Review of shoe reviewers

Just want to review all the shoe reviewers/channels that I follow on YouTube based on my personal preference, from the least to the most favorite. My scale is simple, if you can offer something unique, insightful, have the exact content that scratches my inner itch, you will be high on my scale. Again, this is entirely my opinion, not meant to be objective at all. 

Fordy Runs: this guy's British accent (I meant is he a Scot or something) is so strong that I couldn't figure out half of what he said. He seems to have a fetish on pink and his targeted demo is middle-aged intermediate runners. His reviews however are pretty empty.

RunLikeHeller: Boring. Same old jokes repeating every single time (the "good morning YouTube intro, the TrueToSize accent, the Pull tab joke). Her shoe review format is too templated and the content is predictable. She does answer question in comment pretty diligently so that is a plus.

GingerRunner: I want to say pretty boring too but his reviews are a bit more upbeat than the last one. His content needs some diversification.

FOD Runner: this guy is more of a runner than a shoe reviewer. He is more about picking the right shoe that fits His training block rather than just reviewing whatever shoes that people want to see from him. I like him. But more because of his running not his shoe reviews.

BelieveInTheRun: Robbe and Thomas duo is just hilarious. I don't care if they are talking about shoes or not (I mean if I seriously want to know I can read their written reviews) But just hearing them talking is a fun pastime. Meghan on the other hand is like a dead fish. They understand why people still want to watch YouTube on shoes these days, certainly not for tabulated specs.

SethJamesDemoor: to be honest his shoe reviews are meh. Not very informational and very predictable. His only preference is lightweight, lightweight, and lightweight. He would give a shoe an edge just because it is an oz lighter. That's why he keeps going back the VF1 for racing despite he was given dozen superb shoes to try for free. But I like his channel because his running is inspirational. This guy has four kids, runs 140 mpw and I am not sure if he (still) has a day job or not.

RoadTrialRun: this is the first review channel that I like entirely because of their reviews. More importantly, I prefer reading their full reviews rather than watching their videos (because no offense Sam is kind of boring when it comes to entertaining). But their multitester reviews are top notch. I especially like they include shoe comparison in their reviews which usually are what I often ponder about too.

InTheLongRun: this guy is an elite runner and his review is from a pro angle. I was super impressed watching his review on the Alphafly. Super detailed and technical and on point. I am an engineer myself so I like (and know) it when people know what they are talking about.

Kofuzi: another inspirational shoetuber. Religiously wake up at 4am, quit his lawyer/legal job to run the channel. His reviews are very personal but touch on a lot of topics that I am interested in and that's what I like about it even though I don't have to feel that same things that he feels. He always reads my mind of what I want to see on youtube, as if he has access to my search history. Whatever I was pondering, he either has a video on it already or he is making one next week. One drawback is though he used to do a lot of 100 mile reviews, but now I am seeing less and less. I guess as he is gaining popularity, more shoes are coming his way so he has less time per shoe. One thing I don't like about shoe reviews are they separated into first impression and long term reviews. I understand people want the first impression more because of the urge of buying new stuff. The shoetubers understand that too that's why we are seeing more and more first impression reviews and less and less long term reviews (or replaced by shorter term reviews) because few people care after the first impression.

EddBud: now the final, my favorite shoetuber. He is from UK too but I have no issue understanding him (what's up with that Fordy?). Edd has a great sense of humor. He is the only one pointing the negative in the Invincible while everyone else is praising it like a cult. His content is updated, on point, but without the feeling that he is rushing out content just to catch what wind is blowing out there.

The hyped, the workhorse, and the surprise: Comparison of Three Max Cushion Shoes

First off some basic stats: (US mens 8)

Endorphin Shift: 4mm drop, 10.3 Oz, 70 miles

Triumph 17: 8mm drop, 9.75 Oz, 450 miles

Nike Invincible: 9mm drop, 9.35 Oz, 15 miles

[Upper lockdown/comfort/fit] 

All three shoes have no issue locking down. I don’t have any heel slippage. The Triumph initial feels like slipping a bit but that is only a sensation due to the heel collar is very slick. I don’t feel that anymore after some running in it. In terms of step-in comfort, I would say Triumph > Shift ~ Invincible. The Triumph is very plush and soft. It screams comfort. Some people may find it too much shoe and it does feel warm in the summer. The Shift feels comfortable in the way that it fits better than the Triumph and has a better/snugger lock down. The breathability in the Shift is the best out of the three. The Invincible has a comfortable step-in too, but not quite as plush as the Triumph. The “flyknit” somehow feels stiffer than the engineered mesh on the Triumph, and certainly not as comfy as the Shift. I don’t want to comment on the style of Invincible as it hurts my eyes to look at it.

[Midsole Ride]

This is where the three shoes have distinctive characters. Because of the stack height, in none of these shoes you will feel the road at all. If I may try to describe the midsole in three different sub-categories, they would be the shock absorbing capability, the energy return and the rate of

the retu啪啪啪怕了怕了评论了啪啪啪0啪啪了老婆力量rn, and finally the sole geometry. 

First off, the shock absorption. This means the ability of the shoes to absorb impact on the road and shield your feet and joints from the pavement pounding. Softness or durometer is a good measure for this property. In my experience, while all of these three shoes provide good enough shock absorbing capability, the Invincible is clearly the softest one. So in this sub-category: Invincible > Triumph > Shift. That said, we all agree that softer is not always better. So the sweet spot of softness is a personal choice. I personally am not a big fan of a soft ride and find it working against my gait cycle. 

