Reviews Asics Game FF

Not as long as a baseline model's, and no source says by how much. The Game FF scores 5.6/10 for durability in our ratings, one of the lowest scores in our database of 37 shoes.

That score reflects an absence as much as a finding. The rubber is non-marking, an AHAR compound according to Asics, and the Tennis Warehouse product page presents it as durable. But no measured wear test has been published for this model in the sources consulted, and it is not among the shoes covered by an outsole warranty. I do not convert a score into hours.

Two reference points help place the pair. The first is general: lightweight shoes last less long on average than stable, heavier models, as Tennis Companion points out. The second concerns the cushioning: 45 to 60 hours of tennis before the midsole is worn out, according to the AAPSM. At one hour a week, that is a full season.

The surface decides the rest. On clay, which wears rubber far less than hard courts, a Game FF has every chance of reaching those 45 hours with tread left underfoot. On hard courts, for a heavy player or a server who drags a foot, the rubber may go before the foam, first at the toe and under the inner forefoot.

No pair is judged without the lifespan of its outsole. This one is the model's weak point: the durable tennis shoe ranking shows what eight others do better.

It is a lightweight entry-level shoe, rated 7.0/10 in our ratings, made for the occasional club player. It does not appear in any of our seven rankings.

Its profile is clear. Lightness comes first, at 7.6/10. Comfort and grip follow at 7.4/10, stability at 7.2/10. Durability comes last, at 5.6/10. The exact weight is not disclosed in the sources consulted, nor is the drop or the release year.

The build explains these scores. The cushioning is Flytefoam, Asics' lightweight foam, the one that gives the model its two letters. A Trusstic shank stiffens the midfoot to hold the shoe through lateral movement, according to the SportsShoes product page. The upper is breathable mesh. The sources credit it with three qualities: it is light and comfortable from the first outing, laterally stable for its category, and affordable.

They also note two reservations. No durability data has been measured, and the support is less developed than a Gel-Challenger's.

Who is it for? The player who goes out once a week, wants a shoe that does not weigh on the foot and does not plan to spend more than €80. An interclub competitor who trains three times a week will wear it out quickly. The Asics page places the Game FF in the range, and the comparison tool lines it up with the 36 other models in our database.

Yes, according to the product pages consulted. The US retailer Tennis Warehouse lists the model as the Gel Game FF, while SportsShoes and Belgian retailers call it the Game FF. Our database treats the two names as one shoe.

The letters FF refer to Flytefoam, as on the Solution Speed FF 4 and the Court FF 3, two much more expensive models from the brand. Here, the foam is paired with a Trusstic shank at the midfoot.

For a Belgian player, the real question is the version. The Game FF comes in all-court and clay. Tennis-Point.be and Zalando offer the first, Passasports a women's clay version, Decathlon.be a women's model. Check the wording on the product page before ordering: more than eight Belgian courts in ten are clay according to the RTBF, and the deep herringbone of a clay outsole clears the surface better than an all-court outsole.

And compared with the older numbered Gel-Game models, such as the Gel-Game 9? The sources consulted do not say what changes. So I give no weight gap and no cushioning gap between the two.

One precaution applies to any end-of-line pair. The AAPSM advises replacing an athletic shoe more than a year old, even lightly used, because foam and rubber dry out. An older version that has sat in stock for a long time has already started that clock, and its price needs to drop substantially to make up for it.

The Game FF if you want lightness, the Gel-Dedicate 9 if you count every euro, the Gel-Challenger 15 if you play more than once a week.

The two entry-level models are close. In our ratings, the Game FF scores 7.0/10 overall and the Gel-Dedicate 9 6.9/10. The first wins on lightness (7.6 vs 7.2), grip (7.4 vs 7.2) and stability (7.2 vs 7.0). The second does barely better on durability, 5.8 vs 5.6, with standard AHAR rubber, and averages around €61 in Belgium against €75. Our database also lists a wide version and a carpet version of it, which the Game FF does not offer.

The Gel-Challenger 15 plays in another category. It scores 8.2/10 overall, 8.0/10 for durability with AHAR Plus rubber and 8.4/10 for stability, for around €109 in Belgium. The 2.4-point gap in durability is the widest of the three. On the other hand it weighs 414 g in a men's US 10.5 and scores 7.4/10 for lightness, less than the Game FF.

So the maths depends on how often you play. At one hour a week on clay, a Game FF's rubber is enough and the €34 gap buys nothing. At three sessions a week, or on hard courts in winter, it buys an outsole that lasts.

The Asics Gel-Challenger 15 review covers that model in detail.

The Nike Vapor Lite 3 for most players: it scores higher on all five criteria, for about €5 less.

In our ratings, the Vapor Lite 3 scores 7.9/10 overall against 7.0/10 for the Game FF. In detail: durability 7.0 vs 5.6, grip 8.2 vs 7.4, comfort 7.6 vs 7.4, stability 7.8 vs 7.2, lightness 8.6 vs 7.6. It averages around €70 in Belgium, against €75.

The durability gap has a source. RunRepeat finds the Vapor Lite 3's upper and outsole durable for the price, with a toe in the same reinforced rubber. Nothing equivalent has been published for the Game FF.

The Game FF keeps one argument, and it matters: the fit. RunRepeat advises against the Vapor Lite 3 for wide feet, whereas the Game FF has a standard fit. If the Nike feels tight when you try it on, the Asics is a real fallback.

Lower still, the NikeCourt Lite 4 averages around €67: 7.5/10 overall, 6.8/10 for durability. No clay version of it was found, which gives the Game FF an edge again for the summer season.

The details are in the Nike Vapor Lite 3 review and the NikeCourt Lite 4 review. The best value tennis shoe ranking sets these models against the other pairs under €100.

Around €75 in average prices checked in Belgium between June and September 2026. The official European price is not disclosed. You can find it at Tennis-Point.be, Passasports, Decathlon.be and Zalando.

The price that matters is the price per hour of play. Based on 45 to 60 hours before the cushioning wears out, a Game FF at €75 works out at €1.25 to €1.65 per hour. That is slightly more than a Nike Vapor Lite 3 at €70 (€1.15 to €1.55) or a Gel-Dedicate 9 at €61 (€1.00 to €1.35), and clearly less than a Gel-Challenger 15 at €109 (€1.80 to €2.40).

This calculation assumes the rubber lasts as long as the foam. On clay, that is likely: the surface wears the outsole far less than hard courts, as Tennis Companion points out. On hard courts, with a score of 5.6/10, there is a risk that the outsole gives out before 45 hours, and the real cost per hour rises accordingly.

A word on indoor play. On carpet, you need a completely smooth outsole, according to Decathlon. The Game FF's rubber is non-marking, but neither its all-court nor its clay version has a smooth outsole.

Do not count on a wear warranty. The Game FF is not among the models covered by the Tennis Warehouse 6-month guarantee, and Tennis Warehouse Europe refers to the manufacturer's warranty, which covers defects but not normal wear.

The article on cost per hour of play applies the same method to nine models.