Of course, as I mentioned it's a really extreme example used to demonstrate that, even being frugal on 9/10 of those, you still hit the amount mentioned in the article.
> same pair for over 2 years and haven't worn them out yet
I think it's important to understand that "needs replacement" is not the same as "falling apart". It's essentially an industry-wide recommendation to replace running shoes between 500km-800km.
At that point, my shoes always look functional, and I have pairs I've continued to use for years for other, non-running activities, but they without a doubt feel "dead" and aren't providing proper support for long runs. The shoes might work fine, and at 10mi a week you might not even ever notice a problem until they start actually falling apart, but you are increasing your risk of injury.
Of course, as I mentioned it's a really extreme example used to demonstrate that, even being frugal on 9/10 of those, you still hit the amount mentioned in the article.
> same pair for over 2 years and haven't worn them out yet
I think it's important to understand that "needs replacement" is not the same as "falling apart". It's essentially an industry-wide recommendation to replace running shoes between 500km-800km.
At that point, my shoes always look functional, and I have pairs I've continued to use for years for other, non-running activities, but they without a doubt feel "dead" and aren't providing proper support for long runs. The shoes might work fine, and at 10mi a week you might not even ever notice a problem until they start actually falling apart, but you are increasing your risk of injury.