<\/div><\/div>”],”filter”:{“nextExceptions”:”img, blockquote, div”,”nextContainsExceptions”:”img, blockquote, a.btn, a.o-button”},”renderIntial”:true,”wordCount”:350}”>

I’m not crying, you’re crying.

OK—so we’re probably both misty-eyed. But how could you watch Alone Africa’s fifth episode and not tear up while watching the show’s lovable and grandfatherly contestant battle his inner demons?

Spoilers ahead. Of course, I’m referencing Douglas, the 57-year-old from North Carolina with the Santa Claus beard and folksy twang. On episode five, we spent ample time with Douglas as he endured rain, hail, plunging temperatures, and his own emotions.

Throughout the ordeal Douglas shared ample memories from his childhood in Indiana, his strong relationship with his brothers, and his love of his parents. And then, midway through the episode, Douglas let the audience know about the familial trauma that was weighing him down.

Shortly before he shipped out on Alone Africa, Douglas learned that his father had been diagnosed with an aggressive form of cancer. And as the days wore on, Douglas couldn’t stop thinking about his dad.

Yeah—heavy stuff.

Survivalists Can’t Think Too Much About Home

While watching Douglas wrestle with his father’s illness, I thought about Woniya Thibeault’s recent essay: 5 Signs That an ‘Alone’ Participant Is About to Quit. Woniya’s second indicator—are they curious about and engaged with the place, or are they looking at their photo and talking about home and family?—came to mind.

Long story short: when a participant starts thinking a lot about the folks back home, it’s a sign that they’re no longer mentally and emotionally committed to life in the wilderness. And it’s only a matter of time before they bail out.

Over the years, we’ve seen several Alone survivalists go on the show amid a period of intense emotional upheaval in their everyday lives. And in all of these cases, Alone’s isolation and punishing day-to-day life prompts the character to open up about his or her emotional struggles. But in all of these situations, the person eventually quits.

In season 1, Massachusetts native Mitch Mitchell revealed that his mother was diagnosed with a brain tumor shortly before he went on the show. Mitchell, a very talented survivalist, lasted 43 days in the wilds of Vancouver Island, but eventually his mother’s illness became his day-to-day focal point. He left to be with his mom, despite having a capable shelter and access to food.

In season 3, Pennsylvanian schoolteacher Jim Shields went on Alone just after he and his wife learned that they were about to adopt three children. There was no way for Shields to separate himself from the knowledge that his wife was about to meet the three kids without him, and he talked about it as he built a tent and attempted to fish. Shields left after just three days—wisely so.

Isolation and the Battle to Stay Focused

Of course Alone participants don’t need to be in the throes of emotional crisis to tap out due to the mental/emotional struggle caused by thinking of life back home. One of my favorite Alone participants ever is Peter Albano, a librarian from British Columbia, whose journey on Alone‘s 11th season highlighted this struggle.

Like the other nine survivalists in his season, Albano was plunked down along a river near the Arctic Circle in Northern Canada. After a few days in the wild, Albano started catching fish—tons and tons of fish. He pulled massive pike out of the water, smoked the meat, and appeared to have enough on his hands to start a seafood restaurant.

But the isolation gave Albano lots of time to think, and his mind drifted to his relationships with his loved ones. After eight days, Albano began to fixate on his relationship with his son, and his inability to create the relationship he wanted with the boy.

“My son, he feels big feelings,” Albano said. “And I’ve never been able to relate or empathize with him. I feel terrible. I feel this overwhelming sense of failure.”

Alone acted like a therapist’s chair for Albano, and after several days he drilled down into the gap between him and his son: his tendency to wall off his own feelings. After reaching this conclusion, Albano immediately tapped out. It was as if he couldn’t spare any more time away from his child after knowing the key to repairing the relationship.

Heartache for Douglas

Like Albano, Mitchell, and Shields, once Douglas started to fixate on his dad, he couldn’t stop. He tapped out after 11 days, and said he wanted to get home as quickly as possible to be with his father. As a cruel twist, Alone producers let us know that Douglas got home too late—his father had already passed.

Full disclosure: I cried when the text flashed on the screen.

Every few years Alone debuts a spinoff show that features past participants—usually fan-favorites—coming back for the challenge. Think Woniya on Alone: Frozen or Jordan Jonas and Clay Hayes on Alone: Skills Challenge. 

I wouldn’t be surprised to see Douglas be invited back into the Alone universe for a spinoff. As a longtime fan of the show, I definitely could have spent more time with him.

Rainfall, Flooding, and Cold

Of course the other big story in Alone Africa was that the balmy and dry conditions were completely erased by a major storm, which dumped inches of rain on the desert and flooded out some of the survivalists, specifically Baha and Kelsey.

Kelsey was the biggest loser—her shelter was nearly engulfed by a massive river. Katie emerged as a winner, by weaving together a new section of her shelter and also rolling with the punches of the storm with a very positive attitude.

Another survivalist to suffer a setback was Dug. The episode left on a cliffhanger, after we seemed to watch him pass out after working on his shelter. Like everyone else watching Alone Africa, I hope Dug is OK.

