Chung Shi Shoes

Shuddering in a corner....protecting my privates..


Is ... is it safe now?...can I come out?

I'm putting on all my shoes at once and seeing if I can still balance ...

ahhhuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuum!

BTW, I have been using a pair of Asics DuoMax's . Best shoe I've had in years. My knees don't bother me with them and my back is no worse than it was.

Next time I'm shoe-shopping, I'll have to check them out. Thanks for the info And your privates are safe from me...uhh... you don't have multi-penii, do you?

oh, geez, another one..

Ok, ok, already, I might actually like flue vog, or whatever the name is.



Or not, snarls...

Oh hey c.i....I totally agree with you.

And....I acknowledged, more than once that the information, although not what I was asking about, was interesting, and informative/useful.

I also aknowledged, more than once, that I gave ragmans, and osso's sugguestions consideration, and, in view of the fact that I have to obviously take knowledge supplied by others in light of how they will effect me personally, in this case, fit and purpose, and weigh out for myself if it applies to me.

So, even though I was not looking for advice on other brands of shoes, I read, assimilated and judged the advice based on my needs. Which, are not the needs of ragman and osso.

Somehow, the fact that I don't have the same needs as ragman and osso upset them.

It certainly hasn't upset me.

I have to be totally honest here though...Nothing that ragman said in any of his posts, about brands of shoes, pronations of feet, sports doctors, price, etc, etc. was not anything I didn't already know, had not already experienced first hand, or researched. His information was useful, but, frankly, I was being polite so as not to immediately say "yeah, yeah, I know all that....but I'm looking for information on something I don't know yet"

However, I didn't realize in my initial post that I should have put the disclaimer that I was cognicent of various brands of shoes, knew that medical people were available, and was aware of costs, and so forth.

What I got out of this was that ragman, based on his immediate opinion that something was a gimmick, is disgruntled that I didn't immediately say "you're right....tell me what to do", and then, do it.

Plus, him then saying he didn't need/want to try a product to give an opinion....well.....looks like he made up his mind one way, and as he thinks of me, won't be temptet to think otherwise.

I suppose I could go out and buy some nikes or something, and every time I put them on, think "these aren't half as comfortable as those other gimmicky shoes I tried on....boy, those really felt good. But ragman said these cost half and much, and fulfill my needs, so I guess I'll just wear them"

Giving advice is fine..well, not so fine when it's not been asked for, but still fine enough when it's well intentioned. However, giving advice doesn't obligate the other to swallow it whole without applying what they already know, which may conflict with what a stranger tells them.

bottom line, if ragman feels he needs to defend his privates, it's because he felt by the mere virtue of having privates worth defending, qualifies in to be an expert....but, perhaps not as much of an expert as I think he is, and apparantly that makes me wrong. So, I'm sent off with a "god bless, do what you want, you've been warned"

I think I'll ask someone with a degree in Kinesiology, a BSN in nursing, and years of experience what they have to say. May not be as good as a person with MD after their name, but, pretty damn close.

I agree with mame....these are not Jimmy Choos....they're better.

fluevogs's?


wow....looked at their website and not only are those shoes extraordinarily (IMHO)....ahem, fugley, but they are priced in the $200 -$300 and up range also (ok, some on sale for less than $100-150). I didn't see any athetic shoes, either.

Better run them by ragman to see what he has to say.

Re: Chung Shi Shoes


You know what?

This actually is the first annoying thing you've said. Do you not think I know how to ask about return policies? In addition, I suppose I should have given you a blow by blow of my walking experience at the store.

When I walked outside with the shoes, I had not yet purchased them. I walked outside at the prompting of the sales person, who, it should be needless to say, walked with me as I went from one end of the shopping center and back again, because, again, should be needless to say, he didn't want me walking off with a pair of shoes I hadn't paid for.

Also, before he even brought the shoes out, I told him I'd like to buy them IF I liked them, but wanted my rolfer to evaluate them later in the week, and would either return them or not at that point.

His response was that they had a two week return policy, with the shoes in good shape.....very special, just for me.

You must think I've never conducted a business transaction.

There is a spirit of contention abroad in the land--at least on A2K.

Tonight the moon will be full--and then the moon will begin to wane.

Ill met by moonlight.

<sings>0h...you've got to have friends...
de dee de dee dee dee dee dee

For the sake of decorum and peace on A2K, I wish you well and choose not to rebut and discuss this any further. I see serious issues here.

Yeh, I'm sure I contributed to an element of arguing when it wasn't necessary.

I guess I was obscure in the idea, clear in my own mind, that some shoes could be a poor choice for people with certain kinds of foot pronation. I don't know that they are, just that they well might be, and that understanding about your type of pronation could be useful. I assume that if pronation is "normal" the shoes may be just fine; if not, yes, I might see an orthopedist for an opinion.



May we all have happy feet....

Hey you guys! I'm here to defend the Fluevog!!

I'm sorry if you find them ugly, Chai, but I mentioned them because I bought a pair when Fox & Fluevog had one of their first outlets in Gastown, Vancouver, way back in the hippy-dippy days... (we're talking early 1970's)...

