I found this shoe to be really comfortable with no break in required. However, I wore a hole in the sole in under 2 weeks, maybe 3-4 sessions a week. Durability has to be improved or the price has to be reduced significantly. Too bad, otherwise this would be my shoe of choice.
Just look at online reviews. Everyone says the same three things: wide toe box, minimal cushioning, extremely low durability. And they’re $200. You be the judge.
Roger Pro is a horrible shoe. The worst shoe I bought in my recent memory. No cushion, support is not good, traction is ok but durability is trash. I don’t care what nobody says, it’s probably decent if it’s 80 bucks, but it’s 200. Come on Roger.
All On shoes have a wide toe box. I’m glad they pointed it out. I watched a lot of other reviews say nothing about it.
not my experience RE: ON Monster
The best looking tennis shoe by a mile.
$200 a pop is still way too much for the average consumer. They have to find a way to bring this down and the sales will pop off.
I found this shoe to be really comfortable with no break in required. However, I wore a hole in the sole in under 2 weeks, maybe 3-4 sessions a week. Durability has to be improved or the price has to be reduced significantly. Too bad, otherwise this would be my shoe of choice.
I got fat foot lol Thanks for the review
Just look at online reviews. Everyone says the same three things: wide toe box, minimal cushioning, extremely low durability.
And they’re $200. You be the judge.
I can tell these guys ddn't like them but they hid it somewhat well!
I have them and they suck. Sole is too thin. Disappointing because I have two on running shoes and they are awesome
broad fit? music to my ears
😬 Gotta teach that dude how to say Swiatek.
I've heard nothing but bad things about these shoes
Roger Pro is a horrible shoe. The worst shoe I bought in my recent memory. No cushion, support is not good, traction is ok but durability is trash. I don’t care what nobody says, it’s probably decent if it’s 80 bucks, but it’s 200. Come on Roger.