After five episodes, my mental ranking of the remaining Alone characters based off of their situations and attitudes:

1. Katie: her shelter is looking strong, and the storm caused her very little stress
2. Nathan: he has food and a positive attitude; now he heeds to build a permanent shelter
3. Kelsey: she still has meat left over from the warthog, but her attitude took a hit after the flood
4. Baha: he has no ferro rod, a leaky shelter, and poor access to food
5. Dug: he’d be higher on the list if not for the potential medical situation

<\/div><\/div>”],”filter”:{“nextExceptions”:”img, blockquote, div”,”nextContainsExceptions”:”img, blockquote, a.btn, a.o-button”},”renderIntial”:true,”wordCount”:350}”>

Finding the right pair of road running shoes can invigorate—or reinvigorate—anyone’s relationship with running. Shoe technology is constantly evolving. With lighter weight, springier midsole foams, comfort-enhancing upper materials, novel shapes that add stability, and embedded plates for increased efficiency, there are more great shoes on the market than ever to meet the demands of an incredibly wide range of runners.

The multitude of choices, however, can lead to decision paralysis. To help you find the best running shoe for your specific needs, we’ve tested more than 100 pairs of new and updated models with a diverse team of over 20 testers. Whatever your current goals may be—learn to love running or best your marathon PR—our guide is here to help.

Updated July 2025: We’ve tested and selected new models in four out of 14 categories, naming new shoes for Best Lightweight Trainer, Best for Recovery Runs, Best Natural Ride, and Best All-around Stability Shoe—and updated prices and availability for all the shoes in the guide.

At a Glance

Training Shoes

Stability Shoes

Racing Shoes

Trail Running Shoes

Tips and How We Test

---

Best Training Shoes

Best All-Around

Asics Novablast 5

$140 at Dick’s Sporting Goods $140 at Asics

Weight: 9 oz (men), 7.9 oz (women)
Stack Height: 41.5–33.5 mm (men’s); 40.5–32.5 mm (women’s)
Drop: 8 mm
Sizing: 6-13, 14, 15 (men’s), 5-12 (women’s)

Pros and Cons
⊕ Great weight-to-cushioning ratio
⊕ Smooth ride
⊗ Poor outsole grip in slick conditions

Versatile, cushioned, and responsive, few shoes check as many boxes as the ASICS Novablast 5. Underfoot, ASICS upgraded the midsole to FF Blast Max, a polyolefin-based compound that’s a touch softer and bouncier than its predecessor. Testers praised it for its “plush experience” and “lively and energetic feel underfoot.” The shoe delivers a buttery smooth ride with a noticeable poppy feeling most everyday trainers lack. Despite the thick stack of foam underfoot, the Novablast 5 remains surprisingly nimble for an everyday trainer. While it’s not our first choice for dedicated speedwork, it handles uptempo efforts better than any other daily trainer we tested. The ride is also surprisingly stable thanks to the wide base and the responsiveness of the foam, which saves it from feeling squishy.

The fit, which is true to size, remains largely unchanged from the Novablast 4. Testers appreciated the new stitch-free engineered jacquard mesh upper, noting it felt a touch softer, improving overall comfort. Straight out of the box, the Novablast 5 felt run-ready with no break-in required.

One area that could be improved is the outsole. In an effort to keep the weight down, ASICS skimped on the rubber. This didn’t affect traction on dry surfaces, but one tester noted that he lacked confidence in the shoe during cold and wet runs. “It’s not slick, but it doesn’t grip,” he said.

We rarely suggest one shoe that would work for every runner, but the ASICS Novablast 5 is a standout that just about anyone would appreciate for almost any type of run.

---

Best Cushioned Trainer

Nike Vomero 18

$150 at REI $150 at Running Warehouse

Weight: 11.5 oz (men), 9.3 oz (women)
Stack Height: 46–36 mm
Drop: 10 mm
Sizing: 6-13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 (men’s), 5-12 (women’s)

Pros and Cons
⊕ Outstanding stability for such a tall shoe
⊕ Extremely comfortable
⊗ Heavy, slow

When it comes to adding volume to running shoe midsoles, more isn’t always better. Sometimes more is just more. That’s not the case with the Vomero 18. With an added six millimeters of foam underfoot, everything about this shoe exudes comfort. Holding the title as Nike’s most thickly cushioned running shoe to date, the Vomero 18 features a dual-density midsole that pairs a new version of Nike React X—which Nike claims has 13 percent more energy return—with ZoomX foam. React X, the firmer, more durable layer, delivers structure and support on the bottom, while the softer, more responsive ZoomX—featured in Nike’s Alphafly and Vaporfly—sits on top for a bouncier ride. The pairing delivered a smooth, cushioned ride that testers found both plush and surprisingly stable for such a high-stack shoe.

Nike didn’t just add more cushioning underfoot—the revamped engineered mesh upper also receives a healthy dose of padding for all-day comfort. The downside to all this plushness is that the Vomero 18 tipped the scales at 11.5 ounces for men and 9.2 ounces for women, making it the heaviest shoe we tested. While they are well balanced and don’t feel like weights on your feet, testers did note the shoe is best suited for everyday, easy, comfortable runs.

Read our full wear-test review of the Vomero 18

---

Best Distance Trainer

Brooks Glycerin Max

$200 at Running Warehouse $200 at Brooks

Weight: 10.5 oz (men), 9.5 oz (women)
Stack Height: 45–39 mm
Drop: 6 mm
Sizing: 7-13, 14, 15 (men’s), 5-12 (women’s)

Pros and Cons
⊕ Tuned midsole is both soft and responsive
⊕ Wide platform keeps tall midsole stable
⊗ Feels somewhat bulky

The Brooks Glycerin has long been Brooks’ premium highly cushioned everyday trainer. However, with stack heights increasing across the industry, its 38mm/28mm profile no longer stands out as a true max-cushioned option for long-distance running. Enter the Glycerin Max, which is Brooks’ highest-stacked shoe to date but manages to not feel overly tall.