I paid the astronomical sum of $35 for a pair of their clogs (open-toed) which, when my salary was $500/month, was a lot!! They were the most comfy shoe I have ever worn. So there!

I could afford a pair today, but like you say, they are fugly!

Just to prove I'm not making it up

John and his longtime friend and ex - partner, Peter Fox, go back to biblical times. In those days, such scriptural characters as Methuselah lived to be, quite literally, thousands of years old. John, himself, is thousands of years old and Peter Fox is, in fact, Methuselah. Before they founded Fox & Fluevog, in the ancient biblical age of 1970, they were shepherds. Actually, they worked at Sheppard's, a venerable Vancouver shoe emporium, albeit a tad on the conventional side. As you can imagine, John and Peter felt a wee bit constrained, selling brogues all day to businessmen in suits and servicing only the occasional hipster. When, one day, the miraculous happened, it was followed by the inevitable: an old warehouse full of turn - of - the - century footwear (men's & women's, in mint condition, no less) became available to buy at one ridiculously low price. In a nanosecond, John and Peter were out the door and into their own store, fully stocked with brand new fifty year old shoes that, in 1969, were right in style. Fox & Fluevog immediately became the very coolest place to treat the feet and has remained so ever since. Around 1980, Peter heard the siren song of New York City and moved there to open his own store, specializing in design of Ladies' (particularly wedding) shoes. John took over the business and built it into the multinational mega corporation it is today, along the way forging his undaunted reputation for the world's most distinctive shoes.

Wow, Mame, I'm seeing a whole new side of you! LOL

I'd like to put my .02c worth of shoe stories too, because I worked for Florsheim Shoe Company about ten lifetimes ago.

Back in those days, we used to be able to buy shoes at 55 percent of retail, and they were really great shoes - made in Chicago. I still have Florsheims in my closet that still looks new, and I bought those back in the sixties and seventies. They're still comfortable on my feet, but I wear them only on special occasions.

A few years ago, Florsheim Shoe Company went bankrupt, but a few months ago, the Florsheim brothers bought back the name and re-established their company. I wish them luck.

Danskos woman here. I am going to have to look up fluevogs...

I did try earth shoes once, in Westwood, just about ran out of the store, not so much re the ugliness, but from the cultural whappo, and my own imbalance.

Time passes, and if people like them, fine.

CI - why am I not shocked that you have perfectly good 30 and 40 yr old shoes in your closet? I would never have guessed that, but I am not surprised Good for you - I wish I still had those clogs. That was the first purchase I made with my first paycheque as a 17 yr old working in 'downtown Vancouver' so it was very memorable. Plus, they had a hippy design on the leather

Shite, osso, now I'm going to have to look up Danskos! grrr...

Hey, they sell them at a store near me, Osso... I'll check them out while I'm out and about tomorrow. Thanks for the heads up.

Well, more about me -

fine leather soled shoes, such as florshiems' dress shoes, were I man, would have me on foot death's door. With my arch and metatarsals' failure to 'rotate', the fine sole becomes an upward battering ram. I also can't wear too cushioned soles - as I've found out by buying some very expensive walking shoes - my feet seem to be attempting to break with those.

I tried on some whatchacallits once, the tough punk sort of boots, forget the name. My version of hell.

Danskos are worn sort of loose.. no rubbies, but also not floppy...

Florsheim's women shoe stores were called Thayer McNeil.

ok folks....here's the skinny on Chung Shi's

I was adviced to return them by Sandy, but NOT for Any of the reasons brought up by the peanut gallery.

So, contrary to Mr. "You just hear what you want to hear Chai, and toss the rest", I am taking the advice of this person who explained in length was she saw as the issue.

The #1 problem she said, was the fact that although the Chung Shi's WILL cause you feet to propel yourself more efficiently, and it will cause your hips to roll in a natural motion, as well as cause you to walk and stand straighter....that is actually part of the problem.

She examined the sole (yes, she actually touched the shoes and tried them on herself) and said they were very inflexible. Yes, it will make your foot function properly, but only because your foot is, in effect, in a brace like device. The shoe is simulating proper movement, but you are not actually performing that movement. Your body is relying on a mechanism when it should be performing the work itself.

She demonstrated, in her bare feet, how a proper walk should be, and what your foot should be doing, inch by inch. She emphasized that your "toe hinge" in your big toe should be both flexible and strong, and should be what is pushing your body forward.

So, bottom line, she stated "The idea behind this shoe has merit, the concept is good, but they haven't taken it far enough"

So, then I asked (yes ragman, I actually asked) for suggestions. Her response was "Nike Free". She has recommended them to many runners, and walkers that she has worked with, and although many of them claimed "That shoe will never worked for me"...when she could actually persuade them to try a pair on, they immediately changed their minds.

Sandy said the Nike Free is so flexible that you can bend it in half, so it doesn't inhibit the foot from doing its job, but it does provide support and stability, and enough padding to make them very comfortable.

Anyway, I'm going to do some research on the Nike Free also, and return the Chung Shi's, just as I said I would if I got an educated opinion.