Tighter ankle wrap CCM FT6 Pros?

[Tighter ankle wrap CCM FT6 Pros?]

True can get away with a tighter wrap because they're lower cut. Higher cut boots have to flare out to allow for ankle ROM without scraping away the soft tissue of the ankle. The skate is meant to hold that shape at all costs--that flare is in large part the essence of what it is, design-wise. I haven't tried to do it, but my guess would be you'll dislike the softness you'll need to induce in the shell to achieve the wrap you're after.

Kovalchuk has it in his Vapors, but they're Nylon/tech-mesh, not CURV, fibreglas, or composite like contemporary skates are, and I'd bet he deliberately creases them to hell upon baking them to achieve the flex X wrap he wants, because you see it in his Return Of The Kovy era NHL skates that look relatively new.

[P28 Use Among NHL Defencemen]

3 hours ago, start_today said:

For the history of who developed given curves, don’t we assume it’s like Leibniz and Newton both developing calculus independently at the same time through different routes? 

If there’s enough guys tinkering with curves, eventually two people are gonna get to them same idea. 

That's also a possibility. But one that I consider sometimes, not assume.

However, from the anecdotes I've picked up, it seems like those experiments used to branch out in an idiosyncratic evolution. Once in a while, others would hop onto what they saw their buddies using: Yzerman going for Sakic's curve even though Yzerman's own was probably the most used in the NHL at the time, for example. Grant Marshall (I think it was) using Brett Hull's spec, Malkin picking up various patterns from teammates, from Pouliot's stock P88 to Galchenyuk's family's secret sauce pattern. Sometimes you see players start with something and then do pretty much the same thing to it, like Ryan Smyth almost ending up with a mirrored Kovalchuk at the end of his career--except that Smyth was still using wood blades and didn't add the toe shave to his (if not exact, very close to) E4 he was curving. The potential permutation space is vast, yet it's still likely there have been several instances of two players recreating the same thing separately, but in any case, anecdotes I've heard of usually involve one player completely abandoning his stick design evolution branch for another.

[P28 Use Among NHL Defencemen]

2 hours ago, iceman8310 said:

That's really an old school mindset.  The Kreps "p28" really isn't that big of a curve considering how widely used its is now.  Brett burns for example uses a variant of the p28.  A lot of players in europe use a kovalchuk or semin curve.  I think its more of a factor of the european influence on the north american game.  

The p28 comes from the player kamil kreps who used the number 28.  You probably already know that.

I use a Kovalchuk/new Kovalchuk/Zherdev curve mixed that I had personally made.  Lie 4

I'm thinking autocorrect put Brett instead of Brent Burns. BB still looks to be using the Gionta that he's sworn by for years now, which was also Big Mac's go to before going to the P92 he's on now. Barzal used it for a couple of years as well.

I've wondered about the P28 origin. Bjugstad also claims to have invented it, of course. Some say it was Kreps, some say it was Ovechkin or Fisher. We need a proper oral history of this thing because as usual there are conflicting claims, as there are with the Sakic. Sakic said he created it but H. Ghassemi claims to have introduced it to Easton because he couldn't shoot with any of the curves they had in the era of making the T-Flex into the Synergy (he was a product guy there and the original he says the original retail Sakic was his custom curve he had on some Sher-Woods).

I've looked through the images of Kreps on Getty and it looks like he went back and forth between Kovalchuk and Ovechkin patterns before settling on the E28. Those two actually make sense as potential inputs to making the E28. Ovechkin's basically got the E6 with a slightly more mid-focused second pocket. Kovalchuk had the E4 with the toe curve closer to the location of the E28 pocket and a focused toe shave for puck-ice-blade contact. E28 is kind of a blend of those two.

Fisher started using the E28 around the same time though, IIRC. It could be Kreps switched to that after having tried something to either side of it and never looked back. If that were the case, it would seem weird Easton put his number on it, since Fisher was an even more dedicated Easton stick user. They need to get Fisher on one of the hockey podcasts and open up for audience questions so we can some inside perspective.

[P28 Use Among NHL Defencemen]

1 hour ago, boo10 said:

Fair enough.  I've never used one, but I do currently use a P90TM and find the toe hook mostly just gets in my way.

I just found it interesting that so many defencemen are using the P28, while the P92 still seems to dominate among forwards.

