Shot types...

[ambro 0]

What is the difference? I have a friend that doesn't believe me when I tell him that the fastest shot does not mean the same as hardest shot, or "heaviest" shot, etc. Could any of you help me and tell me what you think about this?

[thejackal 46]

Kinda hard to explain, but a harder/heavier shot makes much more of a sound when it hits the boards. :P

[ambro 0]

I told him that fastest is speed, but hardest is how it would feel if it hit you. I told him the reason that a shot can be hard but not too fast is because of the puck spinning from the tape gripping itas it releases from the blade. Is that a good explanation?

[JR Boucicaut 3804]

The best person to ask is a goalie. Faster shot is faster, however, a heavy shot rips into the goal pad harder than the faster shot.

[headonaswivel 1]

Kinda. You seem to be on the right track.

Lemme give you an example.

Sakic and Blake both shoot at around the same speed. But as previously noted, Blakes is heavy, whereas Sakic's is quick and all, but lacks the hard lag behind it that kills guys.

I'm the same way. I shoot the biscuit damn fast, but not what one would describe as heavy by any means.

A good example is shooting a puck versus a floor hockey puck. You can shoot the same speed, but the puck will be much harder. Its either there or its not.

[Chadd 916]

The best person to ask is a goalie. Faster shot is faster, however, a heavy shot rips into the goal pad harder than the faster shot.

A shot with more spin is generally considered heavier than a shot the same speed with less spin. That extra spin makes it "stick" to a blocker or a body instead of just bouncing off.

[Kobe 0]

Technically a hard shot and a fast shot are the same thing. A faster shot is a harder shot and vise-versa. Force = Mass x Velocity so more velocity means more force and the mass of the puck is constant. Force and velocity are directly proportional. Spin will factor into the equation because of less wind resistance but that just means more velocity.

A Blake vs. Sakic shot is more of a quicker release comparison than anything.

[hockey_player_11 0]

Technically a hard shot and a fast shot are the same thing. A faster shot is a harder shot and vise-versa. Force = Mass x Velocity so more velocity means more force and the mass of the puck is constant. Force and velocity are directly proportional. Spin will factor into the equation because of less wind resistance but that just means more velocity.

A Blake vs. Sakic shot is more of a quicker release comparison than anything.

LOL, I had a little run down with my science teacher about this one, as asdfa knows well. I asked her if something could be harder but not faster, and she made me look stupid by using some velocity formulas. On top of everything, she insulted me . To the point: Kobe is right. I think chadd's comment about the spin on the puck is probably correct.

[Chadd 916]

In true scientific terms, you are correct Kobe. However, people tend to use incorrect terms to describe things. Generally someone with a quick release is going to be credited with a "fast" shot, like Brett Hull. He still refuses to have his shot clocked as he believes the speed isn't that high on his shots and doesn't want people to realize that it's really not as hard as people think.

[Dangles 0]

In my opinion, I think I heavy shot is low, massive velocity and spin. Fast is quick and medium height? I may be completely wrong but just my two bits.

[Kobe 0]

LOL, I had a little run down with my science teacher about this one, as asdfa knows well. I asked her if something could be harder but not faster, and she made me look stupid by using some velocity formulas. On top of everything, she insulted me . To the point: Kobe is right. I think chadd's comment about the spin on the puck is probably correct.

Well if she just used the F=MV formula to diss you then she should be bitch-slapped for being a science teacher because more force would be generated by something that's heavier vs. something lighter travelling at the same velocity (holding things like resistance constant of course).

[headonaswivel 1]

A Blake vs. Sakic shot is more of a quicker release comparison than anything.

No, I am seaking purely about slapshots.....this is in regard to straight up shooting, not to off-wing snaps vs. shots from the point.

Just in general, they may shoot the same speed, but Blakes is far heavier.

[Kobe 0]

So what you're trying to say is that if Sakic and Blake both stood at the blueline and took slapshots that generated the exact same velocity then Blake's shot would produce more force? It's not physically possible. The type of shot doesn't matter. Sakic could throw the puck and it would still generate the same force as Blake's slapper if they were both going at the same velocity (disregarding resistance). The only way Blake's shot could be "heavier" would be for his puck to be heavier than Sakic's puck.

[Eazy_b97 1]

I'm glad you were here to describe it Kobe because I knew it was basic physics, but I haven't done the formula's for a little. Generally I've found a heavy shot to be someone who hits far behind the puck and have a big wind up where a faster shot may be considered a quick release, maybe that's what you were trying to get at Ambro. However Kobe is right it should be the same thing.

