Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble

flip12

Members+
  • Content Count

    1944
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16
  • Feedback

    0%

flip12 last won the day on April 28

flip12 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

418 Excellent

About flip12

  • Birthday 03/16/1984

Equipment

  • Skates
    MLX, Graf 701, Graf 501
  • Stick
    Leino SE16
  • Gloves
    Slava Kozlov TPS HGT, AK27
  • Helmet
    Bauer HH5000L, CCM cage
  • Pants
    Tackla Air 9000 with suspenders
  • Shoulder Pads
    Warrior AX1
  • Elbow Pads
    Reebok 20K
  • Shin Pads
    Jofa 3195
  • Hockey Bag
    Graf

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Copenhagen, Denmark
  • Interests
    Soviet Hockey, IT, Literature, Architecture, Biking, Food+Drink, Philosophy.
  • Spambot control
    753459201

Recent Profile Visitors

8595 profile views
  1. flip12

    Vintage skates pro stock

    I can't recall the naming scheme, but I think Air Accel Elite and Air Accel were the top two tiers in the lineup. You can see the subtle differences that giveaway where in the lineup a boot was. The best signs I know of are the "Made in Canada" on the tongue, versus "Made in Taiwan" on the lesser models, and especially the outsole type. If it's composite, it's one of the top two. If it's the composite with a channel, it's the Elite. Both of the top two look similar in the quarter panels: basically two pieces--the base and the plastic superstructure, without any additional facing bits--and with the groovy reinforcement stitching. What I'll never find is a Fedorov spec in my size, as his feet are a little smaller, but that would be awesome: one eyelet lower than standard, with a squared off tendon guard, rather than the usual pointed shape.
  2. flip12

    Vintage skates pro stock

    Yeah, like the top left, but in the top of the line Air Accel Elite model.
  3. flip12

    Vintage skates pro stock

    Those are ******* amazing!! I've been on the hunt for white 10.5's. There are very few that are in that condition. Just have a look through eBay's completed listings for "Nike hockey skates" (see the link below...that's the search term I tend to use because a lot of the listings for Nike hockey stuff on eBay seems to be from people who don't really represent what they have very well). From what I've seen on there, these could sell anywhere from $150-$300. It seems like the size range from 8-9.5 has pretty good movement. It's somewhat dependent on the size you have. https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_nkw=nike+hockey+skate&_sacat=0&rt=nc&LH_Complete=1
  4. flip12

    Vintage skates pro stock

    It depends on the model. There are certain models that are still sought after, such as Micron Megas, Daoust, and Bauer Supremes from later in the range that you mentioned. Another one is the original Nike Air Accel line. I've seen mid-range models sell for over $100 on eBay. Air Accel Elites are pretty much guaranteed to sell on eBay eventually. If you search for what recent ones have gone for, you might have an idea where to list yours. Those sound like beauties, can you post some pictures?
  5. flip12

    Vapor 2X Pro Custom is now available

    Do you follow any preparation steps to avoid different scans due to potential differences in foot volume from swelling? I've often heard feet swell during the day, depending on what they've been through. If your feet have been through different activity days up to the moment of the scan, is it possible a little swelling is bumping you over the threshold from Supreme to Nexus? Just a thought.
  6. Who asked you for data? I asked you for an opinion based on a close reading of the test's writeup rather than a critique that basically amounts to "this data must be garbage because if it isn't then I can't believe the marketing that says this new and improved helmet design is really new and improved, because features!" That's not an argument that gets you very far. It should be clear that companies have their own interests first, which entails marketing everything as an improvement. Without data, how can we assess if there is any improvement or even a consistent level of performance? A pass/fail test doesn't help there. A lot of people in this thread have attacked the VT study's data without understanding what the data even is. People want to hate this effort but for reasons that aren't really accurate. That makes me wonder if there's retaliation because other interests are feeling threatened and we end up hearing propaganda that isn't an accurate depiction of what the STAR rating system is. It isn't without its flaws, but a lot of the supposed flaws are non-existent or were applicable to earlier iterations but have been improved on since the first STAR rating results; rotational impact being the biggie. I don't see @BenBreeg arguing that the STAR system is law, but rather that it's a step towards a better idea of the complicated assessment of risk when it comes to head injuries. That's the problem with research--it's not really as cut and clean as it's often presented in the pop press, and that pop aspect is meant to feed consumers the food for thought that they want. The 1-5 stars are a shrewd way to play it both ways, but I'll maintain that that has upsides and downsides. @stick9 you should go back and carefully reread what comments you're replying to because they are full of misapprehensions. @OldTrainerGuy, what's the downside of using a football headform? How is a football headform not suited for a hockey helmet? It would seem both would be abstract representations of average human heads and football helmets and hockey helmets are meant to actually protect the same actual heads in practice. Is there a response from HECC and CSA explaining their misgivings with STAR? I'm not sure if I missed it before, but what about the VT lab's analysis of rotational impact is seen as insufficient to test for rotational impact by the certification boards you're familiar with?
  7. 1. Sure, you can do that, go ahead. But that's completely different from what the VT STAR ratings are. They are peer-reviewed studies, which is all about test the degree of questionability of not only data, but everything involved in a study: background, procedure, results, theory, etc. 2. Peer-review acts as somewhat of a guard against junk science. Like concussions, there is no absolute guarantee of preventing junk science. The best we can do is develop standards and procedures that do the most to eliminate potential sources of error. In that sense, the VT lab has already been vetted in a certain arena (a quite powerful journal, as it happens), which does mean the data is good and valid to that degree. 3. I think I know what you're saying, but I have to substitute another word for likelihood to make it make sense. There is always a likelihood of sustaining a concussion. That is, there is always a non-zero probability that you will sustain a concussion going about your daily routine. Playing a contact sport increases that risk or likelihood. There is no way to prevent it. The facts of movement and having a brain entail the likelihood of sustaining a concussion. What I think makes the most sense is, 'VT _ that (helmets that achieve a 4 or 5 star rating according to) their rating system are not guaranteed to prevent concussions,' (indeed, the likelihood of there being cases of concussions in the better rated helmets is high if not absolutely a guarantee). 4. I can't answer that...if it was a question? At least not exhaustively. I think one angle of support for the VT study that I for one am happy to see I'm not alone in taking in this thread, is that I don't so much put faith in it as I see it as a positive development. I think it's great that there's an objective, transparent analysis of the degree of protection afforded by the most important piece of protective equipment in the sport. I'm surprised there aren't more people that welcome that transparency and look ahead to when further dialogue in the vein of the VT STAR system can help produce helmets that have scientifically analyzed and vetted design principles. This makes me wonder, are the helmet certification procedures and results available for similar analysis and commentary? If so, that's great, and I wish there would be more cross-comparisons between the VT lab's work and what the prior approaches have been. If not, then we need to have a conversation about what's more dangerous: people buying a helmet because they think they're protected by an oversimplified safety seal (my critique of the VT study, but I do understand marketing is a huge factor in research these days) that is the result of an objective analysis, or people buying the helmet they think looks the coolest and heck, it's certified so it must be good. I get not wanting to misguide buyers into helmets that don't fit (notice VT says "genetics" will be a significant factor in eventual concussion occurrence--head shape falls under that umbrella somewhat) based on them wanting to pick out the highest rated helmet regardless of anything else. But is it ok to have manufacturers keep pumping out ever more expensive helmets with an ever increasing list of features without the consumer getting some indication of whether or not those design improvements are actually working or not? @OldTrainerGuy what is a football head form? And how does VT's assessment of rotational impact forces fall short?
  8. flip12