Brooks’ new DNA Tuned midsole starts with its familiar nitrogen-infused EVA-based compound, but instead of being a consistent density throughout, the foam has different-sized cell structures in different locations, making it softer on the outside of the heel and firmer and more responsive on the inside of the heel and throughout the forefoot. “The result is a high-cushion shoe that I found doesn’t wallow and allows the foot to engage as it rolls through the stride, making it a shoe that I, usually a max-shoe hater, wanted to wear more,” noted one tester.

Raised sidewalls and a noticeably wide base aid in creating a stable stance for such a tall shoe. To enhance a smooth roll from an otherwise inflexible sole, a rockered forefoot encourages a natural forward transition, helping maintain momentum with each stride. A rather simple engineered mesh upper, consistent with other Brooks models, provides a true-to-size fit that complements the shoe’s plush underfoot feel. All in all, the Glycerin Max coddled our feet while rolling smoothly through the miles, making us want to keep going no matter how far from home we wandered.

Read our full wear-test review of the Glycerin Max

---

Best Value

Brooks Launch 11

$120 at REI $120 at Brooks

Weight: 7.7 oz (men), 7.1 oz (women)
Stack height: 35.5–27.5 mm
Drop: 8 mm
Sizing: 7-15 (men’s), 5-12 (women’s)

Pros and Cons
⊕ A lot of bang for the buck
⊕ Foot-following fit and ride
⊕ Versatile
⊗ Narrow for some

It is not easy to find a good running shoe for less than 125 bucks these days, but the Brooks Launch 11 is an exception. The Launch 11 may not offer massive cushion or a carbon or nylon plate, but we kind of love that about it. Instead of the trampoline-like ride of so many other shoes on the market right now, the Launch 11 provides a classic, almost old-school vibe by allowing groundfeel while still offering a little bouncy rebound. Paired with an upper that conforms around and moves with your feet, plus looks great, we think this shoe gives a range of runners great bang for their buck.

With this update to the Launch, Brooks added 1.5 millimeters more lightweight, responsive cushioning (Brooks nitrogen-infused DNA Flash foam) under the heel and 2.5 millimeters more under the forefoot, with an insert of even lighter and springier DNA Flash 2. This gives the Launch 11 a higher stack height but a lower heel-toe offset (eight millimeters instead of 10) than the Launch 10. We found this update super comfortable and more than capable for everything from daily miles at a cruisy pace to shorter, faster efforts, and even allowed us to dance nimbly over tame trails. One tester noted that this shoe feels “light and springy and propels you forward,” while another called it “downright snappy.” Another tester gave the $120 Launch 11 a score of 10 out of 10, raving that it has “one of the best sneaker fits so far” for her narrow foot, with “all the bells and whistles needed.” Some other testers, however, found the fit too narrow.

---

Best Lightweight Trainer

Adidas Adizero EVO SL

$150 at Running Warehouse $150 at Adidas

Weight: 7.9 oz (men), 6.6 oz (women)
Stack Height: 39-32 mm (men’s), 36-30 mm (women’s)
Drop: 7 mm (men’s), 6 mm (women’s)
Sizing: 6.5–15 (men’s), 5-12 (women’s)

Pros and Cons
⊕ Smooth at any pace
⊕ Excellent balance between cushioning and responsiveness
⊕ Lightweight and nimble
⊗ Toe box can feel wide
⊗ Thin laces can be hard to tie

A great lightweight trainer is the ideal one-shoe quiver: nimble enough for speed workouts yet providing enough cushioning and support for daily mileage. Of all the shoes we tested, the Adidas Evo SL nailed this versatility better than any other. “It strikes a nice balance between cushioning and responsiveness,” said one tester.

At the core of the Evo SL’s excellence is a thick slab of Adidas’ gas-infused TPEE foam called Lightstrike Pro, the same high-energy midsole used in their flagship racing shoe, the Adios Pro 3. Testers described the foam as soft but not squishy, with a lively, more responsive feel. Regardless of pace, the Evo SL’s ride is buttery smooth, with a gentle, flexible forefoot rocker that is absent of Energy Rods—Adidas’s version of a carbon-fiber propulsion plate— making it more versatile for different strides. “The shoe rolls really well and does a great job returning energy and propelling me forward,” said a tester.

The clean-looking mesh upper, accentuated by oversized versions of Adidas’ signature three stripes, offers a surprising level of structure for such a lightweight shoe, especially through the heel, and provides excellent lockdown through the midfoot. A few testers, however, noted that the toebox felt slightly wide.

Still, the Evo SL delivers great performance at a price that’s hard to beat. “Great for fast days without breaking the bank,” summed up one tester.

---

Best Super Trainer

Nike Zoom Fly 6

$170 at Backcountry $170 at Running Warehouse

Weight: 9.3 oz (men), 7.7 oz (women)
Stack height: 40–32 mm
Drop: 8 mm
Sizing: 6-15 (men’s), 5-12 (women’s)

Pros and Cons
⊕ Works for a variety of runners
⊕ Performs at a variety of paces
⊗ Can feel funky when heel striking

By definition, supertrainers combine racing technology with more durable elements. The Zoom Fly 6 borrows ZoomX, Nike’s premium Pebax midsole foam, from the lauded Vaporfly super shoe racer. But while the Vaporfly 3 (and Alphafly 3) are solely built with ZoomX cushioning, the Zoom Fly 6 adds a bottom layer of more stable and durable EVA foam, making it a daily trainer built to last day in and day out. The Zoom Fly 6 also has a wider profile to feel less tippy than the raceday rockets, and a lower stack height which allows greater connection to the ground.