There are plenty of forwards using P28 too. I don't know statisticks on it or anything, but I can think of a lot of notable players using P28. Then there's the Oates effect where he funnels a lot of players to Stamkos' P92 variant, or something close to it. Funnily enough, Stammer's actually gone the other way, using P28 the last few years.

When it comes down to it, P28 and P92 are more alike than they are different. Both 1) have a decent amount of loft without being obscenely open, 2) are compound heel-and-toe curves, 3) with a flat(ter) heel rocker and more aggressive toe rocker. The toe shapes are different of course, and the discontinuity of the heel-to-toe rocker is a bit more pronounced on P28, but to me, the main difference is the gravitational center of the compound curve pocket is at the heel of the P92 and at the toe of the P28. That's the thing I love about the P28 that I was missing until it came on the scene--the toe-dominant pocket. The aggressiveness of the standard heel curve that formed the basis of most of the patterns of yore threw me off. Sher-Wood Coffey and Montreal PC were some exceptions, P89 as well (when you could find it), with a few other short-lived Warriors like the Smyth and Gionta were some notable exceptions.

If only Bjugstad had made the P46 a blend of the E4 blade face with the P28 curve instead of the P92, I could call it a day and never have to think about curves ever again. As it is, the P28 works about as well as anything I've ever had my hands on when the balance is right.

[P28 Use Among NHL Defencemen]

29 minutes ago, boo10 said:

Stopped in at several GTA Hockey Shops yesterday, most of which had a large selection of prostock sticks.  I enjoy looking at the sticks to see what specs players are using (or have tried).  I was very surprised to see that most of the sticks (>80%) from NHL D were a P28 or slight variation.  On the other hand, most of the sticks from forwards were P92, (or a modified P92).

Just something I found interesting, as P28 is thought of as more of a "Shooter's curve", with passing being mostly an afterthought.

P28 is a great passing curve, just like its predecessor, Easton Drury/E6. The toe modifications don’t take the Drury away; just add a little party to the tail end.

[true shift holder]

I'm leaning towards putting heel lifts on mine. I like the holder, but I feel like I'm not forward enough, especially on starts. My favorite holder and steel spec has been the classic Graf Cobra 11' radius with aggressive pitch. Does anyone have a suggestion on how much of a heel lift I should request to achieve that feel on my Cat7s?

[true shift holder]

52 minutes ago, start_today said:

I broke a holder on my TF7s. A few questions for the brain trust: 

a) do the Max holders have the same hole pattern as the shift? 

b) I’ve seen a few places say that the Shift steel can go in Max holders, but not the opposite. Is that correct? I’m hoping to avoid buying new steel. 

c) Are there any other holders that line up with the shift hole pattern without having to drill new ones? 

A. Yes (96% sure).

C. No (100% sure: Shift and Shift Max are the only switch holders I’m aware of—that is a Shift (Max) holder is one shape that goes on a left or right skate whereas the others have a left holder and a right holder and they can’t mix and match holder sides and skate sides, so they’re not going to line up with the Shift (Max) holes).

B. Sounds right but I can’t remember the specifics.

[Anyone try the Powerfly holders yet?]

4 hours ago, VegasHockey said:

The new holders are slightly heavier than the previous generation. 

Sorry, I meant the new runners, not holders.

[Anyone try the Powerfly holders yet?]

8 hours ago, VegasHockey said:

Supposedly the parabolic design is to help the steel lock in place, preventing it from popping out during impact. However, the changes were to also introduce a new patent as well, since the old patent had expired. 

This was not for weight reduction. 

How much do the new holders weigh compared to the old ones?

[Reebok RBK 9k powered by Jofa elbow pad replacement recommendation]

Definitely address the straps if the elbows are otherwise still going strong. I have a friend who replaced his saggy-strap Jofas with CCM Tacks and he was very disappointed in the protection.

[Anyone try the Powerfly holders yet?]

Bauer keeps experimenting with weight reduction on the upper half of the steel, from perforated steel for Custom+ and LS/2, to combo runners Fusion and Carbonlite. My first thought was this was just a new way to try and reduce runner weight while also making it harder to manufacture aftermarket steel.

[First time skating in Tacks (AS-V)]

I have a similar experience in new Catalyst 7s. I loved the flatter steel at the heel from the first step on the ice, but just felt like I was forced upright and like there was too much steel on the toe. I swapped the stock tongues out for some with more flex and the feeling was 10x better. The tongue can have even more impact on how easily you can get in the right position over your edges than the rest of the boot.

