Physical Therapists Using Clinical Analysis To Discuss The Art And Science Behind Running and The Stuff We Put On Our Feet

Post Page Advertisement [Top]

Nike Structure 25: Not Dead Yet
By Matthew Klein, Bach Pham and David Salas

The Nike Structure series has been through a ton. Once one of the staple stability training shoes, it began to gain weight and then seemed to disappear from the market. Many of us assumed it had been discontinued until new versions would randomly show up, then disappear again. Version 24 was its first somewhat noticeable return in a while, but it had strayed from the 10 oz, somewhat versatile structure of the long past. Instead of the stability shoe we once knew, it was a stable neutral shoe/mild stability shoe that while able to tolerate daily miles, was still a bit heavy/dead. The Structure 25 stands as a return for the series as the stability increases and the weight SLOWLY begins to come down. The improved guidance/stability, firmer but bouncier ride and classically lugged outsole signal a breath of life into a series we thought might have passed on. How exactly that breath of life takes form is what we need to talk about.

Nike Structure 25
Price: $139.95 at Running Warehouse
Weight: 10.8 oz, 306 g (men's size 9), 9 oz, 255 g  (women's size 8)
Stack Height: 37 mm / 27 mm
Drop: 10mm 
Classification: Moderate Stability Daily Training Shoe


Matt: The Nike Structure 25 is a moderate stability/guidance daily running shoe for those who want a firmer/stiffer ride. The new set up returns the Structure to being a stability shoe with a heel clip, large midfoot sidewall and a firmer ride that combines current concepts of guidance in stability shoes. The upper fits snug to normal in a classic Nike fit with a somewhat retro look that still fits well. While not the lightest shoe on the market, the Structure 25 provides a traditional ride that finally feels like a Structure again.  

David: The Nike Structure 25 is a daily running shoe in the stability category. The shoe has been a long standing line in the Nike lineup and is a workhorse trainer for eating mileage. The shoe is using a midfoot support system in the form of a large sidewall through the midfoot rather than traditional posting. The Structure has a very traditional ride with a little bit of extra support in the midfoot. For me this rides in the stable neutral category. 

Bach: The Structure was a classic stability series that suddenly pivoted over the past few versions, offering a stable trainer that sits between mild stability and stable neutral. Also on trend with the rest of Nike's lineup in 2023, the Structure also features some actually accommodating room, providing a trainer that's comfortable both under and overfoot.

: Brooks Adrenaline GTS 23


Matt: The Nike Structure 25 fits me relatively true to size in my normal Men's US size 10. The width feels normal in the forefoot and midfoot, while the heel is snug. The volume is slightly above average in the forefoot while lower in the midfoot (thanks to a thick tongue) and heel. The mesh material is on the thicker side and carries a retro look (at least my white colorway does). The tongue is extra thick and while it is not gusseted, seems to stay secure due to not having much wiggle room in the midfoot. The heel features a stiff, rounded heel counter with moderate to mild amounts of padding. Those sensitive to counters will not do well in this shoe, while those who like stiff secure counters will enjoy it. This is a shoe that requires socks as the inner liner is fairly scratchy. Overall, the upper is normal in width with a snug heel and is on the thicker side. 

David: The Nike Structure 25 fits true to size in my Men's 9.5. The length and dimensions feel quite good. The heel is normal to slightly snug, midfoot normal width, and the forefoot normal to slightly wide width. The volume is on the lower end for daily training shoes, but it is still decently accommodating. The engineered mesh material breaks in much better but could probably be a little softer and more comfortable. The tongue is padded well and allows you to lock the laces down without irritation. The lacing system has some splits through it which seems to give each eyelet a little more give or a little more ability to tighten individual of other levels. The heel collar is padded really well without feeling overly plush. There is a heel counter, though it is integrated really well and I forget it is even there pretty often. I am really happy with the overall fit of the shoe, but I do think the engineered mesh material itself could be played with to feel a little more comfortable on foot. 

Bach: Similar to the others, the fit was true to size for me as well. The shoe fits best for standard feet, with solid heel lockdown and some decent room around the toebox for a Nike shoe. I felt pretty comfortable all-in-all wearing the Structure and the fit reminded me of the Saucony Guide 16 (with infinitely more padding in the Structure, good or bad being one's preference). Those who have wider fit should seek out the wide model without hesitation.