While the previous version of the Zoom Fly could feel thick and chunky on the foot, the 6 is lean and streamlined. We found it felt light and fast on tempo runs or when doing speedwork, and stable and comfortable on longer, slower runs, although the heel-toe transition is less smooth when heel striking at an easy pace.

The carbon plate sandwiched between the two layers of foam, which feels slightly less rigid and aggressively rockered than that in the Zoom Fly’s racing siblings, seemed to stabilize the ride and save energy. The texturized rubber outsole does a great job gripping dry or wet roads, and even feels capable on smooth dirt. The woven mesh upper is comfortable and breathable, and the partially gusseted tongue cradles the foot. The Zoom Fly 6 feels capable and fun for daily miles, but is no slouch as a race-day choice either.

Runners who don’t want to fork more than $250 for a race-only super shoe may just fall in love with the Zoom Fly 6, as many of our testers did.

---

Best For Recovery Runs

Hoka Bondi 9

$175 at Running Warehouse $175 at Hoka

Weight: 10.5 oz (men), 9.3 oz (women)
Stack Height: 43-38 mm (men), 42-37 mm (women)
Drop: 5 mm
Sizing: 7-16 (men’s), 4-12 (women’s); D, 2E, 4E widths

Pros and Cons
⊕ Upgraded, livelier midsole
⊕ Plush upper
⊗ Stiff sole

When your legs are still aching from yesterday’s run, few things feel better than slipping into a pair of thick-soled running shoes with a plush, cushioned upper—something just like the Hoka Bondi 9. For this version, Hoka completely overhauled the midsole, adding two millimeters of stack height and replacing the standard EVA foam found in the Bondi 8 with a new supercritical (gas-infused) EVA compound. The result? A softer, more responsive ride.

We were pleasantly surprised to find the Bondi 9 had a speedy streak that we would not expect from such a thick-soled shoe. One longtime Bondi tester described the updated version as more plush and squishy, with a sole that feels noticeably less stiff than the previous version. Another noted the new foam felt livelier and springier. While it’s still not a shoe we’d pull for speed sessions, it made recovery runs feel a little peppier.

Hoka incorporates strategically placed flex grooves, carved into the outsole and bottom of the midsole, to promote smooth transitions and enhance flexibility throughout the gait cycle. That said, compared to most running shoes, we still found the Bondi 9 to have one of the least flexible soles. But Hoka’s signature rocker shape, which allows the foot to roll forward without bending, compensates for this, and the shoe delivered a smoothly flowing ride from heel-strike to toe-off.

The engineered mesh upper is generously padded around the heel collar and tongue, providing a secure and comfortable wrap around the foot. One tester praised the extra cushioning, noting that it made the shoe fit better. On that note, all agreed that the Bondi 9 runs true to size.

If you’re looking for the classic plush and protected Hoka ride, the Bondi 9 delivers. “It’s got all the right bells and whistles of a true Hoka,” said one tester.

---

Best Natural Ride

Topo Athletic Cyclone 3

$155 at REI (Women’s) $155 at Running Warehouse (Men’s)

Weight: 6.9 oz (men’s), 5.5 oz (women’s)
Stack height: 28–23 mm
Drop: 5 mm
Sizing: 8-13 (men’s), 6-11 (wome’ns)

Pros and Cons
⊕ Extremely lightweight
⊕ Comfortable toe space with secure foothold
⊕ Excellent ground feel combined with bouncy cushioning
⊗ Best limited to short runs for most

Topo Athletic shoes are known for their roomy toe box, which provides ample wiggle room and allows for natural foot movement, while also offering a secure midfoot and heel hold. The Cyclone 3 lives up to that reputation. We felt, in fact, that the foot hold and comfort of the Cyclone 2 was improved upon here. And in an era where the vast majority of shoes boast massive amounts of midsole foam and rigid propulsion plates, the Cyclone 3 unapologetically keeps things simple with a thin, flexible layer of premium Pebax foam.

This shoe may have one of the lowest stack heights available on the market (short of minimalist models), but the Pebax midsole still provides springy cushioning that one tester said makes you want to run faster: “When you put it on you feel like you can take off quicker than expected. It’s an easy-going ride.” Another noted, “As the foam compresses, I feel a connection with the ground without being harsh, and when it bounces back, it seems to enhance the power of my push-off.”

We credit the Cyclone 3’s easy forward roll to its incredibly light weight, rockered geometry, great flexibility, and midsole pop. “This reminds me of an old-school, lightweight, flexible shoe for speed and racing,” said a tester.

We found the airy upper ideal for summer running, whether in the hot and dry climate of Colorado, thick humidity of Virginia, or tropical vibes of Hawaii. And because of its feather weight, flexibility, and versatility, the Cyclone 3 is a great choice for traveling: it packs easily and is equally adept whether running on the soft surfaces of a beach or a concrete bike trail.

---

Best Stability Shoes

Best All-Around Stability Shoe

Asics Gel-Kayano 32

$165 at Running Warehouse $165 at Zappos

Weight: 10.6 oz (men), 9.0 oz (women)
Stack height: 40–32 mm (men’s), 39–31 mm (women’s)
Drop: 8 mm
Sizing: 6-16 (men’s), 5-13 (women’s)

Pros and Cons
⊕ Reliably stable
⊕ Plush cushioning
⊗ On the heavier side

Two Kayanos ago, Asics ditched the traditional medial post with a more forgiving, smoother-running geometry and foam combination to achieve stability for those who need it. The Kayano 31 built on the success of the 30, and the Kayano 32 is even better. This is a plush, well-cushioned, supportive shoe that can take overpronators from mile one to 26, and through all of their long-run training miles. It’s not a lightweight, speedy shoe, but it doesn’t claim to be.

