🎾 OFFICIAL AGASSI RETRO THREAD 🎾

^ No, like a few guys have already said, let's not jump to any conclusions... chances are they really are GS's.  

It wouldn't make any sense for them to alter the shoe given what we've seen as of late.  

Let's stay calm! 
happy.gif
 
 
I'm calling GS. Funny shape, 6 lace holes instead of 7 and the swoosh is shorter. I think are safe that the Lavas will release with the same mold as the current retros
 
I'm calling GS. Funny shape, 6 lace holes instead of 7 and the swoosh is shorter. I think are safe that the Lavas will release with the same mold as the current retros

IDK why I didnt check for that. The amount of eyelets is a dead giveaway
Still doesnt fix the color blocking issue
 
Last edited:
 
On the box and catalogue, it was the Air Tech Challenge 3/4, but by chronological order, the Air Tech Challenge IV... 4th shoe of the line.
SinnerP - I believe the 3/4 referred to the mid-high attribute of the shoes.  They were definitely the 4th version, and I remember Holabird Sports' ad in the back of Tennis Magazine back in those days also had the "3/4" designation along with an ATC without that (or maybe it said "Low").  I'm too lazy to search online right now, but I could swear my friend had a low-top version of the IV's that was indeed slightly lower than the ones Agassi is wearing in that pic.  After all, the three previous models had a low and a mid, why not the IV?  I remember at that time "3/4" was fast becoming a term used to describe shoes that fit the mid-high category.  Without looking at a side-by-side comparison, the IV's design would be hard to tell the difference, unlike the mids vs lows of the I, II, and III models.
 
 
SinnerP - I believe the 3/4 referred to the mid-high attribute of the shoes.  They were definitely the 4th version, and I remember Holabird Sports' ad in the back of Tennis Magazine back in those days also had the "3/4" designation along with an ATC without that (or maybe it said "Low").  I'm too lazy to search online right now, but I could swear my friend had a low-top version of the IV's that was indeed slightly lower than the ones Agassi is wearing in that pic.  After all, the three previous models had a low and a mid, why not the IV?  I remember at that time "3/4" was fast becoming a term used to describe shoes that fit the mid-high category.  Without looking at a side-by-side comparison, the IV's design would be hard to tell the difference, unlike the mids vs lows of the I, II, and III models.
Yep, you're right...  we had this discussion a while back (either in this thread or in the tennis thread) and came to a conclusion that it meant a "three-quarter cut"... 

The Jimmy Connors ATC IV low... these were the retros...

air_tech_challenge_retro_1.jpg
 
 
Last edited:
the former convo involved me - and yes it (3/4) means three-quarter height not a model designation


to be honest, i don't care prove anything cause i'm right...but i do remember seeing an ad or nike catalog explaining it in plain english (possibly with a different model than the ATCII)

i'm surprised it hasn;t already been posted, perhaps a young dutiful hypebeast can do the leg-work for me and drudge it up to post?
 
Last edited:
Yep, you're right...  we had this discussion a while back (either in this thread or in the tennis thread) and came to a conclusion that it meant a "three-quarter cut"... 

The Jimmy Connors ATC IV low... these were the retros...
air_tech_challenge_retro_1.jpg
 

I remember these sat at outlets when they retroed.
 
the former convo involved me - and yes it (3/4) means three-quarter height not a model designation


to be honest, i don't care prove anything cause i'm right...but i do remember seeing an ad or nike catalog explaining it in plain english (possibly with a different model than the ATCII)

i'm surprised it hasn;t already been posted, perhaps a young dutiful hypebeast can do the leg-work for me and drudge it up to post?
laugh.gif
 Indeed it was.

Yeah, I think it was this ad, but I don't have a clear-enough version...

atc2-2.jpg
 
the former convo involved me - and yes it (3/4) means three-quarter height not a model designation


to be honest, i don't care prove anything cause i'm right...but i do remember seeing an ad or nike catalog explaining it in plain english (possibly with a different model than the ATCII)

i'm surprised it hasn;t already been posted, perhaps a young dutiful hypebeast can do the leg-work for me and drudge it up to post?


You are correct 3/4 was in reference to the height it was the same deal with the Nike Trainer SC II which came in a 3/4 and a low too. BTW here is the OG Nike catalog with the tech line
View media item 583834

Also here is the original thread from the last Tech Challenge retro

http://niketalk.com/t/1671/air-tech-challenge-ii-and-tech-low-retro-edit-pic-9-29-uhoh/90
 
3/4>>>lows. And the air presence didn't need to be made. Nike should have just made more ATC colorways.
 
Last edited:
3/4>>>lows. And the air presence didn't need to be made. Nike should have just made more ATC colorways.

yea the 3/4 was always better than the low IMO but I wouldn't mind some lows either. As far as the air presence it was a takedown model and with the Tech II 3/4 retailing for around 110 and the tech low around 90 they knew they needed a cheaper model affiliated with the flagship shoe. You have to remember this was 1990, 110 dollars for a pair of sneakers was eye opening.
 
Anyone have any further information on these? Saw these awhile ago and never had any luck.
 
Back
Top Bottom