SolarWind

I've gone through 12 years of hockey with my eldest, and now starting the journey again with my youngest so I realized that I never figured out what is the appropriate level of guidance for 5-6 years old when it comes to teaching the game itself? When we run scrimmages they are extremely unstructured since it's the first year of organized hockey for more players, and majority are still just getting basics of skating/stickhandling so there is definitely zero awareness of any positioning or team play. As a result there is quite a discrepancy in the skill level between players since some of them had a head start while others just learning to skate. During a scrimmage with the exception of few timid outliers who are just doing their own thing, the rest of the 'pack' is usually chasing the puck. Once they all converge on it usually it results in a pile up, and most of the time one of the players just whacks the pack and it flies away in some random direction followed by the puck. This makes it really tough to 'read the game' for anyone due to pretty high degree of randomness to it. Players tend to fight for the puck even on the same team and passing is non-existent. Apparently this makes it quite frustrating for stronger players since unless they get to the puck ahead of the 'pack' and manage to skate in the open, or the puck just happens to pop to them, they really struggle to create any plays because puck movements are not very predictable and threats are abundant while the support is scarce. Anyone who coached younger players must have observed it so the description of the chaos above is probably redundant. LOL So my question is - what Individual guidance/instructions/strategy can we provide to stronger players to help them with their frustration?

good point! I missed the fact that the runners might have already been profiled to forward pitch, so if they are already at +1 then 1mm heel lift would work. all future runners will also need to be forward pitched.

took ~ 4.5 weeks to build plus a week to ship for mine

Ironic since I’m going in the opposite direction from CCM to True lol Re the pitch - check this thread: CCM is neutral, shift is +2 so I don’t think 1mm lift would do it, it’s at least 2mm if not 3

Excellent info, thanks gents! My foot flattens also when pronated, so I’ll make sure to watch for alignment. Time of day is dictated by the rep availability for me so not a lot of wiggle room there. In that lunge position for scanning what’s the proper weight distribution between the front and the back leg? The more I load my foot the more my arch collapses… Also what’s the most foolproof way to determine the length/width of the skates? In the past for Bauer and CCM customs I’d try a ton of retail models to find the closest match since scans for both brands are completely not reliable. But what about True?

When going for a custom fitment with True are there any things to be aware of to make sure it goes as smooth as possible ie leads to the best fit possible? If someone has gone through the process before, and cares to share some lessons learned that would be appreciated.

That's definitely Not the experience I had personally. Length/width wise the fit is similar. However volume wise and the overall cut wise different lines fit and feel quite differently on my feet. To a point that in 100K my ankle bone was almost pressing @ the eyelets, and I was failing the pencil test badly around 4-5th eyelets, but in FT4 pro it was noticeably better.

I recently went through fitting process with the rep, twice, and the feedback was that each boot is built differently because it's meant to flex differently, so quarters are inherently different and it can't be materially changed even by advancing/reducing the facing. ie even through customs they can't make a skate that fits like AS3, but has internals of FT4 and looks of 100K. So even leaving AS3 aside, FT4 in the same fit as 100K will fit differently. It's evident by the eyelet config on each skate like, which is designed specifically for the unique flex profile of each skate. it might not be noticeable if your foot is somewhat compatible with either last, but if it's not then you'd feel it right away.

Without going into a lot of details of my very recent experience with CCM customs I can confirm that you’re spot on with your concern: it’s a complete misconception that the marketing machine has created that fit system unified how all 3 CCM lines fit. In reality each boot is designed to flex differently and it’s reflected in the cut of the quarters. And it can’t even be materially altered through the customs process. Ie AS3 has the most volume in the same fit out of all 3 lines, followed by FT4, then 100K. All CCM boots also seem to have a lot more L-shaped eyelet pattern than Bauer’s, that have the slopped eyelet pattern.

PM sent. Thanks!

Just came across this Excellent post that dispels all "urban legends" re holder pitch: it confirms that the pitch of Edge hasn’t changed from LS2 (both towers were increased in height by 3mm) that True holder is the most forward pitched, followed by Edge then XS (which is known to be neutral). the only surprise for me was that Cobras which in the past were always regarded as mega forward pitched, were in fact the least aggressive of the modern holders…

excellent info! THANK YOU! and as I was able to read the description all the changes are Very promising and seems worth waiting coz the current skates are not polished at all. here's the translation for reference albeit related to CAT9 - retail replacement of TF9: "Many people talked about a certain clumsy manufacturing of True skates (due to the fact that they are made on the basis of a custom model), but the new CAT9 (it was the one I was able to get my hands on) took a very big step forward in this regard. More thoughtful and "polished" in terms of details. Other key changes include: a weight reduction to 100 grams, a more flexible ankle guard (apparently I wasn't the only one who found the original one too stiff), an updated foam tongue, a modified sole (should improve the situation with the holder rivets) and an increased amount of foam in the ankle area. They will also increase the height of the blade - MAX marking. Those are all great improvements!"

excellent point, thanks! doesn't look like a lot of changes in the overall construction, if any? even the design is still nearly identical with just some splashes of yellow?