The heel has a clip that wraps around and adds a lot of the "structure" to the Structure. The heel security is great and I had zero issues in the shoe there. As mentioned, there's mild padding added throughout the shoe's upper which does provide a lot of comfort in all parts of the shoe. I found it to be a really great walking shoe for all-day use, without any irritation anywhere.


Matt: The Nike Structure 25 feels like a traditional stability shoe minus the post. The ride is firmer throughout with some mild bounce from the rearfoot and forefoot zoom units. This makes the shoe feel lighter than its listed weight but there is still plenty of foam underneath the foot to feel protective. However, the firmness of the forefoot makes it a feel a little thin up front despite the 27mm of stack height. There is a large, centered heel bevel and a decent forefoot rocker. This makes for a decent heel transition once the shoe breaks in. The rearfoot stiffness is particularly noticeable and initially makes the heel feel slightly clunky. As the sole breaks in, the transition is better. The forefoot is slightly stiff and snappy. The somewhat rockered geometry does not take the edge off the higher drop, which is noticeable. This is not a bad thing as it has been a nice break from the zero drop shoes I have been testing recently. Those that want a more traditional drop stability/guidance shoe will do well here.

Despite the mild bounce, the weight is noticeable. It is lighter than the last version but is still best for easy and recovery miles. The snappiness makes it feel like it wants to go faster at times but once your body recognizes the weight of the shoe, it is easier to settle into a consistent pace. This feeling and the extremely durable outsole make it best for racking up mileage. I have 50 miles on my pair and there is no wear on the outsole at all. The lugs have remained completely intact and do allow moving over a variety of terrain. I have used this shoe on mild trail without issue and the lugs provide solid traction even on wet road. Overall, the Structure 25 is a firmer, traditional drop and feeling shoe for easy and daily mileage. 

David: The Nike Structure has a very traditional feel to it. The Cushlon 3.0 midsole foam has a very traditional EVA feel to it. The ride is on the firmer end but still cushioned enough for any amount of training mileage. The shoe does have a heel bevel and toe spring, but no so much so that I would say this is a rockered shoe. The transitions feel very traditional to the classic moderate to high drop training shoe. I feel the heel bevel is pretty smooth and I did not have any issues with the shoe coming off clunky or jarring. There is an external heel mold/counter that sits below the internal heel counters position and wraps around the shoe. I do feel the security and positioning is quite good in this model. The midfoot has some gentle guidance from the large medial sidewall named the NSRL Midfoot Support System and a much more mild sidewall laterally. There is pretty good sole flaring in the forefoot as well both medially and laterally. The forefoot is slightly flexible and transitions pretty naturally at toe off without having too much of a rolling effect. I do wish there was a tiny bit more cushion in the forefoot as I can feel the outsole lugs a tad. The ride is really smooth overall though. The foam does not have too much responsiveness to it and this is definitely a shoe for logging daily miles and not doing anything overly exciting.

The outsole traction underfoot is really good and I felt fine running through off road conditions in reasonably runnable trails. I will say though, this shoe still feels pretty neutral to me. The large sidewall does help a little bit, though this does not scream "stability shoe" to me. With that said though, the ride is quite nice and gives me resemblance of shoes like the Saucony Ride and Puma Velocity Nitro with a larger medial sidewall. Those wanting some gentle guidance added to a neutral offering will like the Structure 25.

Bach: The Cushlon 3.0 is a tried-and-true EVA from Nike. Nike says there are Air Zoom Pods in the forefoot, and I have to say the forefoot in general feels really well-cushioned for a lower stacked trainer - especially one that is aimed to be more stability-oriented. It still is very much a firmer riding shoe, but the pods in the forefoot add some really enjoyable comfort that eases the typically firmer stability shoe ride that other shoes have. If you've ever wanted to try a slightly more cushioned, more stable Nike Pegasus, the Structure is essentially that. The overall ride is very fluid as well with a good heel bevel. I have taken this for a variety of distances and as someone who likes a lower stacked shoe, this is more than enough for my training needs. The fluid bevel and decent forefoot cushion actually does okay for slightly faster paces. In the neutral realm, this is on the heavier side, but in the stability realm it's on par with most models and turns over much better than a lot of others. The weight is not so much underneath as it is distributed throughout and in the upper which helps make it feel less bulky than some midsoles which are bottom heavy. It is still best for easy, daily training miles though. There's no rocker here, which further makes the shoe feel more like a traditional ride. As shoes get more and more rockered each passing year, it still is good to see some non-rockered options like this around.

