flip12

A lot of the old retail curves like PM9, E7, E6, P38, etc., are only available on the OGs Red and Blue. They're really nice too though. I prefer the balance off the shelf of the OGs over my VF.

Spurgeon's got that deep toe pocket, indeed. He was asking about the Zegras though, PRO9246, which has a little toe, nothing huge.

I'd say it's a heel and toe curve. It makes sense that you might feel like that makes it end up like a mid curve, but to me it doesn't play that way. It depends on where the puck is on the blade, which of the two pockets it's around. I don't find Bjugstad's descriptions very helpful. For some they might be, but to me they're just confusing. P46 is what you get when you apply the modification steps that made the E6 the P28 to the E4/PM9 instead. It's the same thing, take a heel curve, add some toe curve, shave the toe to make shooting a bit smoother and you end up with a combo curve era pattern: E28, P46, P30, P90, P86...they're all similar in their combo curves. Blade shapes may vary.

I only got to hold a P86/Zegras for a minute so my memory is pretty vague. It has a definite toe component to its curve, but it's not as big as I expected. It seemed like the toe pocket was closer to the same size as the heel pocket on the P92. I didn't test it on the ice, so I can't comment about how it plays. P46 has a little toe curve, but it's somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2 as deep of a pocket as the heel curve on it. I don't really feel like the P46 plays like a mid curve, but that could be because I find the heel curve on it annoying, like it's putting the parts of the blade I want to work with so far to the forehand that I have to mentally adjust for it a bit. I think I play it more like a heel curve and a toe curve, depending on the scenario, or more like I'm pretending it's a toe curve that happens to protrude awkwardly from the heel. P28 is dual curve like that for me. When I want to saucer pass, I usually use the heel curve; shoot or slip-under-the-defender's-stick pass, toe curve. I hadn't thought about it like this before, but it seems like each pocket can operate as its own locus of activity. I suspect P86 would be the same, since it has the two pockets as well. I think the difference for me with mid curves is, they're really just one continuous pocket. I haven't used a proper mid curve in quite a while. The closest in my collection is Warrior Smyth and P89. The Smyth is nice, but I sometimes find the puck annoyingly active on the blade while I'm carrying the puck...kind of like a car with aggressive lane-assistance. P89 is better in that respect, because the heel is very quiet. I didn't realize how important that can be until I adapted to Kovalev's early pro curve. The heel on that is super straight. There's some loft, and it does have some initial heel curve, but then it goes straight until it kinks again a smidge at the toe. Stickhandling with that is a dream because the puck stays right where it is along the length of your blade. I've never fully adapted to shooting with it though... Sorry, I'm ranting. It's all to say, it's surprisingly complicated for me to answer your curve style question. I think this is an aspect of pro-inspired curves that hasn't gotten much focus yet. So much was made of the "dual lie" of the P28, but it's every bit as dual curve as it is dual lie. Maybe that's why it's hit or miss for a lot of people.

Absolutely, Zegras is different. The curves might be quite close actually, pretty similar idea, but the blade shape and lie are quite different from each other. Pro gave the retail P46 the pattern name PRO4466. It looks to be available on the OG lines, albeit sold out at the moment if you're a lefty. PM9 is 5 by Easton scale, 4 old Warrior, 5.5 CCM. That's where it got confusing. CCM had the P28 and P46 out at the same time for a while and labeled the P28 lie 5 because that was the mistaken convention, while P46, because they were the only ones offering it, they measured it according to their system and slotted it at 5.5. Side by side, it's clear as day the P46 is lower. I love the P46, there's just enough loft but not too much, the heel is rockered as well as the toe, making it a bit more forgiving than the P28 at the extremities. Ideally I'd definitely flatten the heel curve, almost completely, and potentially alter the toe rocker and toe shape.

I'm not the best to ask when it comes to lie. I used to be stuck on Easton 5 lie blades, basically Modano retail, Warrior Smyth, and Sher-Wood Coffey, but I hardly notice lie changes now. It took a little while to adjust to catching passes away from the body with P28, but I had no issues adjusting to the high lie on the Kane Pro when I had one.

One of my teammates ordered one and regretted it. He's usually a P92 or P28 guy. He's got P28 and P28M from Pro now, and really likes them. I toyed around with it after he decided to shop it around to anyone who might take it off his hands. I thought it was alright. It was a little hard to get a great sense of because it was the super round shaft shape, which isn't as much my thing. I liked the straighter portion on the heel of the blade, but the toe shape wasn't really great for me. That might have changed if I tweaked the balance a bit.

Where the plate is is exactly where I'm struggling with my feet being too low volume for my skates. I've tried adding the felt part of a Catalyst 7 tongue I dissected. That's hit or miss depending on the skate. The Nike insoles have extra layers of firm foam there. That really helps in a lot of skates, but they're annoyingly lacking in coverage under the forefoot and too thin in the back, giving a void feeling right under the heel if they aren't in exactly the right place. The more I look into it, the more it seems like this might be the best bet for my issues. I know there's a dearth of info and feedback on them in various topics in here. I'm just a little too scatterbrained to take on that read right now. Will probably do it late one night soon.

