.

MATERIALS

Just like the OG Air Jordan 11, the Air Jordan 11 CMFT Low is infused with patent leather. However, the quality of the patent leather used in both pairs is quite different from one another, especially in the case of the most recent releases of the OG. In the Air Jordan 11 CMFT Low, the patent is more like the older releases of the Air Jordan 11.

Along with the signature patent leather, the pair is also infused with suede on the front and leather at the back for additional aesthetics and durability. The mesh material is integrated with TPU for better ventilation.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE OF THE AIR JORDAN 11 CMFT LOW

Despite its not-so-pleasing and hope-crushing appearance, the Air Jordan 11 CMFT Low can actually live up to its name.

Appearance aside, this lifestyle pair is very comfortable. This top-notch comfort experience is brought by the state-of-the-art cushion set-up. Though the implementation is different, the Air Jordan 11 CMFT Low is infused with a full-length Cushlon for superior comfort, just like the Nike Lebron 19.

The only difference with the set-up of the two aforementioned pairs is that the Kobe 6 Protro has the Cushlon fully implemented side by side and supported by the Zoom tech in the midfoot. On the other hand, the Air Jordan 11 CMFT Low’s Cushlon is only implemented on the midfoot.

Despite this set-up, the Air Jordan 11 CMFT Low still has enough spring and bounce to provide comfort for a long period of time. Longevity-wise, the sneaker is definitely a thumbs-up.

In addition to its superb comfort, the Air Jordan 11 CMFT Low is infused with ortholite insoles. However, it’s worth taking note that unlike the OG, the CMFT version has no torsional plate.

So if you are thinking or considering playing hoops with this sneaker, then sorry to burst your bubble but you just can’t. Besides, the Air Jordan 11 CMFT Low is designed for casual and lifestyle use only, not for lebron 8.

Finally, the pair’s traction is way different from the OG Air Jordan 11. The Air Jordan 11 CMFT Low is a bit inconsistent with its outsole. Some parts have a smooth texture while the pivotal areas such as the heel and forefoot have herringbone pattern. The outsole pattern is a given.

Despite the herringbone on the forefoot and heel, there is no way that the other areas of the outsole can survive when playing hoops indoors or outdoors. Its smooth texture is not suitable for good grip in lateral movements.

SIZE AND FITTING

The Air Jordan 11 CMFT Low runs big. It’s advisable to go half or even full size down for better fitting. If possible, try to fit a pair first to determine the perfect size.

Air Jordan 1 Low OG Review

After a long hiatus, the OG iteration of the Air Jordan 1 Low finally made a return in the racks. To assess whether the re-released version is a good cop or a whack, Dribble Media offers an in-depth review of the Air Jordan 1 Low OG.

The Air Jordan 1 Low OG was initially released in 1985 along with the Air Jordan 1 High. The release of the Air Jordan 1 Low marked the beginning of a sneaker dynasty as it was the first low-top signature sneaker released by Nike and Michael Jordan.

Then, in the early 2000s, the iconic Air Jordan 1 Low OG was remastered and it received all-new aesthetics and quality which various sneakerheads all around the world still enjoy thanks to its flamboyant silhouettes and skyrocketing collaborations.

The OG then returned in 2015 and bannered the iconic “Bred” and “Neutral Grey” silhouettes. The pair even got a Europe-exclusive release.

To formally celebrate its return, Dribble Media offers an in-depth review of the Air Jordan 1 Low OG.

AESTHETICS

The re-released Air Jordan 1 Low OG may exactly look like the 1985 version at first glance. But when observed thoroughly, there are some minor tweaks in the pair’s overall appearance and the materials.

Though the tooling in the cup sole is identical to the low, mid, and high versions, this version has a different paneling, height, and tongue appearance compared to the 1985 release. Another difference is that this release has a smaller Swoosh.

Nonetheless, the pair is still easy to match with various fashion styles with its retro look and clean colorways, especially in the case of the recently released silhouette, the Neutral Grey.

MATERIALS

One good aspect of the returning Air Jordan 1 Low OG is the leather quality. Compared to the 1985 release and some recently released Air Jordan 1 Highs, the leather of this lebron 19 pair is amazingly better.

Granted that the pair is out of circulation for quite some time, sneaker enthusiasts were having their fingers crossed on this one.  Fortunately, this iteration of the Air Jordan 1 Low OG turned out to be better, at the very least, material-wise.

It’s a good thing that Air Jordan decided to make the leather more premium for better aesthetics and a longer lifespan.

It is also noteworthy that for some reason, the tooling of the leather material on the heel portion is different compared to the aspects. The leather material on the heel portion has a better premium vibe than the other areas of the pair.

The uppers also have a pretty efficient Polyurethane (PU) coating. For those who are not familiar, PU coating is being used to enhance the lightness and durability of the materials. Also, it drastically improves the appearance of the leather material by giving tumbled effects.

But due to the PU coating, this new version of the Air Jordan 1 Low OG’s texture is rough unlike the smooth leather of the other Air Jordan 1 Low OG.

In some other aspects of the pair, the Air Jordan 1 Low OG’s tongue is made of nylon, which is common among Air Jordan 1 pairs. The nylon material gives more ventilation to the pair and makes the pair easier to wear.

And just like the other Air Jordan 1 releases, the Air Jordan 1 Low OG is infused with Nike Air Unit as its primary cushion technology. The pair is also reinforced with ortholite insoles for better comfort.

Along with these, this version of the Air Jordan 1 Low OG has a suede material for its Swoosh and heel tab.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE

Personally, I prefer to rock the remastered Air Jordan 1 Low than the OG. Considering the overall appearance, the remastered version is easier to match, and its shape is more pleasing to the eyes, at least in my opinion.

However, it won’t change the fact that the OG pair will always have a rightful place in the shoe racks of every sneakerhead. OG sneakers are not only shoes that protect your feet, but they are also vital pieces that reflect the rich history of sneakers.

In general, the materials are good. The implementation of leather is definitely amazing and the cushion setup may not be the most comfortable, but it still carries the identity of the Air Jordan 1.

But it’s expected that some sneaker enthusiasts will become half-hearted in copping a pair because of its overall performance. The main problem of the pair is its instability and stiffness.

Granted that the Air Jordan 1 is not really known for having a very responsive cushion set up, as I’ve said in my previous statement, the main issue relies on how the pair was actually built. With the curves of the pair on the forefoot, the then stiff pair became more unstable.

Also, there is almost no flat portion in the outsole. When worn, it gives the impression that the outsoles are caved in and there are some weird curves that make the feet feel warped and wobbly. This greatly affects the pair’s stability and comfort.

In addition, the supposedly strong reinforcement for additional comfort expected from the insole cannot really be felt. The ortholite insole is not bouncy enough to provide the cushion expected from the pair.

Nonetheless, the Air Jordan 1 Low OG will remain as a must-cop pair for this year. Maybe it’s not an everyday shoe for every enthusiast, but it will always be a new piece in their collection. Besides, there is no way that an OG release will not make the cut on the list of every sneakerhead.

SIZE AND FITTING

Just like the other Air Jordan 1 pairs, the Air Jordan 1 Low OG runs true to size. But if you want more snugness, believing that it will drastically decrease the chances of creasing, then you may go down half a size.

WHERE TO BUY

The Air Jordan 1 Low OG is up for grabs at selected retailers for US$130.

OVERALL RATING

The Air Jordan 1 Low OG nets an overall rating of 4.3 out of 5.