    2018-2019 Gear Sightings

    That would be my guess too, I just notice heel lifts more often than toe. After spotting it on Matthews I noticed JVR also has toe lifts.
  9. flip12

    My Bauer sticks

    P28 has a big heel curve on it to. I thought the difference between P28 and Fisher Pro was smoother transitions from heel to toe, both in rocker and curve.
  10. No amount of incredulity is going to disprove data that are presented with a rigorously described procedure. If you’re unsure what the data mean then show a critique of the tests based on a thorough reading of the paper.
  11. flip12

    What exactly is 'performance fit?'

    Thanks for the great replies so far. Part of what's been puzzling for me, I think, was I started out with a gross oversimplification of the issue of fit. Like I said in my original post, I went with the approach of 'performance fit' ≈ smallest skate you can squeeze into, which might hurt a lot at first and only a little later on (or you just get used to it?), but you'll skate better for being in a snugger boot. What I've found is much more complicated. I've tried from size 11 Graf down to 9.5 and 10 Graf (with some other older boots mixed in: Mission Amp Flyweights, Mega Air 90s, 652 Pump Tacks, as well as MLX in both 10 and 11). So far, the biggest issue seems to be a lot of the smaller skates weren't wide enough in the forefoot, essentially causing my feet and lower legs to seize on load, just when I needed them to immediately fire, and/or were too short in the heel pocket, so instead of the ankle pads sitting on top of my heel (calcaneus?) they were compressing the most on the round profile of my heel and would seem to wobble willy nilly rather than roll with my foot's movement in the ankle joint. Essentially, I could still skate pretty well if I taped the tendon guard in the smaller boots, masking the horrendous decouple of the boot and my heel, but I didn't need to do that in the bigger boots. Especially the size 11 703s seemed perfectly suited for my feet. I had no pain, and felt both 100% stable and 100% free in my range of motion. When I drop down to size 10 703s, I have to force my foot in a bit, but once it's in, it's not really painful, it's just the issue of the volume being too low. All of these skates I've picked up for cheap over the last few years, so it's been shooting in the dim, rather than going to a shop for a proper fitting. But trying them out has greatly contributed to my appreciation for the importance of fit in key locations where I was completely unaware of their crucial role prior to this process. I've still got a couple more size 10s to try: MLX rebaked with thinner insoles, and Graf 701s, because they're better lasted for my feet at that size than the 703s and with much smaller ankle pads leading me to wonder if the random rolling might not be as big of an issue in them.
  12. I've been wondering a lot lately about what is meant by getting a skate that is a 'performance fit.' My reading, probably deeply mistaken, was that it meant suffering a little with a boot you can barely cram your foot into at first because eventually it will be perfect as the boot breaks in, allowing the feet and their boots to settle into the optimum balance between performance and comfort. I've been trying different sizes, from my previous size which felt pretty roomy, to a full size down. I'm just not seeing my notion of performance fit being realized by this smaller-is-better experiment, and after failing to find a clear discussion of it via search I thought, why not ask the brass on here. So what exactly is 'performance fit?'
  13. No. Because your cynicism is spot on.
  14. Some of Gretz’s gloves also had one or two white backhand rolls.
  15. The triangle-perforated steel debuted on the Vapor 8, I believe. I had Vapor 8s with that steel and grey Tuuk Custom+'s. I think they stuck around and were also stock on Vapor 10s, like @BenBreeg mentioned, and Nike Ignite 1s. With the Vapor XX, the perforation pattern changed as @Monty22 pointed out, matching the form of the LightSpeed holder visually.


×