I'm actually hunting for some taller insoles but have never tried Superfeet. How do they feel to skate on compared to regular insoles? I like my insoles medium firm--a little squish but not as much as True/MLX insoles. I've found Nike's old insoles from the late 90's - early 00's with a couple extra layers of foam underneath help me a lot in most skates where I'm so low volume my foot either sloshes around inside or I have to lace so tight I can't move my ankles enough.

I remember when the original Synergy came out. My impression was the durability was spotty. Mine was very durable, as were most of my teammates', but one of our defenseman snapped his in half on his first shot at his first practice with it; got it warrantied, but I never saw him use one ever again. This was just high school level, not as high as it sounds like you were at, so our use was very likely much less damaging and demanding, but there were lots of Synergys in those years and they usually held up for a good portion of a season if one wasn't unlucky.

It just reads like you have two different sticks in mind, but you call them both VF.

Is there a typo here? Also, why the false dichotomy: price and patterns or good product? Price, patterns, and product can all go in one.

Opinions vary yes, but I never said Pro's lineup was that good, just that it was evidence that there's not some steep climb from their sticks, which are more like top sticks of yore (circa 2015 say), to the top sticks of today. If their sticks were clearly inferior, it wouldn't be all that tempting to buy them, no matter the price. If a product is no fun to use, the price feels like a rip off, even if it's not much in raw currency. Pro's sticks might not have that extra oomf of whatever Bauer, et. al. are selling for $400, but the oomf doesn't really justify the $200-$300 price difference, especially when you have more individuality baked into Pro's offerings. That's the evidence I had in mind. To be fair, I will also say I'm fairly biased towards Pro at the moment as well. I still have my misgivings about Geppetty, but the sticks play nice and hold up better than others; True I'm looking at you. I'm a sucker for just about any PM9-based curve, which are becoming harder and harder to find, but he offers several that all work better for me than my preferred retail curve, P28: Kovalchuk Thrashers (my favorite at the moment), Kovalchuk New, Malkin, P46, and PM9 itself. I'd much rather buy a marginally less than stick with an a lot less than price tag with a curve that much better suits me than some really expensive cookie cutter (read profit maximizing) piece mass produced and mass marketed by the overlords.

I'm with @xstartxtodayx. Most of the latest and greatest is just rearranging the deck chairs. Great for marketing, but the ship is still the same. The viability of Pro's lineup is strong evidence if not proof of this. If the technology were clearly superior between 2005, 2015, and 2025 sticks, Pro's OG lineup would show it. The big inflection point remains packaging the T-Flex + composite blade as a unit in the Synergy. Since then, any changes have been more subtle than substantial. To answer the main question, though I haven't tried a ton of different lines, the one stick did just work for me off the shelf a bit better than anything else I've had was RibCor2. It just had a combination of soft blade feel when puck handling with good pop on shots and, most importantly, perfect balance.

There's also no scan for personal preference; that's in the brain.

Bauer P14: curve is all over. I haven't seen one in person in a while, but the most similar curve I can think of is the classic Sher-Wood Coffey, but with a very different blade shape. Coffey's all chunky and beaky while Bauer P14 is rather svelte. CCM P14: curve is at the heel. Absolutely nothing happening at the toe; calm seas. P28s vary in how hooked their toe curve is from so subtle they're almost nonexistent (CCM and Warrior), to a noticeable bump (True--but with more heel curve than toe), terminating in hooked and hooked again (Bauer, Pro). Easton's was somewhere between True's and Bauer's degree of toe kink, if you can find one. I'll second @Buzz_LightBeer's point on the P46. It's quite unique in today's lineup of P92 and P28.

CCM's P14 is the same as Bauer PM9 which is the base curve for P46. It's just a PM9 shape with shaved toe and P92 curve with a tiny bit of toe added. Bauer's P14 has some similarities, but it's much more aggressive in both its toe rocker and curve depth. Not sure about P77. Can't think of any other than the Sher-Wood Coffey, but isn't that obsolete today? Pro Stock Hockey Sticks offers P46. If you really love that curve, that's probably your best bet.

The ribs are APX/X7.0 style (X90 continued that configuration); X:60's ribs were more Porsche 911 compared to the X7.0 Lamborghini slashes. As for fit, I wonder if you could order them in Fits 1-3 or if it's all via the Length Forefoot/Heel paradigm. I've seen plenty of pro customs with the L F/H markings and none with F1-3. That doesn't mean they don't exist though. Depending on what did or didn't work for your fit in specific generations of Vapors I'd think a proper custom order would take care of it, if Mosocas are still offered. Vapor up until recently was always low volume, but the little changes to forefoot sidewall shape, toe cap version, or tongue thickness could nudge a player one way or the other. Mosocas weren't subject to this though, since they were never retail. There was possibly a more standard package offered to teams at lower purchasing levels, but specs could be made to tune the fit. Prostockhockey had a ton of Duncan Keith Mosocas in at one point a few years ago. The big difference that stood out between pairs was the toe caps. All of them were represented: the original shaggy Vapor toe caps from 8 - XXX, the naked toe caps from XXXX - 1X (both of them), and the Twiggy toe caps from the 2X Pro. Tongues and liners could be further specified if desired, and I think maybe even internal padding types and thicknesses could as well if I'm not mistaken. Naturally, with so many variables, it's a complicated spec space to navigate.

