New Balance MT110s are amazing. They are like slippers (for me at least) and are cheap (around 35 quid from Sports Direct), have good grip and excellent drainage. They even have a rock plate in them. I have run up to 20 miles on trail/road runs with no bother whatsoever.
Has anybody run the 34-mile St Swithun's Way between Winchester and Farnham? I have just moved to one end of it and am considering taking a train to the other end then running back on a Sunday when I have nothing else to do, as a first foray into looong distance running. Hilly is fine, as is mud - but if it dull or close to traffic, then I may not bother. Any advice welcome, thanks.
Jeez, Nick, I'd never thought of that. Thanks. Or otherwise, perhaps if you'd read the bit in my original post that mentioned the tropics, you'd have understood that no matter how clean my feet are, they still sweated in the heat. And therefore my cheesy shoes (which aren't anymore, thanks to the helpful replies) have nothing to do with my personal hygiene.
OK, so the thread title is only my opinion, but having used my New Balance MT110s on shingle, mud, grass and tarmac, I can safely say they are wonderful. And weirdly they are only £34.99 at Sports Direct, of all places. How they can be so cheap is anyone's guess.
I must admit I was sceptical that they would even sell a 'proper' running shoe at Sport Direct - especially as many of the staff, let alone the customers, look like Greggs loyalty card holders. But it is true, they do. At a reasonable price. Let's hope Anton Krupicka doesn't find out that a massive chain store is flogging his signature shoes at a snip.
But it begs the question: if we can get the MT110 for the price of a pair of designer flip-flops, how come other so-called minimal shoes cost so much?