Prof. K: Do you have a favorite Kicksology.net review?
Johnson: While it seems an odd selection at first given the less-than-favorable assessment, my favorite Kicksology.net review is the Nike Air Hyperflight [see below].  The shoe is a bit of a dichotomy in that it was phenomenally successful and remains an icon in the industry, but inside the product creation team it is viewed somewhat as a failure as we missed the mark on the performance side of the coin.

Your review recognized this and hit the nail on the head with the discussion around risk and innovation — if you routinely venture into terra incognita, eventually you will find yourself in cannibal soup.  The insight and design solution were solid, we simply ended up with a product that was too niche.

We gained a lot of valuable insight from the effort, however, both on the product/performance side of things as well as team dynamics. If we had to do it all over again we definitely would, but there would be some refinements that would help it perform at a higher and broader level...and you would give it a 5.

Prof. K: Is there someone over there I can call about getting a do-over then? [Laughs]

Now, I may be navel gazing here, but do you remember what you thought of Kicksology.net when you first saw it?
Johnson: Yes, I was struck by the simple, clean, refined and understandable presentation. Refined simplicity is difficult regardless of the medium — websites, food, shoes, etc. I am even more impressed now with the insight that it was managed completely in your free time and that the product shots were, for the most part, taken in your bathroom. Just shows that with enough passion and drive, you can bring anything to life.

Prof. K: Jeff, you let the cat out of the bag — the bathroom thing was a trade secret!

But I'll call back the lawyers if you can tell me what your favorite thing about the site is as it exists today or, rather, as it existed up until a few days ago?
Johnson: Whoops, sorry about the bathroom disclosure.

As for my favorite thing about the site, Kicksology.net took the consumer beyond the cosmetic and explored performance and purpose — why the shoe was brought to life in the first place.

You took the time to dissect the details behind the construction and materials, how these impact performance and, in the process, educated a generation of hoopheads.  No one else was doing it.

Prof. K: Do you think the site has had any sort of impact on the athletic shoe industry overall?
Johnson: The industry is finally starting to trend away from the retro craze that has been the dominant force over the past few years and Kicksology.net definitely played a role in that.

Prof. K: Staying on that point for a minute...we all know that the vast majority of people buy athletic shoes based solely on their appearance and that very few ever actually use them for their intended purpose. Given that, does performance really matter?
Johnson: Well, let me put it this way — even though "Left Eye" started wearing condoms as fashion, the performance aspect of them remains pretty important.

Prof. K: [Falls down laughing] Man, I definitely did not expect you to go there with that answer.

Now, aside from your ability to reference alternative uses for prophylactics, something that's impressed me in all of the interactions I've been lucky enough to have with you is the clear passion you have for your job and the products you and your team help develop — it really is palpable. You have the energy of someone who's just getting started, yet you've been involved in the business in one capacity or another for nearly 25 years now. What keeps you excited about what you do?
Johnson: Two things: teaching and innovation.

Sharing what I've learned over the past 18 years — 11 of it on the Eastern Front, working the factory beat — with the next generation is very rewarding.

And innovating, whether it be a new shoe, component, process or mundane little aspects of everyday work, brings a great sense of accomplishment — particularly when you see it adopted beyond the category and company.

Prof. K: You mentioned teaching — if there was only one bit of advice you could share with the aspiring shoe designers and developers of the world, what would it be?
Johnson: Hybridize your education and training.

Balance design with engineering or vice versa. The great designers and developers of the future will be fluent in both languages and, with that knowledge, they'll raise the bar and bring more "beautiful performance" to bear than ever before.

Prof. K: Any parting words for the soon-to-be-former Professor K before I hang up my lab coat?
Johnson: May Saint Hubbins protect and guide you....

Prof. K: [Laughs] And you as well!

