Choosing running shoes: which tests can you trust?

The running shoe market is booming. So how do you choose the right model, the pair that truly suits you? There’s no shortage of reviews, both online and in specialist magazines, including plenty right here. But how can you tell whether a review is reliable?

First, it’s worth remembering that brands, or their representatives such as PR agencies, are usually the ones distributing free pairs of shoes to carefully selected recipients: specialist media outlets, influencers and bloggers. They decide who gets the opportunity to test their products. To assess how useful a review really is, several criteria need to be considered. The same criteria also apply when judging the reliability of advice on training, nutrition and other topics.

Who is doing the testing?

Start by finding out exactly who the tester is. What is their sporting background? Have they been running for a few weeks, a few months or several years? How much technical expertise do they have? In other words, do they regularly test different products? What is their build: tall, short, light or heavy? What is their level: recreational, competitive or elite? And what distance or discipline do they focus on: 10K, half marathon, marathon, short trail races or ultras?

All these questions help reveal the potential biases in a review. However objective and experienced someone may be, their analysis is inevitably influenced by various factors. For a review to be as neutral as possible, it would require a far more scientific and rigorous approach than simply having one person, or a small and unrepresentative group of runners, try a pair of shoes out on the road or trail.

What links does the tester have to the brand or its competitors?

A tester sponsored or paid by a brand is unlikely to openly criticise one of that brand’s shoe models. They may, however, be more inclined to highlight the weaknesses of a direct competitor’s model. Conflicts of interest need to be identified at all costs so you can distinguish a neutral review from a straightforward marketing exercise.

Where is the review published?

If the shoe review isn’t published directly on an influencer’s account or the tester’s blog, it may appear in a print magazine or on a digital media outlet. In that case, it’s important to identify exactly what kind of publication it is. Is it a specialist running and/or trail title? Is it local, regional, national or international? How much expertise does the publication, and therefore its contributors, have? Is the outlet relatively independent, or does it belong to a major group that may also own running brands? Is the website affiliated with a running brand or a specialist retailer? Once again, these questions can expose potential commercial bias and help assess the reliability and objectivity of the content.

What were the testing conditions?

Finally, last but not least, the testing conditions are crucial. Every shoe review should set out the practical details: how many kilometres were covered in the shoes? On what surfaces? In what weather and climate? A trail shoe tested in an urban park will obviously be assessed differently from one tested on a highly technical mountain path. Likewise, a 45-minute road test cannot offer the same level of insight as an extended trial over ten or so easy runs and interval sessions.

To sum up, running shoe reviews are undeniably useful buying guides, but they should be treated for what they really are: empirical tests that, far from being infallible or universally applicable, are subject to a number of biases, even when the tester does everything possible to remain objective. A review can help guide an individual choice and probably prevent some costly mistakes, but it can never replace your own experience. The person best placed to know which shoe is right for you is you.