Para leer en Español haz click aquí.
There are 2 or 3 brands known as the traditional and experts on athletics, though the progress of the research on health, the specialization in the activity (professionals and amateurs), and the evolution of marketing, detonated the development of many others that today are also leaders and well known by runners.
When I started running and until the end of my first marathon, I used a pair of Nike shoes. When I got to the finish line and took them off, I thought my feet had to be amputated, my toes were very damaged and out of my 10 nails I think I lost 6, so I got rid of the shoes. Time after I made the mistake of repeating a pair from the same brand, and ended up as hurt but now adding a knee injure; I also dumped the shoes.
Over time I became more expert on the running shoes topic thanks to the guidance of an Orthopedist and my concentration while training, I had to know better about my type of foot and the suitable shoe for it. I tested several brands that solved my injuries problems to the point to become 100% loyal to them; this election of brands excluded for 4 years Nike.
Last June someone handed me a pair of Nike Flyknit Lunar 3 shoes, the challenge was to use the brand again to prove that its technology on the running shoes had significantly improved since those days I had more toes than nails. The invitation was to have a rapprochement with Nike running shoes; I accepted the challenge.
I have flat feet and I use insoles to correct my footstep when I run; the shoes I should use are for neutral foot type, and in addition to the insoles this is the solution for my over pronation (meaning my foot rolls inward more than the ideal when ground contact landing). Once I saw the Flyknit Lunar 3, I anticipated they had very low support on the soles, they looked pretty thin and I questioned they were the right shoes for me.
To begin the test, I ran the shoes on the intervals training on the track and the results were positive, so I used them a little more and tried them on short run trainings; even though they have less forefoot and heel cushioning than I was used to, there was no discomfort on my toes, knees or ankles. After that I dared going a little farther and faster and used them on a 21 KM race.
My conclusion is not founded on my foot type, but on the shoe design and support while running. I’ll start saying that this shoe changed my idea that Nike wasn’t good for running, I really believe this shoe model is very good. It’s because the single-piece sole made with foam the shoe is very light, cushioned, and soft regardless it is thin; it is so comfortable it feels like walking in slippers. However, to me the limit of this shoe is the medium run, as after the 21 KM race my soles were very tired, I felt the pavement too hard on my feet. I wouldn’t go any farther with them.
Something I also liked about it is that the entire Flyknit line is made with microfiber knitting; it is used on the shoe cover. Its structure is made to perfectly fit the natural foot shape, it feels like a compression sock that supports in a comfortable and flexible way; plus the microfibers allows your skin to breathe.
I can’t ignore the minimalistic design and colors that makes the shoe super attractive. But the very best thing about Flyknit is that this technology helped reduce nearly 2 million pounds of waste since 2012, thus this is an ecological shoe. And this is the strong reason why I agreed to try them, and the reason why now I allow myself loving them.
Nike Flyknit Lunar 3 was awarded as the Best Update in 2014 by Runners World magazine.
So if it happens you are trying to decide which shoes should you buy, and you are training or running less than 21 KM, I recommend you the Nike Flyknit Luner 3 shoes, they really worth the shot.
Photo Credit: Carolina Soriano Fotografía.