[MDE3 0]

It is physics, but to boil it down to simple terms, some shots are still accelerating as they leave the stick(spinning), while others seem to have reached terminal velocity as soon as they have left the blade(not spinning or spinning less).

The one which leaves the blade still accelerating has more stored energy(actually stored in the greater spin) and would be "heavier". The one which leaves the blade at a constant velocity (for the last moments while still on the stick) will have less spin and start to decelerate faster. This shot might actually be measured at higher velocity than the first as it leaves the stick, but it's more rapid deceleration will grade the shot as "lighter". To put the spin on the puck also requires energy input, and is measured as MR2(the radius to the center of mass squared times the mass)

The puck which spins faster has stored energy in the spin itself, besides the energy from mass x velocity squared. The spin will also help the puck sustain it's velocity longer, helping the aerodynamics of the "saucer" which is the puck, and so even though it may not have left the face of the blade as fast as a shot from a different player, it continues to maintain it's velocity longer as well as having the additional "stored energy" of the spin. The goalie "feels" the energy of a "heavy shot" because he is not only arresting the energy stored in the forward motion of the puck, but also the energy stored in the spin.

[Kobe 0]

This is very true, which is why I said holding things like resistance and spin constant.

[Fedorov91 0]

we have some smart people on this board...

which goes to show you, not all hockey player's brains are gone from one too many pucks to the head ;)

[Cavs019 710]

I think its F=MA (Acceleration) if thats relevant.

[flaming_june 2]

not to be a dick, but force = mass x accel, where mv= momentum

[mack 44]

Science + Formulas = Queer way to kill a thread.

[mack 44]

In my experience I have a heavy slapshot but my wristshot comes off "faster" rather than hard. Without getting into the science of it I'm going to guess that's because I use wedges and when I take wristshots they don't roll along the blade as much and don't get the right spin.

[Kobe 0]

You guys are right. It is F=MA. Acceleration = delta Velocity/Time (delta velocity being the change in velocity). It still works out though. Linear velocity means constant acceleration. If both guys were to stand at the same distance away from the net and Sakic's shot is supposedly "quicker", meaning that it would reach the net before Blake's shot, then Sakic's shot had a higher acceleration and thus a higher amount of force would be produced.

[Chadd 916]

I don't think there is any disagreement about harder/faster being the same thing. The only real difference is a "heavy" shot having extra spin.

Perfect example happened to me Friday. I knocked the stick out of the goalie's hand twice despite not having the best shot out there. The goalie said he had no trouble picking up the shot but it hit the stick like a ton of bricks. There was another guy out there who he had trouble picking up the puck and it got there quicker but the puck seemed to just glance off of the stick when it hit.

[MDE3 0]

not to be a dick, but force = mass x accel, where mv= momentum

If you read what I said carefully..you will find we agree because.....

accelleration is velocity squared... B) as I said, mass times velocity squared is the measure of the linear force involved, but to this must be added the force necessary to stop the rotation of a spinning puck. That is measured by MxR squared which is essentially the "inertia" of the rotating puck. That is why it takes more force to stop a puck that is both travelling and spinning than one which is just travelling without spinning. Add the difference in velocity loss over distance due to the lack of rotation(more drag on the non spinning puck)...and you now understand the difference between a fast shot and a heavy shot.

[MDE3 0]

You guys are right.  It is F=MA.  Acceleration = delta Velocity/Time (delta velocity being the change in velocity).  It still works out though.  Linear velocity means constant acceleration.  If both guys were to stand at the same distance away from the net and Sakic's shot is supposedly "quicker", meaning that it would reach the net before Blake's shot, then Sakic's shot had a higher acceleration and thus a higher amount of force would be produced.

This is fun "in theory"

Let's suppose Sakic's shot was of the non spinning variety, and left the stick at 80 mph, but due to resistance and drag, it arrived only doing 70 mph. The Impact velocity would only be 70 mph..no matter what the "average speed" was

Now let's assume for example Blake's shot leaves the stick at 75 mph, but due to spinning it arrives at 72 mph. "Terminal" velocity is higher, and the inertial force of the spin must be added to this linear force so the shot actually "does more damage" even though the initial speed and average speed of the shot was higher on sakic's shot.

Assuming a uniform decelleration for both shots, Sakic's shot averages 75 mph, and Blake's averages 73.5 mph. even though Sakic's got there faster..Blakes was the "harder shot" at impact. Add the inertia from the spinning puck which the goalie will "stop", and you understand the difference between a "quick" shot and a "heavy" one.