The outsole is the stuff of legends, with a hyper-aggressive waffle design taken from the Pegasus, but is somehow even deeper here. You most definitely can run mild trails with this and it handles wet roads really well and I have no doubt this is going to last above average miles.


Matt: The Nike Structure 25 finally returns to being moderate guidance/stability shoe from its stable neutral predecessor. The majority of guidance comes from the firmer ride, heel clip that surrounds the rearfoot and the large midfoot sidewall. None of these are extremely intrusive but their combination adds to a stable ride. The rearfoot stiffness and guidance is noticeable but helps center the heel rather than pushing in one direction. This transitions to the midfoot that features a large medial sidewall and a small lateral sidewall from the clip. The pressure from the sidewalls was noticeable but comfortable and integrated well into the shoe. The forefoot feels particularly centered as the zoom bag seems to push up and act almost like a mild metatarsal lift. I have noticed this with prior forefoot zoom units but for some reason noticed this more in this version. Overall, the Structure 25 maintains a guided and centered ride that isn't obtrusive outside of the stiffer heel and firmer ride.

 The Nike Structure 25 is supposed to be the supportive offering from Nike and be the long standing stability training shoe. The Structure 25 does not feel unstable, though I would not say it feels overly stable either. It feels like an ever-so-slightly more stable neutral training shoe. The shoe feels very similar to long standing neutral trainers like the Saucony Ride, Nike Pegasus, ASICS Cumulus (before the newest updates) with a larger sidewall medially. It does feel like it gives some gentle guidance, making it a tad more stable, but not overly so. The rest of the shoe has a pretty traditional construction. The heel security is good though and built up pretty well. The internal heel counter and external heel mold seem to give you a solid heel platform to land on without feeling jarring. The platform underfoot has a pretty normal width and does not feel overly narrow or wide. The traction does seem to help with stability and I haven't had issues on runnable trails off road. I would place this on the line of light stability or stable neutral.

Bach: I would say that the Nike Structure 25 is a shoe that wavers between stable neutral and stability. There is a large medial sidewall and some more medial rigidity underfoot. The outsole, to me, does a lot of stability work for the shoe, providing that extra rigidity (the medial side has the waffled pattern which really adds some stiffness directly underfoot) and also a lot of mental confidence through its traction. The heel clip does not feel like it plays into the shoe guidance-wise, but does contribute to a lot of heel security. The "structure" in the Structure really comes not underfoot, but overfoot with the ways the shoe keeps you securely centered on the platform. There is certainly something to say about elements that keep you firmly centered on a platform - as a flat foot runner this is often all I'm personally looking for in a shoe, which makes the Structure really enjoyable for me - but those who have really gotten used to shoes like the Hoka Arahi, Brooks Adrenaline and others may not find the underfoot stability they are looking for here. Those looking for lateral stability might do okay here and should give it a look. There's some sole flaring, but it's very mild. The combination of the sole flaring and how the Structure keeps you centered on the platform might be enough stability for those who only need a little bit of support laterally. Those who need a lot more lateral support should check out other options like the Mizuno Wave Horizon series.

Thoughts as a DPT: Heel Stability and Calcaneal Motion
By Matthew Klein

The addition of a heel clip around the rearfoot is a new feature present in the Structure line. While various methods have been used throughout the years to "stabilize" the calcaneus, an important understanding of its function is needed before attempting to influence its motion. The calcaneus bone is also known as the heel bone and is one the largest and most posterior bones in the foot and ankle. The major joint responsible for motion of the calcaneus is the subtalar joint, which is the connection point between the calcaneus and the talas bone (which connects to the tibia and fibula). The major motions of the subtalar joint are inversion (heel bone points in) and eversion (heel bone points out). There is typically more inversion (20-30 degrees) than eversion (5-15 degrees) but both more are extremely important during gait (Neumann, 2016). Subtalar/Calcaneal eversion is particularly important as part of rearfoot pronation and the ability to shock absorb. Those missing the ability to evert their calcaneus/subtalar joint usually experience increased shock up the lower extremity and any additional shoe stiffness in the rearfoot can be quite irritating. On the other hand, those with excessive rearfoot eversion can have difficulty stabilizing the posterior part of the foot. This can be irritating for structures further ahead as well as the various muscles/tendons/structures that attach to the calcaneus including the Achilles tendon/calf muscles, foot intrinsic muscles and the plantarfascia. This is why an excessive or limited amount of subtalar motion can be associated with plantar fasciitis, Achilles tendon problems or intrinsic muscle irritations (Martin et al., 2014; Martin et al., 2018). 