[New True Catalyst Skates]

5 hours ago, VegasHockey said:

Apologies, I read your post too quickly, and after having too many drinks, assumed you meant the HZRDUS skate compared with the Catalyst. 

The TF fit bigger than the HZRDUS and the Catalyst. 

As they say, what happens in Vegas…

…can become a viral sensation on the internet!

[New True Catalyst Skates]

11 hours ago, Hills said:

Cat9s fit like normal skates did. While the TF fit way bigger.

That’s what I thought. My guess was they stuck with the same last but just slid the scale till the volume was a better match for the general standard. The toe cap certainly would have an effect. I was just surprised by @VegasHockey’s take because he’s a lot more familiar with the nuances of current skates than I am.

[New True Catalyst Skates]

2 hours ago, VegasHockey said:

The boot last is almost the same with the Catalyst and the TF9. I would order the same size and width as your TF9 if you are going to try the Catalyst. 

Did they change the sizing from TF to Catalyst, or did the new toe cap just make the fit feel smaller?

[2023-24 gear sightings]

FT6 looks like Microsoft Windows.

[P14 curve]

Depends on what your definition of P14 is…

•P14 in CCM = PM9: flatter rocker than most.

•P14 in Bauer is a very rockered blade. Closer to P28 style than P92. If you don’t like much rocker run in the opposite direction.

[Putting larger holders on skates (?)]

2 hours ago, caseyjones said:

Just to update for anyone who cares lol, I would up going with a size 6.5 and the smaller holder.  I figured I’d test it out before swapping holders.  To my surprise, I really didn’t notice much of a difference at all.  My balance felt fine. I’m going to stick the the 255 holders.  
 

I am wondering about the “memory foam” in the ccm’s though.  Will this eventually break in to give me a better ankle wrap and heel lock?  I did have the skates baked and still have tightness in the forefoot, but I’m not sure how I feel about the big pillow like padding around the ankles.  I don’t get the “locked in” feel that everyone talks about with the new skates.  My foot felt much more locked in in my 707’s

707s allow you to lock in the talus, crucial to heel lock, while the top 3 eyelets can be as tight or as loose as you please. The problem for most skaters is they panic as soon as there’s the slightest bit of give in that hinge area, so most newer boots lock it down with extra depth and stiffness. JetSpeeds tended to be on the softer side in that regard (I’m not super familiar with more recent iterations of the JS Fam) but still nowhere near a 707.

[CCM Super Tacks X Total Custom helmet]

9 hours ago, start_today said:

It’s also wildly lazy “science.” If I wear a helmet that’s too big for me, and then complain that I got hurt, and you saw that the helmet fit improperly, you’d tell me “hey man, that sucks, but that helmet is obviously too big.” But, these guys as policy use helmets that are too big, give some inscrutable ratings, and have parents wringing their hands over terrible data. 

Your point that “no one would read all that” is a huge problem with this study. Their testing doesn’t do a good job testing for hockey injuries. It’s all buried in fine print and the results incredibly oversimplified. There are consumers making choices off of bad data. And now companies are chasing good ratings from this study, but the variables they test are so skewed it’s not even viable. 

We aren’t critiquing a highschool science fair project. If we were, I think people would be right in their “hey guys, they are doing their best and this seems like a neat idea” defense.  VT is pushing this as a rigorous study and it simply isn’t. Imagine if they were testing seatbelt safety, but some of the time just stuck the seatbelts into that cushions rather than latching them correctly. Personally, I’d see that and think I can’t trust anything they publish, because the methods are so flawed. But, instead, people are craving this ratings system even though it’s flawed the variables are wonky. 

Is their policy (“protocol” might fit better) to test helmets that are too big? Where do they say that?

”Hockey injuries” is a broad category. On the other hand, it’s also narrower than the scope of the Hockey STAR rating system when it comes to cumulative brain impact: when most people talk about brain protection in hockey, they talk about concussions. Hockey STAR isn’t just modeling exposure to concussion-inducing impacts, they model the probable exposure to brain trauma at a given level of hockey (depending on age, competitiveness of the league, etc.) The research on the impact of brain trauma on athletes lives is all relatively new, but it seems concussions get all of the attention and overall brain trauma isn’t even considered in the popular discourse; hence the chestnut, “you don’t even have to hit your head to get a concussion, so these ratings are meaningless.” That’s like saying birth control isn’t 100% effective so there’s no point in seeing how effective various methods are, to the best of our knowledge.

