They are a little more on the neon side than I generally prefer but since Runner Commandment 7 is Thou Shalt Not Buy Shoes based on Color, I'm stuck with them. I tried on several pairs at Universal Sole while picking up my race packet for the Lakefront 10 and these were the ones that felt the best. That’s not to say the other shoes didn't feel good, in fact any of the ones I was shown by the Felicia Day clone would have been perfectly fine.
I'm also considering getting a second pair of shoes now as backup instead of waiting until these are shot. Conventional Runner Wisdom is to buy two pairs of the same shoes and alternate them between runs so that the cushions have at least 24 hours to decompress. Alas, I'm:
- Too cheap and
- Too undisciplined to do something like that.
More to point #1 since I spent ~$120 on the first pair (after discount) I want my second pair to be cheaper. So it’s likely the $58 neutral or the $90 stability I saw at Dick's Sporting Goods the other week. I will have to go back to Dick's and see which feels better, IIRC the $90 felt better but I want to double check.
My cousin asked about the Newton Line. I cannot say anything about Newton. I've heard of them but I don't recall if my runner friends endorse them or not. They came on the scene during the time I was not running as much so obviously I wasn't gonna invest $200 beans in any running shoes.
My psychobabble two-cents: I do think that while research and technology has improved the running shoe, I do wonder how much of a game changer a $200 pair of shoes can be. If we got in our Delorean and took a pair back to the First Boston Marathon, would the winner who ran 2:50 have run a 2:30 instead? Unless there is some new breakthrough in shoe design or materials, we might be at the threshold of what a shoe can do for us.