Thanks for the detailed response! I’m tempted to try it, but the main reason for not even bringing Flare DLC into the conversation is the major difference in price: I just found brand new blacksteel for $95 cdn shipped, and the only Flare DLC I could find is directly on the manufacturer’s website for $240 cdn + shipping. So 2.5 times price difference…

Thanks for the insight! I see Barber's video of his new True skates as of Feb 2020, so based on that sounds like we'll see the new True skates early next year? Wonder if custom orders for the new skates will open up in Nov/Dec then given they usually start these a month before the release (since it takes 6 weeks to build and ship)?

LS2 also has a mechanical lock, and much more sounds than XS, and yet even LS2 would loosen up. I'm looking for real life experience vs common sense, since my comment was based on what I heard from an equipment manager. are these complains coming from folks constantly swapping runners in and out? The plastic holder is bound to get looser every time. However with all things being equal Edge generally is much tighter originally, which is why Bauer even ships that tool for prying the runners out vs for XS once the dial is loosened up the blade almost falls out. My 5 yo was able to remove both runners from my brand new CCM skates the other day, and I have to use either the tool or pliers to get the blades out of my other pair of Bauers with Edge.

resurrecting an old thread: now that 2+ years has gone by since XS introduction, and there has been some real life experience with it, can we get any closer to resolving 'the best holder debate'? Clearly Edge dominates the market, and with XS there seems to be issues reported where runner clicking is much more pronounced and the dial always loses up one or two clicks, where is the trigger in edge stays in place and the runner sits much tighter in the holder?

This was mentioned before, but just to confirm: is Mason McTavish really wearing a prototype True 9X Catalyst skate? Any insight on what's new about it and when to expect it released to general public? I was thinking of ordering custom Trues but if something new is just around the corner I could possibly wait...

Care to share the reference please? It’s totally empirical but squeezing the holder’s towers the one that Feels the stiffest is Tuuk, followed by XS, followed by Shift. There is a noticeable give in the plastic for Shift as compared to other holders? Also do I understand correctly that the rear tower on Shift is 3mm higher than XS? If so given that XS is neutral it’d put Shift at +2 pitch that’s pretty extreme? How can anyone seamlessly adjust to it coming out of XS of Tuuk?!

I'm late to the party, so having completed a scan through 8 pages of this I still have a few questions left that are hopefully easy due to time elapsed: - how does steel quality on Flare compare with STEP Blacksteel? Am I correct in assuming that because of wide profile and the corresponding more shallow hollow the edge retention on Flare is comparable with Blacksteel even without DLC? In the FAQ Flare states that "Many Flare Blade users state they don't have to sharpen their blades as often as they used to with traditional blades. We use a very high-quality Swedish knife steel, so our blades do not wear down as fast as traditional steel blades which are almost entirely made in Asia." but STEP isn't made in Asia and has DLC hence the question. - Since 4 years has gone since this post can someone confirm or deny whether the hollow must be adjusted as the blade wears down? - Lastly even tho pros are creatures of habit and all that, plus "if it ain't broken don't fix it" but if the performance benefits are so substantial why aren't there many more people switching? True is a good example of a brand that ended up with a pretty strong penetration into the pro market, but there isn't a lot of hype re Flare so are there any drawbacks to this setup? ie would angles that a player used to feel the same because of 6 degree change in the steel?

On the topic of skipping the top eyelet: I just came across these pictures and found it interesting that a "poster child" of the motion Matt Barzal is now taping his skates, even though it's already the stiffest skate on the market?! wonder what AS5 Pro skate is going to offer in terms of overall stiffness and the forward flex?

Not is the bottom is extra stiff and the top is stiff since then the boot is a blend between As3 pro where it’s not supposed to flex and ft4 pro where flex matters? plus of course the conservative look unlike ft4s that are just to flashy for the traditional crowd 😉

Makes total sense and completely agree with the need to try retail skates on first to find the closest match. My concern is: how is the 3d mold, that CCM makes based on the scan, going to be any useful for custom thermo forming, if the actual volume of the foot in the skate would be totally different from the scan?! It’s not a theoretical question since I recently gone through the customs process and what came back was a complete miss volume wise (length/width was good). So I’m curious what to do next to improve the result?!

Conceptually it makes sense, however what about folks like myself who's arch is collapsing without support, making standing barefoot scans completely different than non-weighted seated scans? I did an experiment and pulled out insoles from 2 different skates that I fit very comfortably in both length & width wise (toes just brushing the toe cap, insole is custom cut and tight fitting end-to-end), and when I stand on the insoles my toes hang a good 1/2" off the end because my arch completely flattens outside the skate?! Skates do provide a lot of side to side support plus some arch support. It seems to be fixing the natural pronation I have, and as a result the foot position inside the skate is corrected, making it shorter but more voluminous. It feels like the barefoot free standing scan would produce highly misleading results for me would it not? It might explain why CCM scanner recommends size 10.5 tapered size skate for me, which is my shoe size, but I haven't worn skates bigger than 8.5D size for decades.

does anyone know why CCM went from scanning feet in a seated position with feet on the special angled transparent ‘bench’ (for the lack of a better word, see image below for reference) to scanning simply standing on the floor? The reason I ask is because my arch completely collapses when standing, making feet longer and flatter than when seated. So since the skates have some natural arch support built in wouldn’t it be more reasonable to do the scanning the old way?