I agree with almost everything you say in your second paragraph. I don’t think the problem you outline is particular to this lab’s work, but rather the crux of the issue in the interface between research and the rest of the world. Research often involves much more nuance than the general public and its information disseminating apparatuses tend to have a taste for. This slants the public representation of a lot of research results towards tidy boxes that are crude reflections of the dynamics at play in the raw material, and rewards researchers whose production lends itself to crude boxing. The financial mess entailing that boxing function is a ferocious beast.

[CCM Super Tacks X Total Custom helmet]

On 11/10/2023 at 7:56 PM, Hills said:

Obviously yes it is a bad thing they opt for the bigger size. Their data is measuring the rotational impacts, using a larger helmet means there will be more movement in the helmet if it isn't as snug as possible.

Are you sure they aren’t getting the same snugness they would in the smaller size?

Another possibility is they’re erring on the side of best possible rating for a given helmet model. A larger helmet that’s mostly closed will have more shell overlap and more mass overall than a smaller helmet of the same model that’s mostly open, once both sizes are adjusted to the same head circumference (mass won’t change but the degree of overlap will). Both shell overlap and greater mass would contribute positively to impact dissipation.

[CCM Super Tacks X Total Custom helmet]

On 11/7/2023 at 9:36 PM, Hills said:

They mention how important fit is, and yet still go by the larger helmet if the head form fits inside a range of 2 sizes. They also don't try on multiple helmets sizes to get the best fit either.

VT could easily make things better by showing the helmet fitting process for each model they use.

Is it a bad thing if they opt for the bigger of two possible fits?

No one would read all of that if they had a breakdown of fitting each helmet. As it is now their work is too long for most people to read, judging by the accuracy of the bulk of the critique their work gets.

[Holder: size matters?]

14 hours ago, eugene8080 said:

I actually think that's why. I was on size 7 CCM skates with 263 holders. When I switched to Trues custom skates, they were about 6.5 (based on the foot bed). I used the same 263 holder and steel because it's easier and cheaper to be able to switch the steel between my pairs of skates. The disadvantage, especially for True Custom skates is that there is not much of a flat bottom to mount the holder, that's why the Shift holder is much narrower. If you use an oversized holder, the installer might have trouble riveting the holder on properly. I had some warping issues where the holder was no longer straight enough to hold the steel. the shop had to adjust the installation a few times. This issue might be specific to True skates. 

Now that you mention it, True has had significant problems with straight Shift holder + steel combos. I wonder if the shell's underbelly still causes issues even for the narrower Shift holder.

[CCM Super Tacks X Total Custom helmet]

2 hours ago, stick9 said:

So tell me again about these ratings.....

I have had that very thing happen to me. Never hit my head, clearly concussed. 

You're right in that helmets can't protect against whiplash. But that's not to say there isn't substantial impact to the head where helmets can play a part in minimizing the damage, both to the skull and its contents. No helmet is concussion proof. But they are not created equal in how much they dissipate the impact to the head either.

Re: the helmet has to fit for it to work discussion, the VT STAR lab actually wrote a whole article talking about the importance of fit when assessing helmet performance in the lab and how that relates to real life: https://www.helmet.beam.vt.edu/publications.html#56

As usual, the story is more nuanced than the popular discussion. Also as usual, it's still not perfect. It never is.

[P46]

On 10/24/2023 at 5:05 PM, JAY4114 said:

How similar is the P46 curve compared to the P88? Is it like a deeper version or is it like a more closed P28?

P46 is a Krepsified (Kreps = P28) E4. Curve wise it's closest to a P92: a heel curve that continues to curve a little less at the toe. It's about the same loft as well. It has a shaved toe but otherwise it's an E4 blade shape. There's not much P88 there except for the fact that they're both on the lower end of the lie scale.

[2023-24 gear sightings]

11 hours ago, VegasHockey said:

Maybe he will begin to deliver on the expectation that were set when he got drafted 20th overall 😉 

A lot of first rounders don’t make it or don’t become stars if they do. I wonder what percentage of first round picks excel in the NHL. Those expectations are quite suspect IMO.