NBA sneaker physiology: Science or marketing?

There is nothing more frivolous that is taken more seriously in the world of basketball than sneakers.

Basketball shoes, much like trading cards and jerseys before them, have a certain ethos that surrounds them, a dedicated community that seems a little odd from the outside but makes perfect sense when you’re totally immersed in it. But that wasn’t always the case.

Converse’s Chuck Taylor All Star — the first basketball-specific sneaker — was introduced in 1917 and was comprised simply of canvas and rubber, but it wasn’t until the 1980s, with the introduction of Nike’s Air Jordan 1 and the rest that were to follow, when everybody from the casual fan to the dedicated hooper became enamored with basketball shoes.

Read More: Vegas Summer League debuts for top rookies

Walk into any shoe store these days and you’ll see the walls packed from floor to ceiling with various basketball sneakers with eye-catching colorways and silhouettes. Driven by the signature products of the NBA’s brightest stars, the basketball shoe industry is a remarkably lucrative one — total sales approximated $1 billion in 2017, according to Forbes.com — and one that many want a slice of.

Milwaukee Bucks All-Star Giannis Antetokounmpo, formerly of Adidas, will be the latest to join the ranks of players with a signature shoe after he signed a deal with Nike, the clear Alpha in the shoe game, in early November 2017. Antetokounmpo, not necessarily one who champions the status quo, took to Twitter recently to seek the public’s advice as to what elements should be included in his shoe, a unique move in an industry where the creation of signature products is shrouded in secrecy.

The anatomy of a basketball shoe, while obviously not as intricate as a living being, is more complex than one would believe simply by looking at it. It’s within this complexity that the major power brokers of the basketball shoe world — Nike (and it’s subsidiary Air Jordan), Adidas and Puma? — weave their narratives for superiority.

The midsole, comprised of various types of polymers or vinyl and is located under the fabric that forms the body, helps provide cushioning and shock absorption for the foot and lower extremity. The heel counter, the “back” of the shoe, stabilizes the heel during activities such as running and cutting. The outsole, or bottom, provides the traction needed for quick stops and starts. And the shoe collar height (i.e. high- vs. mid- vs. low-top), perhaps the most well-known and widely recognizable of the anatomical structures, helps provide stability for the ankle and lowers the odds for a player incurring an ankle sprain.

Or maybe they don’t?

The anatomy has been well-established, but the physiology of basketball shoes (and athletic shoes in general) has been a topic of scientific debate since their creation. Logic dictates that a softer midsole would decrease the shock — the technical term is ground reaction force — placed on the foot and lower leg during running and jumping and that a higher collar would decrease a player’s risk for rolling their ankle. Decreasing the ground reaction force would prevent chronic injuries such as tendinopathies — or a disease of the tendon — and stress fractures. A higher collar would restrict the available inversion range of motion making the ligaments of the outer ankle less likely to be stretched and injured.

But while logic is convinced, science isn’t so sure.

Studies conducted in 2001 and 2013 found that that midsole density (i.e. “hard” vs. “soft”) likely has no impact on injury occurrence. Other studies conducted in 2013 and 2015 are split as to whether collar height influences the prevention of inversion (“rolling”) ankle sprains. (What is solidly backed in the literature, however, is that ankle braces decrease the likelihood of a player sustaining a sprained ankle, whether it’s their first or more of a chronic issue).

So why are these ideas pushed so hard by the likes of Jordan, Nike and Adidas if they’re back by limited, if any, evidence? The answer is really quite simple: marketing.

A brief scan through the web page for Jordan’s current shoe model, the Air Jordan XXXII, reveals the phrases “lightweight,” “responsive cushioning” and “explosive” in regards to the product and its components. It’s words like these, and the shoulders of the (logical) concepts that hold them up, that are the major driving forces behind the 10-figure a year basketball sneaker industry. It’s not hard science, but rather soft science with a dash of marketing, a pinch of word-of-mouth advertising and a skosh of attractive colors to taste.

Next: Chris Paul advocates for Rockets to sign Carmelo Anthony

As it turns out, the basketball sneaker industry at-large parallels arguably the most important factor in injury prevention via shoes: comfort — whether in the form of feeling good on the feet or recognizability — is really all that matters.