Previous attempts to "stop" calcaneal motion are debatable. There is evidence the majority of research has underestimated heel movement in running shoes and that the heel often comtinues to move regardless of trying to "stop" or "control" its motion (Acantara et al., 2018; Nigg et al., 2018). Thus, influencing or guiding its motion may be better terms. Sidewalls, stiffer counters, heel clips (as in the Structure 25) and other methods to increase stiffness in the rearfoot can all be ways to influence calcaneal motion and facilitate more forward movement. However, it is important to NOT assume this works for everyone. Different people invert/evert/pronate/supinate throughout different parts of the foot. The rearfoot can move independently from the midfoot, the midfoot can move independently from the forefoot, etc. Excessive uncontrolled pronation should NOT be assumed to only come from the rearfoot. In fact, those who pronate/supinate excessively without control may actually have increased pain if their subtalar joint is already stiffened to compensate for excessive midfoot/forefoot motion. This is a reminder to remember that one method of stability/guidance does not work for everyone. Hopefully, this helps guide you a bit more on what type you or those you work with may need depending on how their symptoms respond to different shoes. 


Alcantara, R. S., Trudeau, M. B., & Rohr, E. S. (2018). Calcaneus range of motion underestimated by markers on running shoe heel. Gait & Posture63, 68-72.

Martin, R. L., Chimenti, R., Cuddeford, T., Houck, J., Matheson, J. W., McDonough, C. M., ... & Carcia, C. R. (2018). Achilles pain, stiffness, and muscle power deficits: midportion Achilles tendinopathy revision 2018: clinical practice guidelines linked to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health From the Orthopaedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy48(5), A1-A38.

Martin, R. L., Davenport, T. E., Reischl, S. F., McPoil, T. G., Matheson, J. W., Wukich, D. K., ... & Godges, J. J. (2014). Heel pain—plantar fasciitis: revision 2014. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy44(11), A1-A33.

Neumann, D. A. (2016). Kinesiology of the musculoskeletal system-e-book: foundations for rehabilitation. Elsevier Health Sciences.

Nigg, B. M., Mohr, M., & Nigg, S. R. (2017). Muscle tuning and preferred movement path–a paradigm shift. Current Issues in Sport Science (CISS)2, 007-007.


Matt: The Nike Structure 25 is a welcome change as the series return to being an actual stability/guidance shoe. The heel is quite stable and the midfoot sidewall does a great job of providing midfoot guidance without being overbearing. My only gripes with this shoe is the weight and the thickness of the upper. I'm a little concerned that with so much time to experiment with new materials that the Structure 25 is heavier than its older counterparts. This trend started back with 17/18/19 and is what killed this shoe for me until recently. The improved firm responsiveness is good, but it is a little too clunky to be the versatile stable option compared to the versatile neutral Pegasus. My biggest suggestion is to figure out how to drop the weight back to a more competitive level (low 10 oz). This can be achieved by lightening up the overly thick upper and return to some of the other performance mesh materials Nike has. I also might encourage the use of a little ZoomX foam to facilitate motion. A ZoomX central core could be a great way to reduce weight while further creating a centered ride. The world is open Nike and I hope you continue to progress this shoe to wear we all know it can be. 

David: I really enjoyed my time with the Nike Structure 25. I felt the fit throughout was really good, but the upper material oddly unsatisfying. It will certainly work for logging daily miles, but I think a slightly softer upper material, whether it be a mesh or knit, would feel nicer. This is especially true since the forefoot volume is a little bit lower. I would also like a tad more cushion in the forefoot. The current amount works, but I do feel the lugs a little more than I'd like for a daily training shoe. This is me being picky though. The shoe is quite nice as a light stability or stable neutral shoe.

Bach: I really enjoyed the current iteration of the Structure. I think the shoe could shed some serious weight in the upper to lower the weight, but that could lead to a bit of an imbalance with the midsole becoming more bottom heavy feeling. The midsole would have to be replaced with something a little lighter if this were to happen. I do like Matt's idea of a ZoomX core as the next step in the Structure series. That could potentially lighten the shoe while pushing the ride forward. If it raises costs, however, I would rather see the Structure lightened in a cost-effective way, as $140 is a good price point for the shoe.


Matt: The Nike Structure 25 is a moderate guidance/stability daily training shoe for those who want a traditional drop and ride. The zoom units help offset the higher weight and firmer ride, adding a little bounce to heel and forefoot landings. The high drop and stiff heel are noticeable, although a solid heel clip provides a centered ride that works with the midfoot sidewall to guide the foot forward. Although the heel bevel takes the edge off the heel once the shoe breaks in, the Structure 25 reminds me quite a bit of the Adrenaline 23. Despite both shoes using newer methods of guidance, they both feel traditional thanks to the higher drop. In the age of newer things and concepts, having some traditional feel may be helpful for those who want moderate guidance with a higher drop, which previously was rare in the current market. There is still place for the Structure 25 to evolve and improve but I am happy to see this series still alive and relevant. 

David: The Nike Structure 25 is a balanced daily training shoe for someone looking to have a traditional ride with a tad more guidance and midfoot support. The shoe feels like a traditional neutral training shoe, but with a larger sidewall medially that gives you some gentle guidance. The cushioning is very balanced and runs on the slightly firm side. The outsole uses shallow lugs and does well in reasonable trails on and off the road. This is a daily mileage workhorse with some gentle guidance for those that may need a light amount of stability. Those who need a lot of stability though may want to look at other offerings.

Bach: The Structure 25 is a really enjoyable mildish stability shoe that is certainly stable neutral and could be enjoyed by any runner who likes a firmer ride and lower stacked shoe that's still comfortable underfoot. The shoe runs very traditionally, which is appealing against the number of rockered options today. It's also a great versatile option for those who want to run light trails or just have a trainer for all-day use. At $140, it sits on the lower end of the spectrum cost-wise and often is on sale for much less, making it a solid option for those who want a secure feeling shoe that can long lots of miles.

Looking for something similar but low drop? Check out the Altra Provision 8.


Fit: B+ (Secure fit with locked in heel. Large tongue reduces volume in midfoot while a little extra material slightly increases forefoot volume, but normal width overall)
Performance: B
 (Firmer, slightly bouncier ride thanks to Zoom units in rearfoot/forefoot. On the heavier end so best for daily miles and recovery runs)
Stability: B+/A- [Moderate Guidance] (Heel clip/counter provides stiffer and stable heel which transitions into mild to moderately guided midfoot thanks to large medial sidewall. Noticeable guidance but not in your face)
DPT/Footwear Science: B+ (Solid upgrades that improve guidance/stability and drop weight from previous version. More needs to be done weight-wise to make it competitive with other current market offerings)
Personal: B+ (A shoe I didn't know what to expect from that has quietly taken a place in my rotation when I just need something more stable to slog miles in). 
Overall: B+ 

Fit: A- (Really well done dimensions and fit throughout. Decent anatomic fit. Upper material though can be a tad crinkly and uncomfortable before breaking in more.)
Performance: A- 
(Great for logging daily mileage, good versatility with footing, a tad more cushion in the forefoot would be appreciated so the lugs aren't felt quite as much)
Stability: B+ (Good heel security, light guidance from midfoot support system, though feels like light stability throughout with a relatively traditional neutral ride otherwise.)
DPT/Footwear Science: B+/A- (For the most part a traditional shoe, though I liked how they integrated their heel security from the upper down through the midsole platform and heel mold.)
Personal: B+/A- (Pleasant for daily efforts. For me this is a great 8-10 mile shoe, especially if there is runnable trail. I would like a little more forefoot cushioning for longer efforts though.)
Overall: B+/A-

Fit: A- (I found it to fit really nicely all-around for my standard feet)
Performance: A- 
(The versatility on and off road and comfort for me was spot on. This is for a specific consumer, but for that specific consumer they'll really like this. This is an easy shoe to pick up and take out the door any day)
Stability: B/B+ (Conflicting, but good for a larger array of runners. Those with great stability needs will have to give it a try first)
DPT/Footwear Science: B+ (I think this is a nicely refined version compared to previous iterations)
Personal: A- (Hits my own needs on the nose. This would be an instant buy for me as a consumer who prefers the lower stacked ride and traditional underfoot feel)
Overall: A-


Nike Structure 25
Price: $139.95 at Running Warehouse

Shop Men | Shop Women

*Using the link to purchase helps support Doctors of Running. Thanks so much!

Check out Gear We Love
Ultraspire Fitted Race Belt: The best way to carry your phone and goods on the run. No bounce and various sizes for waist. (Also recommend the Naked belt)
Saysky Running Gear: We were really taken aback by this Scandinavian company's ultra-thin, durable performance clothing
Skratch Recovery, Coffee Flavor: Mental and physical boost post run. Coffee flavor is excellent and goes great straight into a fresh brewed cup
goodr Sunglases: Run in style with goodr's super fun sunglasses.
Feetures Socks: Massively grippy socks that will make you feel more one with the shoe
Amphipod Hydraform Handheld Water Bottle: Perfect for long runs when you need hydration in the summer
Trigger Point Foam Roller: Help get those knots out post-run and feel better for tomorrow
Ciele Hat: Our team's favorite running hat of choice!
Fractel Hats: Our team's wider fitting running hat of choice!


Altra Paradigm 7 - Altra's unique zero drop, guidance-based stability shoe
Asics GT-1000 11 - The most affordable stability shoe in the market
ASICS GT-2000 12 - A new 3D guidance system provides cushioned, modern stability
Asics Kayano 30 - Big changes bring Kayano into the future, creating a geometric stability option
Brooks Adrenaline GTS 23 - The long running stability trainer stays true with small changes
Brooks Beast GTS 23 - The highest level stability shoe in the market today
Brooks Hyperion GTS - All-new, lightweight stability offering using guidance
Brooks Launch GTS 10 - An excellent low profile, mild guidance shoe
Hoka Gaviota 5 - Hoka moves to a new H-Frame stability that universalizes the Gaviota
Mizuno Wave Inspire 19 - The redesign for the guidance-based stability trainer is an early 2023 favorite
New Balance Fresh Foam X Vongo v6 - Big changes to this stability trainer
On Cloudflyer 4 - An update to the mild stability trainer (a really solid walking shoe)
Salomon DRX Bliss - A new guidance based trainer for the roads
Saucony Guide 16 - A much-improved upper and soft insole highlight this stability shoe update

Find all Shoe Reviews at Doctors of Running here.

Thanks for reading!


Facebook: Doctors of Running
Youtube Channel: Doctors of Running
Instagram: @doctorsofrunning
LinkedIn: Doctors of Running
Strava: Doctors of Running
Podcast: Virtual Roundtable
Pinterest: Doctors of Running


Check out the Doctors of Running Podcast to find more reviews, interviews, and running features from the team.

Visit our Podcast Page
Find us on Apple
Find us on Spotify

Editor's Note: As always, the views presented on this website belong to myself or the selected few who contribute to these posts. This website should not and does not serve as a replacement for seeking medical care. If you are currently injured or concerned about an injury, please see your local running physical therapist. If you are in the Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, Danbury and Stevens Point areas, we am currently taking clients for running evaluations.

***Disclaimer: These shoes were provided free of charge in exchange for a review.  We thank the people at Nike for sending us pairs.  This in no way affected the honesty of this review. We systematically put each type of shoe through certain runs prior to review. For trainers and performance trainers, we take them on daily runs, workouts, recovery runs and a long run prior to review (often accumulating anywhere from 20-50 miles in the process). For racing flats we ensure that we have completed intervals, a tempo or steady state run as well as a warm-up and cool down in each pair prior to review. This systematic process is to ensure that we have experience with each shoe in a large variety of conditions to provide expansive and thorough reviews for the public and for companies. Our views are based on our extensive history in the footwear industry and years testing and developing footwear. If you are a footwear rep looking for footwear reviews or consultations on development, we are currently looking to partner with companies to assist, discuss and promote footwear models. Partnership will not affect the honesty of our reviews.

Please feel free to reach out, comment and ask questions!
Contact us at

NEXT: Asics Novablast 4 Review

Bottom Ad [Post Page]

// ]]>