It's very much in the spirit of MSH's DBs. The closest thing I've seen is Icehockey360.ru's measurements comparing boot and holder dimensions for the sizes he was trying: https://icehockey360.ru/baza-znanij/geometricheskie-parametry-stakanov/ It's on the older side now, and there were some surprises in there which makes me wonder about his methods. The general trend that emerges already in his measurements is that the industry was trending toward standardization. I think that process is now complete. True's new holder is supposed to be more in line with Bauer and CCM and I vaguely recall Warrior's skate representative saying on HockeyTutorial that their holder has the same pitch as the others. If those observations aren't mistaken, most of the value in the holder db would be to archive historical idiosyncrasies which have gone the way of the cookie cutter in recent years.

Our local shop is just so so but they do have a try-3 profile option for those with Bauer or CCM holders. I did it and ended up with some very strong opinions about the different options. Something like that might be good, if it's available in your area. Overall, as usual, profile is 100% personal preference. While 9'/10' might be quite popular and effective for a lot of players, for me, I personally hated it. I felt twice as good on the same Catalyst 7s after switching their profile from the stock 9/10 to Ellipse II. I suspect an individual's profile search is akin to finding 3D local maxima. 9/10 might just be optimal for your son. But it might also be a completely different paradigm suits him better.

What's with the Piet Mondrian tape jobs?

P92 is actually a heel curve even though it's often identified as a toe curve. The pitching wedge effect comes from its openness, not its curve profile. I haven't seen Praux's Malkin in person, but Malkin has based a lot of his curves off the PM9 shape, just like Kovalchuk has. Praux's Thrashers-era Kovalchuk curve is definitely PM9 based. It has the same profile from heel right up to the shaved toe. It's got the same very closed face up until the toe as well. Depending on which Malkin the P71 is based on, it could be basically the same as the ThrasherChuk, but with the toe shape closer to the original PM9.

Following what @Hills suggests, Graf still has the 735 lineage alive for now in the 755: https://grafhockey.com/skates/ice/player/g755-pro/ It might not be quite as stiff as your G35s, but the cut and fit should be the same. They're not cheap though, $730 at Ice Warehouse right now: https://www.icewarehouse.com/Graf_Classic_G755_Pro/descpage-GCLG755.html

I find your reasoning not so simple. Considering whether "young players should train on what the pros use" and using your Bedard example, I come to the opposite conclusion. If a young player finds something that elevates their play (as you say you think Bedard's boot and steel choices did for his skating) they're optimizing their performance, which is directly connected to their visibility and chances of making it to and beyond the next level. If instead they opt to stay inside the box of what's in the pro arsenal, they could be leaving performance on the table, diminishing both their chances of making it to higher levels, as well as their degree of excellence at those levels. Once they get to a level where they're professionally outfitted (team buys, EQM does the work, sponsorships could be available, etc.) then the element of "being a team player" with your equipment preferences could come in. Until that, I'd say it makes the most sense to do whatever you can that's legal to elevate your play. Not to mention that "what the pros use" isn't static, it evolves. Those pros who do use what pros used when they were kids are few and seen as curiosities--Sidney Crosby being the best example. Consider the clap skate as a counterexample. The technology was there collecting dust for around a decade before some elite skaters finally gave it a fair shake. Then everyone switched and all the world records fell, not necessarily in that order. Just because the pros don't use it doesn't mean it's not any good. There's a significant familiarity bias when the margins are razor thin.

I do tend to use my Dolo with an end plug, but that also helps focus the feel for me with newer sticks like Hyperlite and Praux VF. Torquegate never bothered me with my Dolomite. Balance is a stick by stick issue and I don't think stick balance has improved linearly over the years. A lot of super light sticks have really strange balance. The only stick I've used that felt perfectly balanced for me without any counterweight like a 25-30g Tacki-Mac and or a 20-30g end plug was my RibCor 2. I think that was around 430g. Felt amazing. My least tweaked stick with good balance right now is a Malkin pro stock SE16 that's right around 450g and has a 30g Kovalchuk Tacki-Mac on it. Without the Tacki-Mac, it feels dead to me. With it, it sings. I don't sense much more power from newer sticks. This could be tested though. Get one of those testing machines to shoot pucks with NOS Synergy, TPS XN10, G3, etc., and compare it to the latest and most expensive models and see how much more powerful the shots are with the same swing.