Secondly we come to the energy return, the most hyped up property of a running shoe midsole. There are many adjectives describing energy return, like bouncy, responsive, snappy, springy, or pingy. They are all very subjective descriptors based on personal sense. I want to boil down this characteristics into two simple measurable terms: the amount of energy returned, and the rate of the energy return, so that we can demystify things in a measurable way.  The former simply means how much energy that you put in comes back in your toe-off instead of dissipated as heat, and this can be measured roughly by heart rate effort; The latter is how fast the energy is returned in your toe off. Imagine two springs, upon the same impact loading, both return the same amount of energy but one does that faster than the other. If you have a foot pod, this can be measured as time elapsed between max compression to toe-off. I don’t have a foot pod so I can only provide comments based on my own experience.

For the energy return or saving, I did three longish runs, all around 11-12 miles, at similar heart rate of 140 bpm (this is my zone 2 HR). The one shoe that gives me the fastest pace should deliver the best energy return.

The result is: 

-Endorphin Shift: 8.08 min/mile

-Triumph 17: 8:23 min/mile

-Invincible: 8:21 min/mile

I don’t really feel which shoe give me a “fresher leg”. To me leg freshness is very subjective or ambiguous, and it involves not just the midsole, but also your fatigue level, and mostly your form. I understand the pace has lots of other factors. I made my best attempt to try to keep other factors equal. But take it with a grain of salt.  From this crude comparison the Shift has the best energy return. And the Triumph and Invincible is similar.

For the rate of return, Shift>Triumph > Invincible. The TPU foam in the Triumph has less compression/travel than the Invincible and it snaps right back while the Invincible decompresses leisurely. The Shift returns the fastest but it might feel too firm to some. To me it feels pleasantly firm. Different rates of energy return affect the peak paces which the shoe excels at, simply due to the fact that the natural frequencies of the materials resonate with different gait cadences. What that means is that the faster the rate of return is not always better if it doesn't match your pace/gait cycle. Imagine a foam that has instant energy return, i.e. It returns energy while you are still landing down so the returning force is out of phase with the work you put in. The best rate of return is the one in phase with your gait cycle, i.e. It pushes you up when you need it to. The Invincible while being uber soft and has good enough return, it feels not as snappy due to the sluggish decompression.

There is a very nice write up to demystify energy return of running shoes: The Truth About Energy Return in Your Shoes | Runner's World (runnersworld.com)

The last sub-category of midsole ride is the sole geometry. Here the result is Shift > Invincible ~ Triumph. The Shift is the only shoes in the bunch that has a meaningful rocker. I have a theory that a rocker shoe must have some rigid element in the sole in order for it to rock, otherwise it will simply compress and collapse instead of rolling forward. In plated shoes it is the plate that plays this role as the rigid guiding element. In the Shift it is the midsole itself. So I can understand why they make the Shift with a firmer midsole even for a daily trainer, it is precisely because of the need of the SpeedRoll geometry. Another point to note is that I don’t really mind the “firmness” of the Shift at all. First of all it doesn’t bother me. And it provides a quick energy return that it feels fast. In Feb-March I was suffering PF and it was the Shift that helped me run through it. So if it is soft enough for my PF foot, it is soft enough for the normal me. The fact the Shift surprisingly runs the fastest while being the heaviest of the three also tells me weight is an overrated spec that people fuzz too much about.

[Durability]

In this category, there is really no comparison. Triumph >> Shift >> Invincible. Why? Earlier I posted my AB test on my 450 mile Triumph  17 and it still looks (upper and outsole) and runs the same as a brand new pair. It is built like a tank. I can take it to all kinds of terrains without thinking about it. And we all know how fragile the ZoomX powered Invincible is from了 what has been posted here. ZoomX foam typically last 300-400 miles if not less, while the TPU foam arguably never dies. I suspect if I want to, I can take the Triumph to 800 miles. Did I mention that I bought it at $90? Incredible value as a workhorse long run shoe.

The Shift sits in the middle in terms of durability. It is also built like a tank (literally look at the heel armor). However its PWRRUN foam is less durable than the PWRRUN+ (TPU) foam, so I gave it a bit less score. But still no doubt that it can last 450+ miles and can take abuse. 

The Invincible, some has quoted that lasted 400+ mile but many have reported split or torn Zoom X with some twists and turns or simply hiking. I will need to baby this shoe since I spent $180 on it (two pairs worth of Triumph). Mine arrives brand new with some glueing defect on the outsole. 

[How would I use them]

Recovery from beaten up legs or injury: Invincible;

Long slow distance runs: Triumph > Invincible; (Triumph first because it is cheaper).

Long distance moderate-effort runs: Shift > Triumph. I need snap in this kind of runs. Babying my legs is not the priority. I need interaction and these two shoes give me that.

[Bottomline]

I would buy the Triumph 17 again and again without a heart beat. And probably would say the same for the Shift as well. The only thing I wish to improve on the Triumph 17 is to tone down the plushness on the upper to something like the Ride or Freedom but keep the midsole as is. The Shift I wish it can be priced at $130. At $150 I won’t buy it again especially considering the Axon is out there. 

I will not buy the Invincible again unless it: redesign the upper to make it look better and the price drops to $150 or less. And need to fix all the quality and durability issues found in this iteration. The only thing that keeps the Invincible in the comparison is the somewhat intriguing Novablast-like ride. While it is fun, it doesn’t return energy significantly more or faster than the other two shoes. It is what it is, a hyped up daily trainer. With this category of shoes my primary objective is to soak long miles, and to train aerobic endurance. So durability is high priority and mile/dollar is important and all three shoes discussed here are comfortable enough for this goal.

In this running shoe era, softness is somehow marketed and shoved down our throats as better. It is not always the case and it is certainly not true for everyone.