Stability comes from a wide, flared sole and a soft, bouncy insert under the arch designed to reduce how long a runner’s foot is in a pronated position. “The shoe feels supportive under the midfoot, but not firm,” said one tester. “It allows my foot to move naturally, then rebounds under the arch and provides a pleasant push-back as I roll onto my toes.” The cushioning, while feeling slightly firmer and more responsive than that in the 31, remains plush—long gone are the days of overpronators having to wear a blocky, stiff shoe.

This version is updated with two millimeters more foam under the forefoot, reducing the heel-toe drop for a more balanced stance, making the forefoot rocker more pronounced, and delivering more comfort over the long haul. Plus, it gets a better-fitting tongue. “I found the fit and feel of the shoe to be great,” said a tester. “The gusseted tongue wraps a bit nicer than in the past, and the slightly thinner material is more sock-like so there are no pressure points.”

Final verdict: The Kayano32 is protective without feeling overbearing. This tried-and-true model has evolved, and continues to impress.

---

Best Plush Stability

Puma ForeverRun Nitro 2

$150 at Running Warehouse $150 at Puma

Weight: 10.4 oz (men), 8.1 oz (women)
Stack height: 38–28 mm
Drop: 10 mm
Sizing: 7-13, 14 (men’s), 6-11 (women’s)

Pros and Cons
⊕ Soft and smooth
⊕ Stable without feeling controlling
⊗ Toe box uncomfortable for some

The Puma ForeverRun Nitro 2’s significant stack of nitrogen-infused TPE foam underfoot and a wide forefoot silhouette make this feel like a lot of shoe. This thing is plush. But for that much cush this shoe comes in at a reasonable weight and offers a forgiving, comfortable ride.

Testers found the foam—a combination of a softer core surrounded by a firmer perimeter —to feel great underfoot, noting that the shoe ran “smooth and easy.” That’s not a description that comes easy for a stability shoe, and makes the ForeverRun Nitro 2 stand out. Complementing the underfoot cush is a premium engineered mesh upper that eliminates interior seams (aside from the partially gusseted tongue, which adds midfoot hold) to provide a welcoming step-in feel.  The secure heel hold with a stabilizing external heel clip gives way to a narrow/secure-fitting midfoot, then splays out to a wide forefoot geometry that seems to add inherent stability throughout the gait cycle.

Despite the wide forefoot shape at the base, some testers craved more room on the interior, noting a feeling of crammed toes. But overall, the ForeverRun Nitro 2 is a great option for those seeking a combination of stability and cushioning in a good-looking shoe.

See our full round-up of stability shoes

---

Paid Advertisement by Backcountry.com

HOKA Clifton 9 Running Shoe

Shop Now

Need a light, plush shoe for your everyday miles? Meet the HOKA Clifton 9. HOKA added more foam underfoot yet somehow dropped ounces to give increased shock absorption at a lower weight, making the ride smoother and your stride freer. The strategically placed rubber zones ensure this pair holds strong against the rigors of a daily trainer, while the articulated heel collar keeps you locked in mile after mile.

---

Best Lightweight Stability

Brooks Hyperion GTS 2

$140 at Running Warehouse $140 at Brooks

Weight: 7.6 oz (men’s), 6.9 oz (women’s)
Stack Height: 31.5–23.5 mm
Drop: 8 mm
Sizing: Men’s 7–15; Women’s 5–12

Pros and Cons
⊕ Lightweight
⊕ Low-profile, agile-feeling, and supportive ride
⊕ Highly breathable upper
⊗ Can feel too squishy in the heel for some

We loved the first-iteration Hyperion GTS for its lightweight comfort and springy, nitrogen-infused cushioning that one tester described as “fun and fast.” The second version is updated with a new midsole compound—nitrogen-infused DNA Flash v2—which Brooks says is lighter weight and more responsive than its predecessor. We concur—one tester described it as “snappy,” while another remarked on how it seems to push back while compressing and offers impressive rebound.

The GTS 2 still features stabilizing guide rails along the sides of the heel—a raised extension of the midsole foam on the outside, a firmer TPU piece on the inside—to help reduce heel shift and rotation for runners whose stride strays excessively inward or outward, especially towards the end of their run as a result of fatigue.

We appreciated the feeling of support while still being able to run smoothly and speedily when we wanted to up the effort. “I’d definitely speed train in these,” said a tester. “They’re responsive, nimble, and light.” These shoes are ideal for any runner looking for a daily trainer or racer that gives them a connected ground feel without being minimal. The cushioning is noticeable and lively, while the stability features are discreet. “I found these easy to run in at any speed,” said one. “They’re very responsive to whatever I feel like doing in them.”

See our full round-up of stability shoes

---

Best Racing Shoes

Best Marathon Racer

Nike Alphafly 3

$285 at Running Warehouse $285 at Dick’s Sporting Goods

Weight: 7.8 oz (men), 6.2 oz (women)
Stack Height: 40–32 mm
Drop: 8 mm
Sizing: 6-15 (men’s), 5-12 (women’s)

Pros and Cons
⊕ Bouncy, trampoline-like ride
⊕ Works for a wide range of runners
⊕ Lighter weight than previous versions of the AlphaFly
⊗ Heel can feel unstable
⊗ Can be hard to find in specific sizes

We’ve run in all three versions of the AlphaFly to date and think this third iteration is a great update. Subtle adjustments to the shoe’s geometry, including a wider footprint and carbon fiber plate, paired with repositioned Air Zoom units and strategically sculpted midsole, give the Alphafly 3 a distinctly different feel from its predecessor, which many found heavy and clunky compared to the original. This shoe again feels bouncy, fun, and fast.

Complementing the cush and rebound of ZoomX (Pebax) foam and Air Zoom units (pockets of compressed air and tensile threads) is a full-length carbon fiber plate that gives the shoe extra snap and adds a touch of appreciated stability that even the most efficient runners can benefit from when fatigued (marathon, anyone?). One of our more competitive testers praised the Alphafly 3 for its bouncy, energy-saving ride and says she’ll wear no other shoe for races longer than 10 miles. Another speedy tester noted, “Even running as fast as 5k pace, I found the Alphafly responded quickly, encouraging a fast turnover.” Some slower runners noted, however, that landing on the Alphafly’s sculpted heel can create a feeling of instability until the plate is engaged at the midfoot roll.

The upper of the Alphafly 3 is a lightweight, super-breathable mesh with an integrated tongue and thin, notched laces that pull tight and stay tied. Our feet were comfortable and secure without any pressure points on top of the ready-to-fly platform. We love that this shoe got lighter than its previous versions, which adds to its race-readiness.

Read our full review of the Alphafly 3. See our showdown comparison of 16 super shoes.

---

Runner-Up Marathon Racer

Saucony Endorphin Elite 2

$275 at Running Warehouse $275 at Saucony

Weight: 7.0 oz (men)
Stack height: 39.5–31.5 mm
Drop: 8 mm
Sizing: 3.5-14 (men’s/unisex)

Pros and Cons
⊕ Fast and springy
⊕ Secure foothold
⊗ Slightly unstable

Talk about an overhaul. This second iteration of the Saucony Elite could not be more different than the first. The primary reason is the underfoot feel of Saucony’s new, proprietary midsole material made out of TPEE that they’re calling “IncrediRUN” foam. While the original Elite’s midsole felt moderately firm until compressed powerfully, the Elite 2’s midsole feels wildly squishy and unstable when walking or slow jogging in the shoe. But, as one tester noted, “Once I started to pick up the pace, the foam firmed up and became insanely responsive.” With a stack height that falls just within legal limits for a marathon-racing shoe, that massive amount of rebounding foam—combined with a carbon fiber plate that’s slotted in the forefoot for flexibility (the same plate as in the original Saucony Elite) and an aggressive toe spring—makes this shoe beg for speed.

The upper has also been drastically updated, and we dig it. A combination of knit and mesh plus an airy knit tongue makes the shoe highly breathable. Testers found the heel collar and areas underneath the TPU overlays a bit warmer, but loved the secure heel fit paired with a roomier toe box. This is a fast, fun, lively shoe for race day.

Fit notes: We found this shoe to run a bit short. Also, the heel collar comes up high enough that a longer-than-no-show sock is needed.

---

Best For Shorter Road Races

Adidas Adizero Adios Pro 4

$250 at Running Warehouse $250 at Dick’s Sporting Goods

Weight: 7.1 oz (men), 6.1 oz (women)
Stack Height: 39–33 mm
Drop: 6 mm
Sizing: 6-13.5, 14.5 (men’s), 5-12 (women’s)

Pros and Cons
⊕ Soft, bouncier midsole than previous versions
⊕ Great fitting, comfortable upper
⊗ Less stability and ground feel than previous versions

For short road races like the 5k and 10k you need a shoe that’s lively, explosive, and ready to roll. The new Adios Pro is all that. “Unlike the Pro 3, which felt more like a cruising shoe, the Pro 4 actively pushed you forward,” one tester remarked, adding that “it makes fast paces feel easier.” To achieve this, Adidas overhauled the Adios Pro 4 from top to bottom. Previously recognized as one of the firmer and more stable super shoes, it now joins the ranks of softer, bouncier super racers built for maximum cushioning and energy return. The newly formulated midsole is noticeably softer and bouncier.

Adidas’ signature energy rods are still embedded in the midsole, adding a bit of rigidity to the squish and roll. The start of the rocker, however, has been shifted backward, from 70 to 60 percent of the distance from heel to toe. When building their ultralight, high-performing race model, the Adizero Adios Pro Evo 1, Adidas’ designers learned that the longer rocker engages the foot earlier in the stride and benefits forefoot and midfoot runners, enabling a smoother transition from midfoot to toe-off. Testers noted the change, with one saying, “This shoe allows you to push off of your toe a lot easier than other shoes, which gives that fast feel.”

Substantial improvements were also made to the upper, which is now crafted of a one-way stretch-woven upper material that’s incredibly soft and form-fitting. Testers loved how it adapted to their foot’s shape, providing a secure, locked-in feel for total control. “The upper disappears on my foot in the best way possible,” remarked one.

“The Pro 4 is lighter, bouncier, and responsive than the Pro 3—a huge step up.” Unfortunately, those who liked the firmer, more stable and grounded feel of the Pro 3 may feel differently.

Read our full review of the Adidas Adizero Adios Pro 4

---

How to Choose a Running Shoe

When choosing a road running shoe, the first step is to determine the type of running you’ll primarily be doing in them. Do you need a speedy racer, a shoe that offers comfort during long, slow jogs, or a versatile trainer that can handle various distances and paces?

Next, consider your preference for the feel of the shoe’s cushioning: do you like a soft, forgiving ride, a more energetic, bouncy sensation underfoot, or a firmer platform that provides better ground feel? With advancements in foams and technologies, many shoes today offer cushioning without compromising responsiveness or stability. However, each shoe balances these characteristics differently, providing a spectrum of options to choose from. The key to finding the perfect running shoe is choosing the one you’re most comfortable with.

Once you’ve narrowed the search to a certain type of road shoe, you need to find a pair that complements your unique body and stride. Every runner’s body, gait, speed, experience, and ride preferences are different, so every runner will interact differently with each running shoe. The shoe that your best friend or your sister-in-law loves may be uncomfortable for you and make running feel slow, sluggish, or even painful. Finding the perfect pair of road running shoes is a seriously personal affair.

The process for choosing the best running shoes is a matter of finding the models that both fit your foot and also feel best when you’re running. To determine fit and feel, there’s no substitute for trying the shoes on and running in them.

Fit: Match Your Foot Shape

When assessing fit, first pay attention to length. You need room at the end of your toes as your feet lengthen during their dynamic movements on the run. A rule of thumb is to allow a thumb’s width between your longest toe and the end of the shoe. Runners often wear a running shoe a half or full size bigger than their street shoes.

Ensure that the shape of the sole and the upper matches your foot shape. The sole should be as wide or wider than your foot for the whole length, and match the curve of your arch comfortably. The shoe should hold your foot securely over the instep, while allowing the ball of the foot and the toes to splay and flex when you roll forward onto them. Your heel shouldn’t slip when you lift it, and the arch should be able to dome and lengthen naturally. Nothing should bind or rub as you roll through the stride.

Feel: Match Your Movement Path

If the shoe fits, it’s time to take them on a short run on a treadmill, around the store, or, ideally, down the block and back. Every running shoe has a unique ride created by the type and density of foam in the midsole and the geometry of that foam: its thickness, width, heel-to-toe drop, molded sidewalls or flares, and forefoot flexibility or rocker shape (plus, in an increasing number of models, the presence of and type of embedded plate). Each of these elements interact with each other and your stride to determine how the shoe reacts on landing, how much it cushions, how stably it supports, how smoothly it transitions from landing to toe off, and how quickly and powerfully it rebounds.

The best way to choose the shoes that complement your body and stride is to find the ones that feel right on the run. Benno Nigg, the world-leading biomechanics professor who proposed this method of shoe selection, calls it the “comfort filter,” but makes clear it is far more than how plush the shoe feels when you step into it. What you want to assess is whether the shoe allows and supports the way your feet want to move, what Nigg calls your “preferred movement path.” In the right shoe, while running at your normal pace, you will touch down where you expect to land, roll smoothly and stably through the stride without noticing the shoe, feel both cushioned from and connected to the ground, and push off naturally, quickly, and powerfully. When this comes together you’ll know that you’ve found your pair.

It’s likely that several shoes will feel good on your feet. To find the most comfortable, it helps to compare them back to back, like an eye doctor will do with corrective lenses: flipping between “A” or “B,” “1” or “2.” You may also find that different shoes feel better at different paces or level of fatigue, and you may want more than one pair. In fact, research shows that wearing a variety of different shoes is one of the few proven ways to reduce injury risk as it appears to vary the stresses on your feet and joints.

What About Injury Prevention?

Running shoes have long been marketed and sold as prescriptive devices to help runners stay healthy, but there is little scientific evidence correlating shoes, or any specific shoe properties—like cushioning or pronation control—with running injuries. Medical professionals say that it is highly difficult to determine whether a runner needs a certain type of shoe, and studies have shown that prescribing shoes using traditional methods like treadmill gait analyses or wet-foot arch height tests don’t consistently reduce injuries.

Don’t assume that you need more cushioning or more stability if you have sore joints, or if you’re a heavier runner, or if you’re a beginner—evidence doesn’t support many common beliefs. The best way prevent injury is find two or three different pairs that feel right on the run, ease into using them, and vary your shoes, your running surface and your pace regularly (plus avoid rapid increases in your training load and work on improving your mechanics).

---

How We Test

• Number of testers: 27
• Number of shoes tested: 119
• Number of miles: 21,000+ over a year

To test running shoes, we begin by researching every brand’s upcoming offerings for the coming season. We wind up with dozens of samples of the models (39 road shoes this season, 119 over the year) that are most promising—not just for us, but for 27 testers that range in age, ability, running form, geographical location, and preferred shoe types. We try to put each tester in models from within the same category (e.g., neutral, stability, carbon fiber, zero drop or uptempo) so everyone can compare apples-to-apples.

After three to six months of running in each model on paved roads, concrete multi-use paths, treadmills, sandy beach paths, dirt roads, and tracks at a variety of distances, paces, and weather conditions, our crew members report back with their assessments of fit, comfort, traction, cushioning, flexibility, stiffness, pop, what type of running the model is best used for, how the shoe compares to other models, and more. We also run in every shoe ourselves, and, combining all the tester feedback with years of personal experience, hone in on the best. This guide combines the best recent shoes with outstanding shoes still available from the past two test periods.

---

Meet Our Lead Testers

Lisa Jhung

Freelance journalist, editor, and author Lisa Jhung has researched, tested, and written about running shoes for the past decade and a half, much of that time for Outside and Outside Buyer’s Guides. She coordinates a fleet of female shoe testers out of Boulder, Colorado, and says her home office is a perpetual obstacle course of cardboard boxes and piles of running shoes. Lisa’s written about gear of all kinds for numerous national magazines as both an editor and freelancer, including a stint as the Shoes & Gear blogger and trail running microsite editor for Runner’s World.

A high school jumper and occasional sprinter/hurdler, she started running—really running—after walking off the collegiate volleyball team, and moved on to road and trail races of any distance, triathlons, adventure races, and mountain running. She’s happiest testing rugged trail shoes on gnarly terrain, and also loves a good neighborhood jaunt…but is almost always looking for ribbons of dirt. Lisa is the author of Running That Doesn’t Suck: How to Love Running (Even If You Think You Hate It) and Trailhead: The Dirt on All Things Trail Running.

Cory Smith

Cory’s passion for running started over 30 years ago in high school when he became the number six ranked runner in the nation at 3000 meters his senior year. After high school, he competed at Villanova University, earning two NCAA Division I Championship showings. Today, he’s determined not to let age slow him down and competes on the national master’s circuit, running a 4:12 (4:30 mile pace)) 1500 meters and 9:04 (4:52 mile pace) 3000 meters in 2021 at age 43. He prefers a hard track workout or tempo run over an easy long run any day but also appreciates a challenging trail or mountain run.

His obsession with running shoes started in 2014 when he wrote his first shoe review for Gear Institute. Since then, he’s tested and reviewed hundreds of running shoes, clothing, and gear for Outside, Runner’s World, Footwear News, and other outlets. He has a soft spot for speedy shoes over heavy trainers but loves dissecting all shoes equally and thinking like a product engineer to explain the why behind every design detail. Cory is the Founder of Run Your Personal Best, an online running coaching business, and since its inception in 2014, has coached runners’ to over 100 Boston Marathon Qualifying times.

Here’s one of Cory’s shoe-testing routes on MapMyRun:





View Route Details

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

Jonathan Beverly

Jonathan fell in love with running his freshman year of high school and quickly became fascinated with finding the perfect pair of running shoes. That quest got a boost when he became editor of Running Times in 2000 and started receiving every new model as they were released. The parade of shoes continued while he served as shoe editor for Runner’s World, then editor of PodiumRunner, and currently fitness gear editor at Outside. Having now worn nearly every running shoe created in this century—and a fair amount of those dating back to the early models of the ’70s—he’s given up on finding the one best and now relishes the wide variety of excellent options.

Once a 2:46 marathoner regularly doing 50+ mile weeks, recent injuries and his age have reduced his volume by about half and slowed his easy training pace to around nine-minute miles—but he says he still enjoys an uptempo workout or two each week. Beverly is the author of the book Your Best Stride which explores how each individual’s gait—and, consequently shoe preference—is unique. He enjoys getting scientists’ take on new shoe trends and trying to describe the nuances of each shoe’s ride.

 

<\/div><\/div>”],”filter”:{“nextExceptions”:”img, blockquote, div”,”nextContainsExceptions”:”img, blockquote, a.btn, a.o-button”},”renderIntial”:true,”wordCount”:350}”>

A fallen hiker in the mountains of Washington found himself in dire straits: badly injured, alone, and approaching hypothermia this past Monday, July 14.

According to a press release from the U.S. Navy’s air station on Whidbey Island, the hiker, 31-year-old Ryan Polkinghorn, was climbing the Chickamin Glacier on the northern slopes of 8,440-foot Sinister Peak, a remote, rugged mountain in the North Cascades. That’s when he lost his footing and tumbled roughly 200 feet down the steep ice field.

Luckily for Polkinghorn, he didn’t lose consciousness during the fall. And when he came to a stop, Polkinghorn began screaming for help.

The yelling likely saved his life.

Hikers across the canyon heard his cries, and although they could not see or reach Polkinghorn, they sent out a distress call using their Garmin inReach. Emergency responders received this SOS at 1:38 P.M. according to a media release from the Chelan County Sheriff’s Office.

Once they’d called for help, the other hikers navigated tricky terrain to reach Polkinghorn. “After traversing glacial and rocky terrain” they finally located the fallen climber, and saw that he “had sustained head, neck, and shoulder injuries … and was showing signs of early-stage hypothermia.”

After reporting this to the sheriff’s office, Chelan County contacted the Naval Air Station at Whidbey for a hoist-capable helicopter, which airlifted Polkinghorn off the mountain that afternoon. The injured hiker was then taken to Harborview Medical Center in Seattle for further treatment.

The rescue highlights the importance of carrying a satellite emergency device or a phone equipped with off-grid SOS functionality when adventuring solo in the backcountry. It’s also proof that, when all else fails, a powerful scream or loud noise can save one’s life in a backcountry emergency.

In its published guide General Backcountry Safety, the Colorado-based Mountain Rescue Aspen advises readers to blow a whistle and yell “HELP,” and not to give up if you do not hear a response. “Rock walls and valleys play strange tricks with echoes and you may lose your potential rescuers by attempting to locate them,” MRA writes.

“No matter how faint his or her yell may be, stay put and keep yelling,” the group adds.

The rescue on Sinister Peak has also ignited the debate about who should foot the bill for search and rescue operations: the victim, local taxpayers, or nonprofit rescue outfits. On the Chelan County Sheriff’s Office Facebook post that reported the Sinister Peak rescue, one of the top comments was, “Send him a BILL!”

Earlier this summer, another Washington sheriff’s office considered an ordinance that would charge hikers fines for rescue, if they’re found to have behaved recklessly, such as venturing off trail to take a photo on the edge of a slippery gorge. In late June, five separate distress calls on the same trail in a single week prompted the responding rescue organization, a volunteer group, to encourage hikers to use more caution when recreating outside.