Alright then, without further ado, here's Jeff Johnson's favorite Kicksology.net review...

by Professor K, posted June 26, 2001
updated July 4, 2001 (click here for the update)

Nike is the dominant force in the athletic footwear and apparel industry and, as such, the company is often held up as a scapegoat by those critical of industry-wide practices. As the company with the highest prices and the most visible marketing campaigns Nike is an easy target, but one thing that Nike cannot be criticized for is an unwillingness to take risks. In most other categories the industry leader is often more interested in keeping competitors at bay than in innovating. Innovation involves risks and the last thing that most big companies want to do is to take risks. But Nike is not a typical big company. Nike seems to revel in taking risks and in constantly pushing the envelope in the areas of design, manufacturing and technology. A perfect embodiment of this ethos is the Nike Air Hyperflight.

The Air Hyperflight is a study in risk taking. Most obviously, the design is beyond bleeding edge. The shiny synthetic upper, offered in a variety of bright, eye-catching colors, cannot be ignored, but it's under the surface that the Hyperflight really pushes the envelope. Its design strips away anything that isn't absolutely essential in order to achieve the lightest possible shoe. There is no traditional upper or midsole, just a hyper-thin synthetic outer shell with a thin strip of rubber attached to the bottom and a midsole that is integrated into the footbed. The only structural elements of the shoe are the large external anti-inversion structures and the interal carbon fiber midfoot support shank.

The result of all of this minimalism is a shoe that is indeed incredibly light. At 13.7 ounces in a U.S. Men's size 11 the Air Hyperflight is not the lightest shoe that we've reviewed, that distinction still belongs to the Nike Air Flight Lite II, but it is a very close second. And like the Air Flight Lite II, this incredibly light weight comes with a serious trade-off in overall performance.

The biggest problem that I found in my testing was stability. The Air Hyperflight is perhaps the most unstable basketball shoe I've ever tested. It felt almost as though the shoe was designed to roll when lateral forces are applied. This was particularly problematic on defense, when I had to react quickly to an opposing player's movements. As I would react to a quick lateral movement by attempting to cut sharply to either side, the shoe on the foot that I was pushing off with would constantly roll over. Not only did this hamper my ability to cut sharply, it also increased the possibility of an ankle sprain. Luckily, I did not sprain my ankles while testing the Hyperflight (this was probably thanks to the external anti-inversion structures visible in figure 2), but I would warn heavier players and those who are susceptible to ankle sprains to think twice before buying this shoe.

My next problem was with the cushioning. The Air Hyperflight provides impact protection through the use of Zoom Air in the forefoot and a large-volume Air-sole unit in the heel. Because the Hyperflight does not have a traditional midsole, these are both encased within a unique Phylon footbed that does double-duty as an internalized midsole. On my first wearing the cushioning felt great. Both the Zoom Air unit in the forefoot and large-volume Air-sole unit in the heel felt very responsive. By the end of my second wearing I was starting to feel a little soreness in my shins, but, with only two wearings, I wasn't sure if it was attributable to the cushioning. By the end of my third wearing I had a fairly bad case of shin splints and was also feeling soreness in both knees, something that I hadn't experienced in quite a while. My fourth and fifth wearings ended with the same results; shin splints and soreness in my knees.

Shin splints and pain in the lower legs is often the result of poor cushioning. I'm quite certain that the pain I experienced was the result of cushioning at both the forefoot and heel that was too soft and thus could not adequately absorb and dissipate the impact forces I was generating. Heavier players will likely feel the effects even more acutely. A possible solution is to add an after-market cushioned insole (it would have to be the kind that sits on top of an existing footbed since the Hyperflight's footbed is not removeable), but this would not address the stability issue and would effectively eliminate the Hyperflight's primary advantage of super-light weight.

