Keil is not a dog; or, I wouldn't throw these Nike and Adidas golf shoes at anyone!

I have to give my colleague Kiel C. deserved props for shining a light on some desirable holiday gifts this month, and for lighting a fire under my lazy keyboard. Having countered his Sun Mountain blog with my own Sunice submission, I’ll now attempt to block his Golf Rules Made Easy Entry with a Footwear Follow-Up.

If the names Muntadhar al-Zaidi and Ramazan Baydan are not familiar to you, allow me to shed a little light. al-Zaidi is the Iraqi journalist who demonstrated remarkable accuracy when hurling shoes at President Bush, while Baydan is the Turkish shoemaker whose sales have increased since the world-reported incident last week. I don’t propose to discuss either gentleman’s name; what I will assess is the viability of two more familiar names: Nike and Adidas.

If you were to examine my two peds during a round of golf, you’d find a Nike Zoom on one and an Adidas Tour 360 on the other.

NIKE ZOOM

ADIDAS TOUR 360

I had the opportunity to wear both shoes this season and in the light of honesty, they’re difficult to distinguish. A lot of R&D goes into this footwear, not to mention the hours of testing under unique circumstances. To even suspect that one of these two high-echelon companies would produce a dud is irrational.

That said, I’ll tell you what I liked about each one and make an overtime decision on the winner…

1. I like the split sole that both employ. The Nike has a torsion bar that unites the toe sole and the heel sole, while the Adidas utilizes the eponymous three power bands in the area. Decision: Draw.

2. The Adidas tongue reminds me of the old Pizza Hut thin-and-crispy style of pizza pie, while the thick Nike tongue (you guessed it) is the thick-and-chewy variety. I’m thick and chewy with my pizza and lean the same way when it comes to shoe tongues. Decision: Nike

3. Heel support for the Nike shoe is fairly traditional. The heel piece extends about an inch below tongue height. The Adidas shoe does a bit more by adding an notched piece that ascends a 1/2 inch higher. I like this touch from Adidas and allow them to tie the match. Decision: Adidas.

4. The spike pattern for each shoe is unique; both shoes have five spikes in the forward section of the ship and two in the aft. The Nike shoe places a center spike under the toes while the Adidas map slides it under the big toe. Secondary spikes are line segments and squares on the Nike and cones on the Adidas bottom. I felt incredibly stable in both shoes, having played in all sorts of desirable and undesirable atmospheric conditions. Decision: Draw.

5. The full leather upper of the Adidas shoe is traditional and comfortable, while the Nike upper combines a leather heel and center toe piece with two side mesh panels. Normally I don’t like the use of two distinct materials, but this mesh is different. It’s breathable and flexible yet not so much that it leaks. In an incredibly close competition, it’s the bravura of Nike in using this contemporary combination that wins the day. Decision: Nike

Score: Nike 2 wins, 2 draws
Adidas 1 win, 2 draws