Monday, 2 April 2012


If shoes (“x”) have a lifespan - measured in weeks - of “y” (or measured in miles of “z”) then would 2x=2y, or 2x-2z OR as I have postulated would 2x>2y or 2x>2z.
Bullshit? Probably. Anyway, I have a theory – or rather I’ve heard this before, and I want to see if it’s true. Say, for arguments sake, you get three months out of a pair of shoes that are worn day in day out. Well, if you had two new pairs of shoes and you wore one pair till they were “dead” then moved on to the other – you’d get six months in total. Right?
BUT, the theory I want to test goes, IF you have two new pairs and alternate them, day about, then for some reason you get longer than six months (it might only be a short period).
Is this true? If it is …. WHY?? Does the EVA midsole get a chance to “recover” if it’s not being pounded day after day after day?? Maybe it’s the upper rather than the sole. Perhaps wearing shoes every day doesn’t give them time to dry out completely? Or perhaps, and most likely, its all in the mind.
Whatever, I’ve got two spanking new pairs of Brooks Adrenaline and I’m going to give it a bash.
And to insure that I don’t accidently wear the same ones all the time I’ve got a different pair of laces to put in one pair.

No comments: