Converse Trainers

[st_files]

What is the fuss?? Seriously, if ever there was a classic example of form over function, these skanky trainers are it. Surely if you can wear a good, supportive comfortable pair of trainers that dont look ridiculous you'd choose them ahead of these over priced things.....?

[staceyb]

st_files said:

What is the fuss?? Seriously, if ever there was a classic example of form over function, these skanky trainers are it. Surely if you can wear a good, supportive comfortable pair of trainers that dont look ridiculous you'd choose them ahead of these over priced things.....?

Its called choice.

[andy_s]

Good enough for James bond...

[Dr_Gonzo]

staceyb said:

st_files said:

What is the fuss?? Seriously, if ever there was a classic example of form over function, these skanky trainers are it. Surely if you can wear a good, supportive comfortable pair of trainers that dont look ridiculous you'd choose them ahead of these over priced things.....?

Its called choice.

It's called fashion. Most people wear them because everyone else is.

[st_files]

Dr_Gonzo said:

staceyb said:

st_files said:

What is the fuss?? Seriously, if ever there was a classic example of form over function, these skanky trainers are it. Surely if you can wear a good, supportive comfortable pair of trainers that dont look ridiculous you'd choose them ahead of these over priced things.....?

Its called choice.

It's called fashion. Most people wear them because everyone else is.

Thats my point, if they were launched today they'd sink without trace as being ridiculously basic...

[Halb]

They are good for the gym. Lifting weights.

[shirt]

at least they have history [baseball boots].

its those k swiss things that are beyond me - 5 stripes = market adidas .

[st_files]

shirt]at least they have history [baseball boots said:

.

its those k swiss things that are beyond me - 5 stripes = market adidas .

I thought they started out as Army shoes in the 40's & 50's...and havent developed since.

[shirt]

wikipedia tells me they are basketball shoes, first produced in 1917. now claimed as the emo shoes of choice.

i don't actually mind them but haven't worn them in at least a decade. certainly never used to pay more than £20 for a pair.

[Emsman]

Why the fk would you waer any trainers- with the obvious exception of sports.

I dont own a pair, wouldnt be seen dead out and about in them.

I will concede that the converse ones do look stter than most though

[st_files]

Emsman said:

Why the fk would you waer any trainers- with the obvious exception of sports.

Because they're usually far more comfortable that your average leather/rubber soled shoe?

[Tiggsy]

same here...have seperate trainers for gym, jogging, casual - where leathers shoes at work all day and trainers really comfy for casual.

[loltolhurst]

converse are great esp for us tall people who dont like pumped up trainers. you prob dont like glastonbury either some people are different to you get over it

[st_files]

loltolhurst said:

converse are great esp for us tall people who dont like pumped up trainers. you prob dont like glastonbury either some people are different to you get over it

Glastonbury? Where did that come from? Why not say I hate Red Leicester cheese or paper clips since you seem to be picking arbitrary items that I might hate? I have no problem with the people wearing these trainers, I just dont get the appeal of something that is so blatantly a 'form over function' item.

Take some deep breaths.

[i remember]

Dunlop trainers were bakc in a few years ago, i bought a pair of green flash.

But they were without a doubt more uncomfortable than walking on daggers

[anonymous-user]

st_files said:

Emsman said:

Why the fk would you waer any trainers- with the obvious exception of sports.

Because they're usually far more comfortable that your average leather/rubber soled shoe?

Exactly! I wear trainers a lot of the time (onitsuka tigers) and they are very comfy! Id look a tt in jeans and t-shirt with proper leather shoes! If im going out I'll wear a nice v neck or a shirt and wear some nice smart shoes!

[TTwiggy]

I've seen chavs in Nike, chavs in Adidas, chavs in Reebok, chavs in Puma...

never seen a chav in Converse... I'll stick to Converse ta

[st_files]

TTwiggy said:

I've seen chavs in Nike, chavs in Adidas, chavs in Reebok, chavs in Puma...

never seen a chav in Converse... I'll stick to Converse ta

If thats the strongest argument you can find for your choice of footwear.....its a good point though, I'll concede.....

[TTwiggy]

st_files said:

TTwiggy said:

I've seen chavs in Nike, chavs in Adidas, chavs in Reebok, chavs in Puma...

never seen a chav in Converse... I'll stick to Converse ta

If thats the strongest argument you can find for your choice of footwear.....its a good point though, I'll concede.....

well, it's an argument

I like Converse, have owned many pairs over the years (I'm 37 btw). I also own quite a few pairs of Vans, as I used to skate 'back in day'... They suit my image (such as it is), I'd look a bit odd in the latest pair of Nikes I reckon..

[ShadownINja]

I still wear my DCs. Smart shoes would look crap with combat trousers and hooded tops that I still wear.