Moving up to the upper, this was yet another problem area. The outer is made of a unique synthetic material that contributes to the Hyperflight's stand-out appearance. Contrary to some reports I had heard, the shiny material is not patent leather, but instead more along the lines of vinyl. As visible in figure 5, the material is perforated on the medial side and on the tongue, allowing the shoe to breathe. While the very thin, double-lasted upper is very comfortable, the near lack of any internal padding makes the inner very roomy. The result is lots of movement of the foot within the shoe. The movement is particularly bad from side-to-side which, I believe, contributes to the ankle-roll problem noted above. Making the laces very, very tight can help minimize the internal movement, but then compromises comfort. Wearing thick, padded socks is the best solution that I have found, but is still not ideal.

One last problem I had with the shoe was in the area of durability. As anyone who has seen the shoe in person probably already knows, the upper creases very visibly as of the first wearing. While the heavy creasing itself is a purely visual problem, it is indicative of the fragility of the material. After only my fourth wearing of the shoe I noticed that the material was tearing away from the anti-inversion structure on the lateral side of both the left and right shoe in the areas where the creasing was most apparent (see figure 4 below). And this was after indoor use only. Do not plan on using the Hyperflight outdoors and, if you play more than a few times a week, don't plan on one pair lasting more than two to three months tops.

Okay, so is there anything to like about the Hyperflight? As noted above, the shoe is very comfortable and the traction provided by the solid rubber outsole is exceptional. The Hyperflight will also almost certainly be noticeably lighter than your current hoops shoe. Without a doubt, the thing I liked most about the shoe during my testing was its light weight. While the Air Flight Lite II may be lighter, the Air Hyperflight provides a much more responsive feel than the spongy Flight Lite II. But in their numerous flaws both shoes prove that, at least until someone achieves a breakthrough in materials technology, a feather-light weight does not come without serious sacrifices in overall performance.

A quick note on the appearance of the shoe. The Air Hyperflight was designed by Eric Avar, who also designed the Nike Air Flightposite. Avar's designs for both shoes display a wonderful appreciation for the foot. Both the Hyperflight and Flightposite are, much like the foot, deceptively complex. Simple on the surface, they are full of complex curves that must have caused nightmares in many an engineer. But the end result is a design that beautifully complements the organic form of the foot -- acting as a visual extension of the extremity instead of camouflaging it under layers of material and stitching.

Both shoes are also similiar in that they elicit an immediate and unequivocal reaction in those who see them. Much like the Flightposite, the design of the Hyperflight is one that people will either love or hate. I think that this is a testament to Avar's design vision because it's often those works that elicit the strongest and most immediate visceral reaction that have the most lasting impact. The Air Jordan XI and Air Flightposite are just two examples of this. Unfortunately, unlike the Air Jordan XI and Air Flightposite, the Air Hyperflight does not provide a level of performance to match its striking visual appearance.

To sum up, the Nike Air Hyperflight is a perplexing shoe. Given what has to be a fantastically complex manufacturing process it is a shoe that could have only come from Nike. For being willing to develop such a risky, envelope-pushing shoe I have to applaud the company, but with risk comes the potential for failure and the Hyperflight is, in my opinion, a complete failure on the performance front. With sub-par fit, cushioning and stability, the Nike Air Hyperflight is not a shoe that I could recommend to anyone, not even those looking for the lightest basketball shoe (as noted above, the Nike Air Flight Lite II, at 13.5 ounces, is still, by a hair, the lightest hoops shoe that we've reviewed).

This is what has me confused. Why spend so much time on bringing to market a shoe that is so flawed? Given the nature and extent of the problems we encountered I have to believe that Nike's own internal testing identified them as well. If not, then Nike needs to take a serious look at their testing program. While they're at it they should also take a serious look at their pricing model because charging $125 for a shoe that performs at or below the level of competitors' products costing nearly half the price (and that are much more durable than the Hyperflight) is simply ludicrous. My hope is that the Hyperflight is simply one of those risks that didn't pan out and is not a sign of things to come from a new, more fashion-focused Nike.

Who's Worn It
Terrell Brandon (G- Minnesota Timberwolves), Damon Stoudamire (G- Portland Trailblazers), Jason Williams (G- Sacramento Kings)

by Professor K, posted July 4, 2001